HMS Sultan

HMS Sultan (1870)

Browse RN vessels: A; B; C; D; E - F; G - H; I - L; M; N - P; Q - R; S; T - U; V - Z; ??

Name	Sultan (1870)	Explanation
Type	Central battery ironclad
Launched	31 May 1870
Hull	Iron
Propulsion	Screw
Builders measure	5234 tons
Displacement	9290 tons
Guns	12
Fate	1946
Class
Ships book	ADM 135/455
Note	Ships book ADM 136/50. 1906 = Fisgard IV. 1932 = Sultan, training hulk
Snippets concerning this vessels career
Date	Event
12 September 1871 - 20 July 1873	Commanded (from commissioning at Portsmouth) by Captain Edward Westby Vansittart, Channel squadron
5 August 1873 - 26 May 1875	Commanded by Captain Anthony Hiley Hoskins, Channel squadron
25 February 1876 - 27 April 1878	Commanded by Captain Duke of Edinburgh, Mediterranean
9 May 1878 - 14 June 1878	Commanded by Captain Edward Henry Howard
3 April 1882	Commanded by Captain Walter James Hunt-Grubbe, Channel squadron, then (December 1882), Mediterranean (including Bombardment of Alexandria, where Hunt-Grubbe was in command of the ships which engaged the northern forts), then Channel squadron again
2 May 1884 - July 1885	Commanded by Captain Richard Edward Tracey, Channel squadron
1906	Renamed Fisgard IV
1932	Renamed Sultan
*Extracts from the Times* newspaper**
Date	Extract
Ma 8 August 1870	The Reports of Vice-Admiral Sir Thomas Matthew Charles Symonds upon the Trials of Her Majesty’s ships Monarch and Captain, to which so many people have been looking forward with interest, have at length been published, and will well repay perusal. No such terse and practical Reports, so far as we can remember, have for a long time been laid before Parliament. Admiral Symonds points out drawbacks in either vessel, but is quick to recognize the superiority of both to all the broadsides under his command. Both ships, he says, are "very easy in a seaway, and can use their guns in any sea in which an action is likely to be fought." Instructed to watch carefully "the effect of a sea combined with force of double reefed topsail breeze on the ship with low freeboard, whether there would be a liability of the height of the wave interfering with the efficiency of the fire of the 12-inch guns of the Captain," he reports that "the ship of low freeboard has shown no failing on this point; . . . they hit a target (a small cask and flag) distant 1,000 yards to windward (at the third shot); and in a treble-reefed topsail breeze and sea, shot were dropped 1,000 yards to windward, the sea not interfering in any way." After a heavy gale on the night of the 29th of May "both ships were very steady;" on the 2d of June, in a long heavy swell from N.W., when the greatest rolling of the Warrior was 10 degrees, the greatest rolling of the Monarch was five, and of the Captain less than four degrees. On the 25th of May, when "the Minotaur's main deck was wet throughout by the sea entering the weather ports, and a great spray wet the poop" of the flagship, the turrets of the Captain were not in any way inconvenienced. Her hurricane deck was dry, although the sea washed freely over her main deck, "but in a far less degree than I anticipated." The Admiral recommends the Monarch to be altered by the removal of the forecastle, the bow guns, and their protecting ironplated bulkhead — on which, by the by, Mr. Reed, in his letter published by us to-day, particularly plumes himself — and then "the Monarch would have no equal among present ships of war;" and his verdict on the other vessel, as she now floats, without alteration, is, — "The Captain is a most formidable ship, and could, I believe, by her superior armament, destroy all the broadside ships of this squadron in detail." This sentence of the Admiral, who has never been known as a partisan of turret-ships, — whatever Mr. Reed may now think fit to assert in this respect, completely confirms the opinion of our Special Correspondent, who last year accompanied the combined squadrons under the Admiralty flag and startled the public mind by writing, — "There can be no manner of doubt that had the Monarch been an enemy, with her turret and four 25-ton guns in working order, she could have steamed down on the fleet from her windward position, and have sunk fully one-half of the ships before her own fire could have been silenced by her being sunk or blown up in turn.” Such is the pith and substance of the Reports which have just been published. The reflections to which they give rise are very mixed, but we are sure the public, who are often puzzled by the disputes of rival inventors, but always ready to do justice to perseverance and successful ingenuity, will be prompt to recognize the merits of Captain Cowper Coles, whose efforts have at length been crowned with such indisputable success. In October, 1861, when we were commencing our broadside ironclad fleet, Captain Coles wrote to the Admiralty as follows: — "I will undertake to prove that on my principle a vessel shall be built nearly 100 feet shorter than the Warrior, and in all respects equal to her, with one exception — that I will guarantee to disable and capture her in an hour. She shall draw four feet less water, require only half her crew, and cost the country for building at least 100,000l. less." In season and out of season he has ever since maintained the same pretensions. In 1865 he obtained an Admiralty Committee to consider his challenge, and it was in consequence of the Report of that Committee that it was determined to build the Monarch. Captain Coles protested against the lofty freeboard which the Admiralty Constructors designed for her. He declared that it was of the essence of his invention that by concentrating the armament in turrets amidships a high freeboard might be dispensed with, to the great advantage of the ship, both offensively and defensively. He obtained at the close of 1866 permission to design a ship after his own idea, in conjunction with Messrs. Laird, of Birkenhead, and the Captain is the offspring of their united ingenuity. Every one at Whitehall declared that a ship with so low a freeboard would be swamped by the sea and unable to use her guns. The Captain was tried under all the disadvantages of a raw crew within a fortnight after she was commissioned, was tested by a most experienced Admiral in rougher weather than most actions have been fought in, and the result is given in the Reports from which we have quoted above. Seldom has it been given to an inventor to reap in his lifetime so gratifying and complete a success. The two ships which carry off the palm in our Navy are the two which represent the invention of Captain Coles; and it is easy to gather from the Reports of Admiral Symonds which of them, as he thinks, embodies the preferable type. There have been two eminent naval designers in Europe during the last ten years — M. Dupuy de Lôme, the advocate of broadsides, an eminent French engineer but no sailor, and Captain Coles, of our own Navy, the advocate of a rival system. The Controller of our Navy proclaimed himself in 1865 a follower of the French designer. and he and Mr. Reed, in more than official antagonism, have for years opposed Captain Coles with an animus which is signally shown in the letter which we publish to-day. If it were wise or patriotic, we could point out hundreds of weak points in all the ships which Mr. Reed, with unlimited scope and skilled assistance, has added to the British Navy. We prefer to listen to the Admirals who command our squadrons — whether "sailing Admirals" or not, as Mr. Reed politely terms them — and rejoice that at length Mr. Reed, who is no sailor, is prohibited, as he tells us, from publishing controversial Minutes in defence of his own ships against the strictures of the recognized professional judges. He trumps up the old story that a shot fired with depression might stop the revolution of the turret. The experiment was tried with the guns of the Bellerophon at short range against the turrets of the Royal Sovereign, and the fear was shown to be groundless. Moreover, in action, when ships are moving and rolling from one side to another, it is no such safe or easy matter, as any artillerist will tell us, to fire a large gun with anything like the requisite depression. Mr. Reed exhibits in his letter all the disappointment of defeat. It is, indeed, no very pleasing reflection at the present moment that of the 40 ironclads which Mr. Childers lately mentioned only four are of the English type, which is now confessed to be the stronger and the better. There is one point of great importance upon which the Admiral in command expresses himself with some doubt and hesitation. Are not the advantages of masts and sails too dearly purchased by the impediments they offer to an all-round fire from the turrets, and by the risks of accident or burning which attach to them in action? He admits that with the Captain as she is "he has never seen such a range of training before, and that the perfect clearance of her 600-pounder guns for action from a training of 60 degrees forward to 60 degrees aft is very satisfactory, particularly when compared with the 30 degrees of the 9-inch 250-pounder guns of the broadside ships." She has since extended her range of firing from 82 degrees forward to 80 degrees aft; but even so she does not meet the ideal of the Admiral, who is anxious to be able to fire right ahead with the turret guns, seeing that "attack in future actions will generally be end-on right ahead, the exposure of broadside or quarter to ramming being suicidal." The class of ships introduced by Mr. Childers, of the Devastation and Fury [renamed Dreadnought prior to launch] type, carrying on a low freeboard without masts or sails the heaviest ordnance invented, will undoubtedly for heavy fighting in line of battle have advantages to which no sea-going cruiser like the Captain or Monarch can pretend. But the British Navy will always require sea-going cruisers, and for that purpose it seems to be now admitted that both the Monarch and the Captain are far preferable to the Hercules or the Sultan. To us it appears that the Captain, which in all other respects is the equal of the Monarch, and which carries more and thicker armour, and can be cleared for action in five minutes, while the Monarch takes an hour and a half, is a ship unequalled up to the present date for the purposes of war by anything afloat, and well deserves to be repeated, with such improvements as can be suggested by the ingenuity of Captain Coles.
Ma 6 January 1873	IRONCLADS IN COLLISION. The collision between Her Majesty's ships Northumberland and Hercules on the morning of Christmas Day in Funchal Roadstead, Madeira, is stated to have been due entirely to the want of "holding power" of the old-fashioned anchors of the now abandoned and confessedly useless pattern, now known in our dockyards as the "Admiralty pattern." The same tale was told many years ago, when Trotman brought forward his anchor for competition with this oldest of all known forms, the Admiralty pattern anchor. It is now the duty of Mr. Goschen, guided by the light of the First Sea Lord's acknowledged experience and professional knowledge, to take care that a really efficient anchor, such as the Devastation, Glatton, and others of Her Majesty's ships carry, on Martins's self-canting plan, and with the enormous holding power they are admitted to have, shall not be cast aside as Trotman's anchor was. The cost of the repairs to the hulls of the Northumberland and Hercules, added to the loss incurred by whatever anchors and cables may be lost, should be a most instructive lesson to all concerned. The Western Morning News has received from an officer of the Northumberland the following account of the collision:— "Madeira, Christmas Day. "We were lying at single anchor, riding by our port cable at 3 45 this morning (Christmas Day), when our cable parted close to the bitts, the wind blowing fresh at a force of about six, but in squalls. Fortunately there was a very active and efficient officer of the watch, who immediately ordered the starboard anchor to be let go, which was done with good despatch. Unfortunately our fires were only banked for ordinary purposes, that is, that under ordinary circumstances steam ought to have been got up in a little under an hour's time, but under the good arrangements and management of the engineer staff steam was up and the engines were ready to move in 20 minutes from the time the cable parted. However, this was not early enough, as before the engines were ready we had dropped on top of the Hercules, her jibboom going right through our after-funnel. We then dropped down alongside the Hercules, side to side. Our anchor that we had let go then brought us up, and the Hercules, veering her cable, dropped clear of us. We carried away the jibboom and foretopgallant mast of the Hercules, and the only damage done to ourselves was some of our boats' davits carried away, some three boats damaged, and our after-funnel damaged. We were all congratulating ourselves on the very little damage done, and got again quickly to bed about 5 a.m. However, at breakfast time this morning we perceived that this ship had a good list to port, and on examination two of the compartments in the ship’s side were found to be full of water. It appears that we dropped on the top of the Hercules' prow, which we now believe has made a large hole in our side. Up to the present time we have not been able to discover either its size or its position, so it is uncertain the amount of damage we have received; but from the large flow of water it is believed that the hole must be a large one. The weather is somewhat wild, with some sea on, so we have not yet been able to send a diver down; till we do, the amount of damage done cannot be ascertained. It is most fortunate that we fell foul of the Hercules, as had our second cable been carried away we should most probably have drifted onto the shore. Had such been the case, nobody can tell what would have become of us. We are now the third ironclad of the fleet of six which is shaky about the bottom. The Bellerophon from the collision with the Minotaur; the Sultan, from having touched the ground, it is supposed, at Ferroll, and now ourselves. I cannot conclude this without drawing attention to the inadvisability of sending an ironclad fleet to such an anchorage as Funchal at such a period of the year as this, with no sort of harbour or protection in bad weather. "Madeira, Thursday, Dec. 26,1872. "The mail has been delayed sailing. I give you the latest particulars of the unfortunate accident of yesterday to the Northumberland. On the diver going down to see the amount of damage done, the sea still remaining rough, he reported that the hole in her side was so large that he did not like to go near it for fear of being sucked into it. However, late in the day the wind went down, and the sea became smooth. He again went down and ascertained its size. The hole is 4ft. 6in., running the length of the ship, and 18in. Broad in the depth of the ship. One part of the iron plate is bent outwards, and the other part bent inwards, caused most probably by the Northumberland swinging on the Hercules' prow. The two compartments in the ship’s side which are full show no signs of leaks of any consequence, so that the water is entirely confined to these two compartments. The amount of water being about 60 tons is of no great consequence. We are to start for Gibraltar at 3 p.m. to-day, accompanied by the Hercules; so you will most probably receive telegraphic Information from there of our misfortunes before this comes to hand, as we are going at the rate of eight knots. There, most probably, they will patch us up as well as they can. And we shall fetch Plymouth at as early a date as possible."
Ma 9 June 1873	THE SHAH OF PERSIA. ... The subjoined Information was made public by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty on Saturday afternoon: — "The following are the arrangements of the Admiralty for the reception of His Majesty the Shah of Persia on his embarkation at Ostend and arrival at Dover:— "A squadron of ironclads, under the orders of Rear-Admiral Hornby, will leave Spithead on or about the 18th inst. Her Majesty’s ships Vigilant and Lively and other yachts will embark His Majesty at Ostend early on the morning of the 18th inst. Her Majesty's ships Devastation, Audacious, and Vanguard, will escort His Majesty thence towards Dover, where they will be met by the following ships, under the command of Rear Admiral Hornby:— Agincourt (flag), Northumberland, Black Prince, Achilles, Hercules, Sultan, Monarch, and Hector; and Audacious. Vanguard, and Devastation (to be detached to Ostend and rejoin). The squadron will convoy His Majesty to near Dover Pier, where His Majesty will land. On joining the ships at Ostend and the channel squadron, and on landing, His Majesty will be received with the usual salutes and ceremonies due to His Majesty's exalted rank." At Devonport and Keyham the following vessels are being prepared and equipped to take part in the naval review at Spithead:—The Zealous, 20, wood built, armour-plated, screw ship; the double screw, iron, armour-plated turret-ships Gorgon, 4; Hecate, 4; Hydra, 4; and Cyclops, 4; the Prince Albert, 4, screw, armour-plated, iron turret-ship; the Hotspur, 3, double screw, iron, armour-plated ram; the Waterwitch, 4, iron, armour-plated, hydraulic gun-boat; the Goshawk, 4, and the Swinger, 4, screw composite gunboats; the Plucky, 1, screw gunboat; and the Lively, paddle despatch vessel (the latter being intended to join the escort). Besides these vessels, the ironclads Northumberland, 28, Agincourt, 28, and Vanguard, 14, have lately left Devonport for the rendezvous of the fleet at Spithead. On the 17th of June it is anticipated that the Channel Fleet will be lying off Dover to await the arrival of the Shah of Persia, and it is proposed for the yachts of the Royal Cinque Ports Club to go out on Wednesday and sail as a squadron to meet the Shah, and to return to Dover with the Ironclad Fleet.
Ma 30 June 1873	The fleet remaining at Spithead anchorage yesterday comprised the following vessels:—The Agincourt, flagship, Rear-Admiral Hornby, C.B., commanding-in-chief; the Sultan, carrying the broad pennant of Commodore Vansittart, C.B., second in command; the Northumberland, Hercules, Monarch, Audacious, Vanguard, Black Prince, Caledonia, Penelope, Hector, Valiant, Achilles, Glatton, Devastation, Royal Sovereign, and Valorous, paddle. The Devastation, Glatton, and Royal Sovereign are expected to go into Portsmouth harbour from Spithead this morning.

Top↑