English modesty

.bTz~lish .Modesty.

47

consumption of coal on the grate per unit of time, diminishes .generally, also, the potential, though it increases the economical:evaporatwe resulL LossEs or L~.llOlt lvf "rlI]~ PAI, t, LE- wal~;r:b.~The speed of the vessel being 6,8~4 k n o t t of 6082~ feet, the cireumtcrcncc of the centre of reaction of the paddies 07-60 feet, and the Jmmbcr of revolutions of the wheels per minute 12.491, their sllp would !~e as follows; 6'824X6082~ :=a 41508"12 speed of vessel, in feet, per hour. 07'6 X 12'491X 60 ~ 50603'50 " centre of reaction of paddle per hour, in f e e l 9155.38 slip per hour~ in t~et. Or 18-07 per cent. The loss by the oblique action of the paddles, calculated as the squares of the sines of their angles of incidence on the water, is 12-89 per cent. '/'he total losses by the paddle-wheel would then be (18"07+12.89) 30.96 per cent. The following proportions will be fouml useful in practice: Square feet of immersed amidships section of vessel to square foot of paddle (taking the area of two paddles only) 8,179 to I'0C0 Do, do. (taking the area of all the immersed paddies) 1.S17 " ])o. do. cubic foot of space displacement of steam piston 2.,t00 " Do. do. do. per double stroke of piston per minute 0.192 "

For the Journal of the Franklin Institute.

English ,Modesty. Otlr friends across the Atlantic are in a fair way of carrying off all the honors connected with marine navigation~ if we allow them to take that liberty nnopposed, and the cool immedence of the thing is most surprisintr; for instance, ttle fo]]owin~ amcle is pubhshed in the Budder for October llth, 1851, No. 454, p. 658, claiming that the machinery of the Collins ~ line of steamers was not only copied ii'om the Cunard line, but that engineers and hands were imported from the Clyde into New York for the purpose of constructing their machinery, and that this was one of the conditions on which the United States government granted the contract to Mr, Collins. "British and Amcrlcan Stcamers.--In your number of the 4th inst. you quoted an extract from an American paper, in which it is stated thatimprovements made in the steam engine by Americans, have been adopted in building the "last fast" boats of the C u n a r d line, and that in the "extra fast boats" of the same line now in course of censtruction~ "they are to go the whole figure, and ~asblon the engines entirely after the most approved American models." By giving ctlrrency, as you have done on this anti other recent occasions, without comment, to the overwecnlng estimate which the Americans form of their own superiority, you appear to me, Mr. Editor, to do much towards weakening tim well-founded confidence which has hitherto been entertained in the perfection of British machinery, thereby injuring British interests, particularly with reference to the demand~ for engines from foreigners. It is time, therefbre, that the real facts of the case respecting the manufacture of tha engines on bokrd Collins' American linc of steamers (the vessels more immediately alluded to in the American newspaper) should be made known, which I now~do from u n doubted authority, and, as rcgards some of the particulars, from my own knowlcdge,--and which arc as follows:~ The United States Government, pcrceiving' the failure of all the attempts that had been made to establish an American line of Atlantic steamers, which shoul d compete in point of speed and efficiency with the Cunard line, and deeming it of the greatest national importance that this interiority should no longer continue, subsidized, with a large annual subvention, Collins' line, (besides, it is believed, giving pecuniary aid in some shape o r o~her towards the construction of the vessels,) on condition t h a t no expense should be •pared in obtaining the most perfect and efficient engines that could be constructed; and:

48

3~Iechanics, Physis, and Chemistry.

~s there was at that tlme (although it is only two years ago) no manufacturcr in the United States w'tlo coubl make engines fulfilling these conditions, the contractors tbr tho American line turned their "views towards,the Clyde, and obtained permission from the proprietors of the Cunard line to take moublings or castings of every part, even to the minutest particttIar, of' the engines constructed by Napier, of GIasgow, on board the largest of their '~'essels; and ht order that nothing might be wanting to make thc engines equal to those in the Cunard steamers, the contractors imported men fl'om the manufitctories on lhe Clyde for the purpose of making the engines in New York, so that they might be of national or Amcricall tkbrie. As, therefore, the last constructed and £tstest of the. American or ocean-going steamers are made entirely after the British model and by "Britishers," you wiI1 perceive, Mr. E(litor, how llttle likely it is that the Cunard ~,csscls now in course of construction are to bc fitted with engines made aitcr the American model. Where, indeed, have the Americalts anything better to show than the engines on board tb.e Collins' lille, which are made after the British model~. Bam_'~.~Icu~"'

There is not o~zeword of truth in the above article, so far as it relates to tile construction of the machinery of the Collins' steamers, and it has emanated fi'om one who is entirely ignorant of what be is writing about, " and in his zeal to protect the eredit of the Cunard line for speed, has either ignorantly, or by design, written the article to blind his countrymen as to the truth, for it is ~'athe~" mortifying to be beat by Brother Jonathan on a field that two years since was controlled entirely by Great Britain. Now fiJr a few facts; the machinery for the Atlantic and Arctic was designed and constructed at the Novelty Works, New York, ~¥hose engineer, T. B. S:fllman, " ,~ Esq., (the senior member of the firm) is a Yankee from the valley of the Mohawk, and I am quite positive has never visited EngIand, at any rate has not been there for the last five years. The engines for these two ships were design'ed and constructed under t/is immediate supervision. The engines for the Pacific and Baltic were construeted at the Ailaire Works, and were designed by Charles W. Copeland, Esq., engineer of the works, (another Yankee ti'om Cmmectieut,) and construeted under his supervision. The chief engineer of the line, John 1.:aron, Esq., was I believe born in Ireland, and came to this country when about two years old, at which time we may fairly infer he had not imbibed many ideas on marine navigation. Mr. 17. was superintending engineer oa the part ot Mr. Collins, and it is understood, designed the boilers of all the vessels. If ~he writer in the Builder can from the above statement, (which is strictly true,) make out that the engines were copied from the Clyde, and designed and built by English engineers, I should be happy to hear his argument. I can, however, I think, give him a hand to help him out of his dilemma. The engines of the Ohio and Georola, Chagres and New Orleans steamers, were designed by an engineer from the Clyde, (Mr. Tothill,) and constructed under his supervision at the then works of T. F. Seeor & Co., (now Morgan Iron Works,) New York; they are of the same size and have a strong resemblance to the engines of the Cunard steamers Europa and Niagara, but are improved in having balance valves, by which one man can work each engine, instead of requiring three, the usual practice on the Clyde. The boilers are also essentially ditI~rent from those of the English steamers• Those who pay any attention to the English papers, must well remember that it ~ as a long ttme before the9 would admit that the Collins' -I

•

.

fr •

.

.

.

~

English ,Modestv.

49

Iine were the equal in speed of the Cunard steamers; but now that they ~ are obliged to admit the truth, and own that they are beaten, they turn round with all the coolness imaginable, and actually call it a triumph of English engineering. What they have claimed as to the Collins' steamers, they are now asserting in relation to the yacht America. Most persons on this side of tile Atlantic have supposed that she was built by William H. Brown, Esq., of New York, and that she was designed by his foreman, Mr. Steers, and that good or bad, she was truly the production of this country; they have also the impression, that while building, drawings were taken of her on the stocks, and published in several of the English papers, and that those papers all spoke of her peculiar form, and not one of them claimed her as being built ti'om an English model; but all this was before the race; no sooner is that over, than several English papers discover a very strong r<.semblanee to some of the fishing boats on their coast; others are more delinite, tbr instance, the London ~Iechanics' J3/Iagazine, October number, page 289, says, "It turns out that among other novelties, she had sliding Iceel.~, and probably this contributed not a little to her triumph. Sliding keels, however, are well known to have been the invention of the late British Admiral Sir John Sehank." .Now it is a well known fact, in this country at least, that the use of centre boards or sliding keels, as they are termed in England, dates f~rther back than the memory of the oldest inhabitant, and at the risk of disturbing the ashes of Sir John Schank, I must sav he had nothine* to do w~th their invention in this country; nearly every river sloop in the vicinity of New York, at least as long back as the memory of man goeth, used them, and the date of their invention was as great a'mysterythen as now. Another English writer says, the America is modelled on the wave principle, and therefore she is an English model, because Mr. John Scott Russell is the inventor of the system; that Mr. Russell has done much to beat a little common sense into the heads of some of the ship builders of England, I allow. He has undoubtedly tor years past seen, that while the models of our ships were being constantly improved, yet in England they were all but stat{onary, and an English merchantman could be readily told fi'om her build, no matter what flag she might carry or how much they might attempt to disguise her. There has not been during the last twenty years a single English regular packet ship trading to this country, their inferiority being universally conceded. Mr. Russell, fu]ly aware of this, has adopted essentially the theory and practice of some of our best builders; that he thinks he is original in his ideas, I am willing to admit, for I have watched for years past his efforts, and he may perhaps claim the merit of being the originator so far as his own country is concerned; but when he claims, as he is now doing, that we are adopting his i&as, it is carrying the joke too far. In the~'London ~qrchitect'for August, Mr. Russeli claims, that his system has been generally adopted in this country; that our present practice and Mr. RusselPs may assimilate is quite possible, but ours has been of a gradual native ~rowth, and if it has any merit it belongs to our own ship builders, with whom it originated, and who have gradually carried it forward to its !p~'~sent position of triumph. Mr. Russell states, that the yacht 2gtania, th~competitor of the America, VoL XXIlI.--Tu~a~ 8~alxs.--No. 1.~J,.~v.~mr,1852. 5

50

2Jechanics, Physics, and C]~emistry.

was modelled on his system, which I am .glad to know, as the two vessels bein~ essentially ditFerent, he cannot then claim the America. 'rite next ,nonce, [ suppose, will be to call Com. Stevens, who sailecl the America, an lgnglishm:m, and then 1he whole thing will be complete. How contemptible is that spirit that ca.mot see good in another; for my part, I allow that we have gained much knowledge from an examination of the machinery of the var{ous English steam ships that have visited us, and this kindness we sh~lll fully repay by teachh~g brother John how to model a ship, 13. For the .lournaI of 11"e Franklin1 Ins6tute.

Re~nrtrlcs on Y. W. d~i,/d~'o~,~'s Renegades o'a lae Propeller and Steam E~gine of the ll:~gr,5'h'c(ater "£'an Jacineo." .By a. V. MERmcI<. The readers of this Journal, in perusing various calculations and remarks inser{ed on former occasions in its pages by 3Ir. a. W. h'ystrom, on the subject of Muriue Propulsion, may have been a little surprised at the thcility with wt:idx sundry disputed points were disposed ol~ and eh~.e observed results of <, ...... :'~ e set at nought, when brought to the [es~ of theory, unsuppcn'ted e;(!~er by proof or probability, l~ithout desirilag in this connexion to quarrel witi, the positions taken by Mr. N. in his former articles, I fbe] too much interest in lhe subject of his last on% (in the Dec. ~o., pp. 402-404:,) to forbear venturi~_g a word or two regarding some remarks he has therein seen fit to make on a l~.eport of the recent trial trip of the U. S. steamer San Jaeinto; in the course of which remarks we are gravel)" informed Ihat the %lip" is f:alsely reported~ because it does ~a0t correspond with the result of an empirical formula~ and with his opinion of what ottgkl ~o be the slip u:ader the eirem~lstances. IIappening to k n o w some of the facts of this case, I can inform Mr. 1N'ystromthat 1act only is the slip of'the San Jaeinto correctly reported by Mr. Isherwood, (that is~ if any rdianee is to be p]aced on the Charts of the U. S. Coast Survey~ and the observed tim% compared by several competent and disinterested individuals,) but that furthermore, other instances might be adduced to show that ~26} per eer~t, slip is not remarkable, as being either very small or very great, in a vessel of her resistance and propelling area; but is simply about what might be m'edicted, by those wl~o predicate their j u d g ment on former expe~'ience. It may also be observed ~hat, so far from an{icipatir~g a passage from Liverpool to Halifax in 5'78 days, because her propeller has a slip of only 26{- per cent. in still water, it is much more likely that the San dacinto will not accomplish it in less than teu days. To appreciate the force of.Mr. N.'s argument, it is mere]y necessary to suggest, 1st, that heavy weather at sea, or even a very slight swell, ~s, "" uniortunatel " y, a~t ~ to m " crease the slip of all propelling agents; and, ~d, although Mr. N. announces that "there would be no di~:Seuhy in giving the propeller 50 revolutions per minute/' it is almost certain that not even 31 revolutions (the number on the trial) will ever be attained :at sea, when the ship has her full supply of coals, provision% and stores, and where the water is'rarely at rest. It would be easy by such ai ::: mode of calculation, to argue a six days' passage as possible for the Col-~