HMS Undaunted – whose wrought iron mast now stands at the road entrance to the Historic Dockyard, Chatham – was the fourth Bristol-class wooden screw frigate built for the Royal Navy. Her sister ships were HMS Bristol, HMS Glasgow, and HMS Newcastle. The class were built with composite wooden hulls and fitted with telescopic funnels and hoisting screws* as well as a full set of sails and rigging. As an experiment, HMS Undaunted was fitted with a wrought iron mast.
After she was launched at Chatham Dockyard in 1861, HMS Undaunted, went to Sheerness Dockyards for completion, and then straight into Reserve. She was later commissioned in March 1875 under the command of Captain Hugh Campbell, and set sail for the East Indies, where she acted as the flagship of Rear Admiral Reginald Macdonald. She returned to Chatham in 1879, where she was decommissioned in 1880 prior to being sold for scrapping in November 1882.
HMS Undaunted's characteristics:
* The telescopic funnel and hoisting screw allowed the Bristol-class to operate as purely sail-powered vessels when necessary. This increased their ability to stay at sea for long periods without having to stop at a coaling station to refill their bunkers.
After she was launched at Chatham Dockyard in 1861, HMS Undaunted, went to Sheerness Dockyards for completion, and then straight into Reserve. She was later commissioned in March 1875 under the command of Captain Hugh Campbell, and set sail for the East Indies, where she acted as the flagship of Rear Admiral Reginald Macdonald. She returned to Chatham in 1879, where she was decommissioned in 1880 prior to being sold for scrapping in November 1882.
HMS Undaunted's characteristics:
- Displacement: 4,094 tons
- Dimensions:
- Length: 250 ft (76.2m)
- Beam: 52 ft 1 in (15.9m)
- Draught: 22 ft 9 in (6.9m)
- Propulsion: 1 x horizontal, two-cylinder, single-expansion steam engine (2,503 ihp) driving 1 hoisting screw propeller*
- Speed: 12 knots
- Complement: 550 to 600
- Armament: 30 x 8-inch (203 mm) muzzle-loading smoothbore guns; 20 x 32-pounder muzzle-loading smoothbore guns; 1 x 68-pounder muzzle-loading smoothbore gun
* The telescopic funnel and hoisting screw allowed the Bristol-class to operate as purely sail-powered vessels when necessary. This increased their ability to stay at sea for long periods without having to stop at a coaling station to refill their bunkers.
.jpg)
The ships in those days had short life spans... launched 1861, commissioned in 1875, scrapped 1882..... spent most of her time not being used - I wonder what the story was behind building a ship you never intended to use??
ReplyDeleteSteve-the-Wargamer,
DeleteI suspect that the answer lies in the date when she was built. Warship design was in transition, and the UK had piles of seasoned wood available as well as the capacity to build ships with iron rather than wooden frames. France was seen as a growing threat, and there were quite a few war scares ... so building ships made sense 'just in case'.
By the time they were finished, the world had moved on, and ships were used as and when they were needed, spending long periods in Reserve. The advantage of this class was their ability to act as steam and/or sail warships that could be used to 'show the flag' on overseas stations. They could cruise using just their sails, which made them economical, and their armament was strong enough to impress local rulers and deal with any potential enemy commerce raiders.
By 1882 better ships were becoming available and ships like this were fast becoming obsolete. Some were hulked and used as training ships, store hulks, barracks ships, and asylum ships ... but most were just scrapped.
All the best,
Bob
Definitely sounds plausible, Bob... shame, she was a nice looking ship
DeleteSteve-the-Wargamer,
DeleteI suspect that service in the Indies may well have taken a serious toll on her hull, especially if she wasn't sheathed in copper. Exposure to various maritime creatures (e,g, torpedo worms, barnacles) could easily have led to serious below-water damage,
All the best,
Bob
Interesting post Bob.
ReplyDeleteI had the same comment as Steve on her lifespan. Being designed just before the Ironclad revolution really limited her usefulness. Compare the lifespans of ships constructed in the Napoleonic times - some of which lasted past 60 years, or the early Ironclads that lasted 40+ years before Fisher got rid of them.
Peter Douglas,
DeleteIt's interesting to note that smaller wooden-hulled corvettes/gunboats lasted well into the late nineteenth century. These frigates were just too big and too old-fashioned to be worth keeping in service.
Equivalent modern ships seem to be replaced at a faster rate than they were thirty years ago. For example, some of the early Type 23 frigates were disposed of almost as soon as the last ones came into service.
All the best,
Bob