SQUADRON BATTLESHIP "TWELVE APOSTLES"

   It is laid in 1889 on by Nikolayevsk the admiralty, on 13 September, 1890, it is gone down to the water and in 1892 entered the system. Until 13 February, 1892, it counted by armored ship. During April 1907 it is brought out from the fighting strength of fleet, it is disarmed and in 1912 re-equipped into the " blockship?8 ". From the spring 1918 it was found on the storage in the Sevastopol military port, and in 1922 it was selected to the metal.

Photos of "Twelve Apostles"

	More pictures »

Technical characteristics
Displacement	8438 t.
It is long	104,2 m.
Width	18,3 m.
Sagging	8,8 m.
Power of the mechanisms	8758 hp.
Running speed	15,7 knots
Cruising range	1500 miles (by 10- main motion)
Armoring	from 203 to 356 mm
The crew	599 people
Armament
305- mm	4
152- mm	4
63- mm	2
47- mm	12
37- mm	14
The torpedo tubes	6

Impressive-looking ship Mountainman. Twelve Apostles served as the set for Eisenstein's film Battleship Potemkin as the real Potemkin was at the bottom of the sea
http://armoured.ru/dvenadcat_apostolov_eng.php

The Russian attempt to deal with those pesky "stability issues" didn't work very well, either, although it certainly was unique.

The Novgorod:





The Twelve Apostles c. 1888 - note the "fortess" type turrets:

Surviving pre-dreadnought battleships
http://www.oz.net/markhow/pre-dred/index.htm

Pre-Dreadnought battleships
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xJB2-QtNbFAC&lpg=PA213&ots=noT9kla1cd&dq=victorian%20warship&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Originally posted by Nick1986 This website might interest you Delenda. The British built this advanced battleship for the Italians just one year after the Civil War ended http://www.cityofart.net/bship/rn_affondatore.html

The Italians always had a certain flair for naval design.  Nice find, Nick

Ramming is generally a bad idea due to the crew and marines aboard the vessel being rammed, who suddenly have a terrific incentive to board and capture the ramming vessel.  In addition, it was not unknown for the rammming vessel to become trapped by the hull of the targeted vessel and become unable to disengage.

Civil War ironclads are actually an entirely different breed of fish, having absolutely awful sea-keeping qualities, the turreted variety having pretty much a zero freeboard, and neither of them being all that maneuverable in terms of engine power.

The Parrot Gun and other rifled muzzle loading cannon were formidable weapons, but had a slow rate of fire as opposed to the traditional broadside of forty guns or so, and the ironclads remained vulnerable to having their decks swept by enemy fire and their rudder shot away, which BTW persisted into the 20th century and caused the sinking of the Bismarck.

Muzzle loading weapons, meanwhile, exposed the gun crews to a literal hurricane of shot and shell and was a precarious way to make a living.

For the crew, the sheer noise level inside of an ironclad under attack was enough to literally drive men mad, bursting eardrums and rendering speech and thought impossible, and although the hull armor plates might have been impervious to enemy fire, the riveted seams were not.

Being "ironclad" was an advantage, but not enough to ensure victory by itself.

Not really. Masts neither helped nor hindered Victorian warships as they used steam power in battle

On the contrary: they saved a lot of coal on long-distance ocean crossings. It wasn't until the late 19th century when steamships were big enough to carry enough fuel, and even then they had to stop at coaling stations

A central paddle was better protected from enemy fire. I imagine the steam engine was only used in battle, treacherous coastal areas, or when sailing against the wind