HEIC Nemesis Armour?

[AThompson]

Hi, all.

I have a few books that touch on the East India Company's Nemesis in varying details, but one thing I'm trying to figure out was, was she actually armoured?

She was obviously an early iron warship of 1839, we know this, but was this iron considered to be armour? It would seem strange that this iron was not considered protection, though saying that we know she was holed from shot received from the Chinese, so maybe it was not armour.

Glorie is always held up as the first ironclad, but we know there were several iron ships before her.

Any thoughts?

[marcelo_malara]

Hi, all.

I have a few books that touch on the East India Company's Nemesis in varying details, but one thing I'm trying to figure out was, was she actually armoured?

She was obviously an early iron warship of 1839, we know this, but was this iron considered to be armour? It would seem strange that this iron was not considered protection, though saying that we know she was holed from shot received from the Chinese, so maybe it was not armour.

Glorie is always held up as the first ironclad, but we know there were several iron ships before her.

Any thoughts?

Hi! This is treated in the magnificent volume "Before the ironclad" by DK Brown, I recommend it. Iron hull was NOT armour, it was more easily pierced than the wooden walls of sailing ship. That´s why wood soldiered on till Warrior, when actual armour applied on the iron hull adequately protected the ship.

[wadinga]

Hi AThompson,

Conway's History of the Ship "Steam, Steel and Shellfire confirms what Marcelo has gleaned from D K Brown. Perhaps not surprisingly as Brown was one of the distinguished contributors.

It says Nemesis' success might have been that besides only facing outmoded Chinese low velocity weapons, high ambient temperatures may helped against brittle fracture of the iron. The RN led a race to commission iron-hulled warships but soon decided this was premature due to perceived vulnerability after trials, and three were downgraded from frigates to troopships, and their powerful engines redeployed into new wooden-hulled screw battleships.

Wrought iron's brittleness at temperatures below 20 deg C made it unsuitable as solid armour unless as much as 4" in thickness but laminated (riveted) plates were easier to produce for some protection. Gloire's 4.7" armour had significant strengthening backing and her heavy hull made her a poor sailer which rolled heavily.

What is also interesting about Nemesis for warships is another iron hull advantage: effective watertight compartmentation.

All the best

wadinga

[Byron Angel]

A couple of notes -

> The midships hull cross-section of Nemesis which appears in DKB's afore-mentioned book (p.76) indicates no iarmor, only iron skin plating ranging from 5/16 to 1/4 inches in thickness. My impression is that she was an iron-built warship, but was not armored.

In any case, the 1840 date of launch of Nemesis would (IIRC) have put her about ten years before the introduction of wrought iron armor.

A good reference on 19thC armor development and testing can be found here -
https://books.google.com/books?id=6ZNPA ... utput=text

Byron

[AThompson]

As always, thank you for the info, guys. Interesting to know, and some good book recommendations.