The Lunette Battery
TQ 45023 00084
“The works planned by the ordnance engineers are to present an angular front to the sea. Internally there will be brickwork; the batteries will be composed of earth work, 30 feet thick, rising to a height of nine feet above the level of the eastern pier, sloping seaward, and covered with turf. The dimensions of the works are 112 feet from each interior angle, and at the extremities there will be compartments of brickwork 50 feet square, containing spaces for powder magazines and shells, the entrances of course being northward and inland. Each façade will mount three guns of large calibre, on swivels, so that the whole strength of the battery may be pointed directly off the harbour mouth, half the number will command all westward, south of the cliffs, and the other half will guard Seaford Bay eastwards”.
The Morning Chronicle, March 15th 1855
The Morning Chronicle, March 15th 1855
The original six gun plan for the lower or "Lunette" battery at Newhaven.
|
The term "Lunette" applied to a fortification built around a "Redan" strong point as shown in these simplified diagrams.
|
This then was to become the Lunette Battery and was initially designed in 1854 by a Mr A. T. Taffs at a time when the British Government and armed forces were committed to fighting the Crimean War (1853-1856).
The name “Lunette” comes from the French term for “Crescent Moon”, referring to the half moon shaped structure. A Lunette is best described as a detached field fortification, consisting of two faces, forming a salient angle and two parallel flanks in which the powder magazines are housed. This style of design was a detached form of the simpler “Redan” structure, a two faced triangular construction also used on fortifications. The land on which the Lunette Battery stands was purchased by the Board of Ordnance from Lord Sheffield of Newhaven in 1855.
The Lunette Battery was initially armed with six 68 pounder smooth bore guns of a design that Henry VIII would have recognised with firing steps in between the gun mounts, allowing defending soldiers to fire over the parapet with muskets. This battery was not an isolated example as all around the coast of Britain gun batteries and forts were being re equipped or newly built under one of the biggest peacetime defence construction projects known by the then heavily criticised Palmeston Government.
The name “Lunette” comes from the French term for “Crescent Moon”, referring to the half moon shaped structure. A Lunette is best described as a detached field fortification, consisting of two faces, forming a salient angle and two parallel flanks in which the powder magazines are housed. This style of design was a detached form of the simpler “Redan” structure, a two faced triangular construction also used on fortifications. The land on which the Lunette Battery stands was purchased by the Board of Ordnance from Lord Sheffield of Newhaven in 1855.
The Lunette Battery was initially armed with six 68 pounder smooth bore guns of a design that Henry VIII would have recognised with firing steps in between the gun mounts, allowing defending soldiers to fire over the parapet with muskets. This battery was not an isolated example as all around the coast of Britain gun batteries and forts were being re equipped or newly built under one of the biggest peacetime defence construction projects known by the then heavily criticised Palmeston Government.
British Coastal Fortification Costs for 1860
Under Lord Palmeston Prime Minister 1855 to 1865
From A letter to The Times
Total consumed sum as of 1860 was £7,425,000 of an authorised government total budget of £ 7,460,000. Leaving £35,000 remaining to be spent on completing all the works required.
In today’s money the figure of £7,460,000 equates to £470,726,000 with the purchasing power of £1 in 1860 = £63.10 today.
The costs so far are:
Portsmouth £ 3,067,991
Plymouth £ 164,000
Sheerness £ 366,912
Gravesend & Thames £ 343,377
Pembroke Coast £ 306,000
Dover £ 294,000
Chatham £ 274,000
Cork, Ireland £ 194,000
Cost of armour plates and fitting to all forts £ 403,800
Experiments £ 15,237
Surveys £ 23,524
Legal and Incidental £ 173,500
But; all forts have yet to be fully completed as of 1860 and it has further come to light that most have not been built strong enough to support the heavy guns that they are designed to accommodate. Therefore the critics of the project are aware that the remaining £35,000 of the budget is simply no where near enough money to see the project justifiably completed. The Chancellor Gladstone repeated threatened to resign over the enormous costs placed upon the tax payer that were simply beyond redemption.
But by modern standards:
The Trident Nuclear Submarine Project has cost:
Total development £9.8 billion
Annual Running £ 2 billion
Each Missile £ 16.8 million to build.
Defence spending over the years has become far more expensive than Lord Palmeston's Government in 1860 could possibly have imagined!
Under Lord Palmeston Prime Minister 1855 to 1865
From A letter to The Times
Total consumed sum as of 1860 was £7,425,000 of an authorised government total budget of £ 7,460,000. Leaving £35,000 remaining to be spent on completing all the works required.
In today’s money the figure of £7,460,000 equates to £470,726,000 with the purchasing power of £1 in 1860 = £63.10 today.
The costs so far are:
Portsmouth £ 3,067,991
Plymouth £ 164,000
Sheerness £ 366,912
Gravesend & Thames £ 343,377
Pembroke Coast £ 306,000
Dover £ 294,000
Chatham £ 274,000
Cork, Ireland £ 194,000
Cost of armour plates and fitting to all forts £ 403,800
Experiments £ 15,237
Surveys £ 23,524
Legal and Incidental £ 173,500
But; all forts have yet to be fully completed as of 1860 and it has further come to light that most have not been built strong enough to support the heavy guns that they are designed to accommodate. Therefore the critics of the project are aware that the remaining £35,000 of the budget is simply no where near enough money to see the project justifiably completed. The Chancellor Gladstone repeated threatened to resign over the enormous costs placed upon the tax payer that were simply beyond redemption.
But by modern standards:
The Trident Nuclear Submarine Project has cost:
Total development £9.8 billion
Annual Running £ 2 billion
Each Missile £ 16.8 million to build.
Defence spending over the years has become far more expensive than Lord Palmeston's Government in 1860 could possibly have imagined!
On this aerial view of the harbour area today we have high lighted the location of the Lunette Battery.
|
The later and final plan of the Lunette Battery as a three RML gun position and it is this that can be seen today.
|
Only seven years after the land purchase on the foreshore, Lieutenant John Charles Ardagh started the construction of the main fort on the cliff top above the Lunette. Seeing the advantage of keeping the existing battery, the Lunette was re designed as a three gun battery, with earth embankments built over the other three positions, thus giving a better protection from enemy fire.
The firing steps remained a part of the design and three new 64 Pdr Rifled Muzzle Loader (RML) guns were installed, giving increased range and more accurate firepower; these three massive new guns now superseding the ineffective previous six.
The firing steps remained a part of the design and three new 64 Pdr Rifled Muzzle Loader (RML) guns were installed, giving increased range and more accurate firepower; these three massive new guns now superseding the ineffective previous six.
The Wrought Iron 64Pdr / 64Cwt RML Gun (Some facts about this huge cannon)
These massively constructed guns were made essentially of four wrought iron tubes; a bore tube, a bore reinforcement tube, a chamber reinforcement tube and a large breech coil tube. All together a single gun weighed in at 3.2 imperial tons or 64Cwt. The building mandate at the time of manufacture was to contain the propellant explosion by wrapping the barrel in successively stronger iron sleeves to avoid barrel bursts, while at the same time keeping the dead weight as low as possible.
The Barrel Length= 98 inches (8ft). The Calibre = 6.3 inch.
These guns were uniquely rifled as:- 1 turn in 40 calibres = 252in or 21 ft. In a 98 inch barrel the shell achieved just .39 of a turn. The rifling consisted of 3 grooves each at a depth of 0.11in and a width of 1in and originally used a “shunt” groove system whereby one groove was used for loading and another for firing. This was later replaced with a “plain” groove to avoid excessive wear and to keep the shell centred in the barrel thereby maintaining accuracy.
These massively constructed guns were made essentially of four wrought iron tubes; a bore tube, a bore reinforcement tube, a chamber reinforcement tube and a large breech coil tube. All together a single gun weighed in at 3.2 imperial tons or 64Cwt. The building mandate at the time of manufacture was to contain the propellant explosion by wrapping the barrel in successively stronger iron sleeves to avoid barrel bursts, while at the same time keeping the dead weight as low as possible.
The Barrel Length= 98 inches (8ft). The Calibre = 6.3 inch.
These guns were uniquely rifled as:- 1 turn in 40 calibres = 252in or 21 ft. In a 98 inch barrel the shell achieved just .39 of a turn. The rifling consisted of 3 grooves each at a depth of 0.11in and a width of 1in and originally used a “shunt” groove system whereby one groove was used for loading and another for firing. This was later replaced with a “plain” groove to avoid excessive wear and to keep the shell centred in the barrel thereby maintaining accuracy.
Available Shells:
Common Mk 6 = Weight 64 lbs 11 oz
Incl. 7 lb 2 oz bursting charge
Used against Land Fronts. Earthworks. Buildings. Large Shipping.
Shrapnel Mk 7 = Weight 67 lbs 7 oz
Filled with 234 metal balls and a 14 lb 90z bursting charge.
Used beyond the range of case shot. On land against troops.
At sea against small boats.
Case Shot Mk 5 = Weight 49 lbs 14 oz
Filled with 50 x 8oz shot balls set in a sand and clay moulding.
Used against troops or boats when close up.
2 can be loaded together at very close quarters.
The Propellant Charge: = Mk 1 & 2 Guns 6.5 lbs of R.L.G. Black Powder
Mk 3 Guns 10 lbs of R.L.G. Black Powder
Each packaged into silk cloth bags.
R.L.G. = Rifle Large Grain; Black Powder
Common Mk 6 = Weight 64 lbs 11 oz
Incl. 7 lb 2 oz bursting charge
Used against Land Fronts. Earthworks. Buildings. Large Shipping.
Shrapnel Mk 7 = Weight 67 lbs 7 oz
Filled with 234 metal balls and a 14 lb 90z bursting charge.
Used beyond the range of case shot. On land against troops.
At sea against small boats.
Case Shot Mk 5 = Weight 49 lbs 14 oz
Filled with 50 x 8oz shot balls set in a sand and clay moulding.
Used against troops or boats when close up.
2 can be loaded together at very close quarters.
The Propellant Charge: = Mk 1 & 2 Guns 6.5 lbs of R.L.G. Black Powder
Mk 3 Guns 10 lbs of R.L.G. Black Powder
Each packaged into silk cloth bags.
R.L.G. = Rifle Large Grain; Black Powder
A preserved example of a 64Cwt RML Gun on its traversing mounting overlooking a parapet defensive wall.
|
An equally preserved example but mounted behind a higher parapet wall. One can see the slots in the barrel for the sighting instruments.
|
|
|
The Rifled Muzzle Loading Gun (RML) of the Victorian period. These were monster guns of large calibre and weight. Though accurate when handled properly they had a tendency to burst upon firing with often horrific results for the crews.
Bottom Left: Improvements in design and strengthening, The Lunette Battery had the Mk3 Gun. Bottom Right: A typical traversing mount with recoil slide centred on a cast iron pivot.
Bottom Left: Improvements in design and strengthening, The Lunette Battery had the Mk3 Gun. Bottom Right: A typical traversing mount with recoil slide centred on a cast iron pivot.
The performance of the gun was actually quite good and both accuracy and firepower were generally excellent for 19th Century standards. The ballistics chart below tells us much about the overall efficiency. The shell exited the muzzle at just about the speed of sound but this did not detract from the massive muzzle energy generated by the heavy 64lb projectile moving at 1,125 fps. The chart tells us that at 1000 yds the shell needs only a 2° inclination from horizontal and will hit its target on a shallow descent angle of only 2.5° while retaining a velocity of 969 fps (664 mph) and that this distance is covered in just less than 3 seconds. This means that the trajectory curve at this range is quite flat and accuracy would have been very good for a target the size of a warship; the shell retaining massive penetrating power before it exploded.
At one mile range (2000 yds) though the velocity of the shell has dropped only marginally the flight time has doubled in keeping with the doubling of the inclination angle and the tripling of the decent angle; that is the shell is travelling on a much steeper trajectory curve and therefore less accurate. As the range increases so we see that the guns long range performance gets steadily worse despite the shell still retaining great kinetic energy out to 4000 yds.
Ballistics Chart for Common Shell
M.V. = 1,125 fps 771 mph Time of Flight Elevation Descent
Required Angle
1000yds 969 fps 664 mph 2.91 secs 2° 7' 2° 35'
2000yds 865 fps 593 mph 6.21 secs 4° 53' 6° 13'
3000yds 781 fps 536 mph 9.86 secs 8° 24' 11° 10'
4000yds 709 fps 486 mph 13.8 secs 12° 48' 17° 14'
The entire procedure of manning and firing these guns was together with the advent of better propellants and breech loading high velocity shells, to lead to their redundancy before many had even been test fired. It took a team of nine men to crew each gun with much of their work consumed in maintenance, gun laying and munitions preparation. They were big, brash and unpopular pieces of ordnance requiring upwards of 10 minutes preparation between each shot and the handling of large amounts of dangerously volatile raw black powder that required precise storage conditions to avoid the extremes of dampness and excessive heat.
By the turn of the century RML guns were obsolete and so were their fortifications, in the years leading up to the Great War it was not only better artillery that replaced them but two new inventions that would change the way wars were to be fought altogether; the Machine Gun and the Aeroplane.
At one mile range (2000 yds) though the velocity of the shell has dropped only marginally the flight time has doubled in keeping with the doubling of the inclination angle and the tripling of the decent angle; that is the shell is travelling on a much steeper trajectory curve and therefore less accurate. As the range increases so we see that the guns long range performance gets steadily worse despite the shell still retaining great kinetic energy out to 4000 yds.
Ballistics Chart for Common Shell
M.V. = 1,125 fps 771 mph Time of Flight Elevation Descent
Required Angle
1000yds 969 fps 664 mph 2.91 secs 2° 7' 2° 35'
2000yds 865 fps 593 mph 6.21 secs 4° 53' 6° 13'
3000yds 781 fps 536 mph 9.86 secs 8° 24' 11° 10'
4000yds 709 fps 486 mph 13.8 secs 12° 48' 17° 14'
The entire procedure of manning and firing these guns was together with the advent of better propellants and breech loading high velocity shells, to lead to their redundancy before many had even been test fired. It took a team of nine men to crew each gun with much of their work consumed in maintenance, gun laying and munitions preparation. They were big, brash and unpopular pieces of ordnance requiring upwards of 10 minutes preparation between each shot and the handling of large amounts of dangerously volatile raw black powder that required precise storage conditions to avoid the extremes of dampness and excessive heat.
By the turn of the century RML guns were obsolete and so were their fortifications, in the years leading up to the Great War it was not only better artillery that replaced them but two new inventions that would change the way wars were to be fought altogether; the Machine Gun and the Aeroplane.
A six inch studded shell of the type used in the 64Cwt RML gun.
|
A 64Cwt RML gun on a fixed mounting deployed in a casemate. This mount only allowed for recoil and not traverse.
|
This 19th Century diagram shows how the three Lunette Battery guns would have been mounted to clear the parapet wall.
By 1871, when the Lunette’s new design was sent to the Inspector General of Fortifications, soldiers were being armed with the new breech loading .450/577 Martini Henry rifle (1871-1888) and artillery was also adopting the more modernistic breech loading design together with the development of more powerful long range, high explosive ammunition manufactured from new products that no longer relied upon the limitations of black powder.
Despite its expensive modernisation, after only eight years of further service, the Lunette Battery was doomed to redundancy. Between the years of 1879 – 1890 major work was carried out on the harbour entrance, including the construction of the new harbour breakwater, lighthouses and signal station, thereby replacing the existing two piers and their lighthouses. To carry out this construction, a clear route was needed for materials to be brought to the site, so the Lunette’s western gun position was removed, flattened and replaced with a road and railway.
By 1885 with the beach having been improved, one of the new lighthouses and its adjoining signal station were now blocking most of the Lunette’s eastern field of fire as well. Five years later the large western breakwater and second lighthouse had been completed totally blocking the battery’s arc of fire and thereby rendering the entire Lunette obsolete.
Bottom: The Lunette Battery as it can be seen today after some restoration over recent years.
Despite its expensive modernisation, after only eight years of further service, the Lunette Battery was doomed to redundancy. Between the years of 1879 – 1890 major work was carried out on the harbour entrance, including the construction of the new harbour breakwater, lighthouses and signal station, thereby replacing the existing two piers and their lighthouses. To carry out this construction, a clear route was needed for materials to be brought to the site, so the Lunette’s western gun position was removed, flattened and replaced with a road and railway.
By 1885 with the beach having been improved, one of the new lighthouses and its adjoining signal station were now blocking most of the Lunette’s eastern field of fire as well. Five years later the large western breakwater and second lighthouse had been completed totally blocking the battery’s arc of fire and thereby rendering the entire Lunette obsolete.
Bottom: The Lunette Battery as it can be seen today after some restoration over recent years.
|
|
Two World Wars
Although the Lunette Battery had become redundant, the west beach on which it stood and the harbour it guarded were by no means inactive. During WW1 the harbour served as a major supply port for the British army fighting in France, with Red Cross ships frequently bringing back wounded. The admiralty also placed “examination” ships to permanently patrol the harbour mouth to seaward with orders to stop any vessel not identifying itself as friendly before the guns at the fort guarding the harbour opened fired.
With the outbreak of WW2, west beach was sealed off as the threat of German invasion loomed. Mines were planted, barbed wire laid out; a hole was blown in the harbour breakwater so it couldn’t be used as a landing point and on the promenade next to the Lunette it was thought that a “Cockatrice” mobile flame thrower vehicle was parked ready to set the beach and the River Ouse ablaze; though these somewhat experimental vehicle mounted flame throwers enjoyed limited roles with both the admiralty and RAF the army on the other hand showed little interest in them and they were not mass produced.
An eye witness had this to say about the Cockatrice: "It was a terrifying apparatus ... It fired a mixture of diesel oil and tar and had a range of about a hundred yards. It had a flame thirty feet in diameter and used eight gallons of fuel a second ... When demonstrated to admirals and generals it usually appalled and horrified them ..."
Also at this time surviving photographs show that a brick and concrete rectangular building was constructed on the Lunette which was to become Engine Room No.2 for generating power for the three search lights mounted on the promenade. This building remained abandoned well into the early 1950’s before meeting its inevitable demolition.
Although the Lunette Battery had become redundant, the west beach on which it stood and the harbour it guarded were by no means inactive. During WW1 the harbour served as a major supply port for the British army fighting in France, with Red Cross ships frequently bringing back wounded. The admiralty also placed “examination” ships to permanently patrol the harbour mouth to seaward with orders to stop any vessel not identifying itself as friendly before the guns at the fort guarding the harbour opened fired.
With the outbreak of WW2, west beach was sealed off as the threat of German invasion loomed. Mines were planted, barbed wire laid out; a hole was blown in the harbour breakwater so it couldn’t be used as a landing point and on the promenade next to the Lunette it was thought that a “Cockatrice” mobile flame thrower vehicle was parked ready to set the beach and the River Ouse ablaze; though these somewhat experimental vehicle mounted flame throwers enjoyed limited roles with both the admiralty and RAF the army on the other hand showed little interest in them and they were not mass produced.
An eye witness had this to say about the Cockatrice: "It was a terrifying apparatus ... It fired a mixture of diesel oil and tar and had a range of about a hundred yards. It had a flame thirty feet in diameter and used eight gallons of fuel a second ... When demonstrated to admirals and generals it usually appalled and horrified them ..."
Also at this time surviving photographs show that a brick and concrete rectangular building was constructed on the Lunette which was to become Engine Room No.2 for generating power for the three search lights mounted on the promenade. This building remained abandoned well into the early 1950’s before meeting its inevitable demolition.
Photographs of the Lunette: Above, views inside the two powder magazines and one of the entrances. Theses would had held reserve shells, bagged propellant cartridges and large quantities of black powder.
Bottom: one of the ready use shell recesses in the parapet wall. The fire steps allowing the supporting infantry to fire their muskets over the wall can also be seen.
Bottom: one of the ready use shell recesses in the parapet wall. The fire steps allowing the supporting infantry to fire their muskets over the wall can also be seen.
The Lunette Today
The railway was finally removed in the 1960’s and in 1988 the Lunette Battery and more importantly, Newhaven Fort became visitor attractions. The Lunette Battery later became a Scheduled Ancient Monument and with a grant from English Heritage and Newhaven Town Council was repaired in 2009 155 years after it was first conceived, to become a more recognisable land mark.
Today and left open to the elements, it makes for an interesting visit and one can clearly see the two surviving main gun positions and underground magazine of the two eastern most defences. To the west there is little to see other than the sealed and often broken into, western underground magazine which with caution can sometimes be explored; but there is little else surviving. From the air more can be discerned and feint traces of its original shape can be seen as our photographs show.
Perhaps the most interesting items still on view are the two cast iron mounting spigots for the two eastern 64Pdr RML gun mounts. Though they might not look much to the uninitiated eye they are likely to be the only surviving remnants of the original battery that have remained untouched during 162 years of exposure to the elements.
The railway was finally removed in the 1960’s and in 1988 the Lunette Battery and more importantly, Newhaven Fort became visitor attractions. The Lunette Battery later became a Scheduled Ancient Monument and with a grant from English Heritage and Newhaven Town Council was repaired in 2009 155 years after it was first conceived, to become a more recognisable land mark.
Today and left open to the elements, it makes for an interesting visit and one can clearly see the two surviving main gun positions and underground magazine of the two eastern most defences. To the west there is little to see other than the sealed and often broken into, western underground magazine which with caution can sometimes be explored; but there is little else surviving. From the air more can be discerned and feint traces of its original shape can be seen as our photographs show.
Perhaps the most interesting items still on view are the two cast iron mounting spigots for the two eastern 64Pdr RML gun mounts. Though they might not look much to the uninitiated eye they are likely to be the only surviving remnants of the original battery that have remained untouched during 162 years of exposure to the elements.
|
|
Royal Sussex Artillery: This regiment is pursuing a steady course of instruction at its regimental depot, Lewes, and making most satisfactory progress in all artillery drills and exercises. On Wednesday and Thursday last six gun detachments with a proportion of officers, under the command of Major St. Clair, preceded by railroad to carry on practice with shot and shell from the 68- pounders in the Lower Battery at Newhaven. The target, of the dimensions of an ordinary barrel, or half-tun vat, was moored at a range of between 1400 and 1500 yards, and the firing on both days was astonishingly good, nearly every shot striking within the compass of a small schooner or rowing boat (indeed two shots in succession struck the small target and disabled it on the first day), the shells bursting at the required instant on reaching the object. Not with standing the unfavourable state of the weather on Thursday, the Duke of Richmond, as Colonel-in-Chief of the regiment, in full uniform, accompanied by Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimer, Colonel Lennox, Commanding Royal Engineer in the district; Colonel Birr, of the Indian Army, and several officers of distinction, attended, and were heard to express their admiration at the extreme accuracy of the practice, and upon which his Grace complimented the commanding officer and men. After the day’s proceedings the Duke returned to London and the gun detachments to Lewes. The practice will be resumed on Monday and Friday next, and the volunteers disperse to their homes on Saturday, the last of the 27 days training. The Times Monday May 21st 1860
With greatfull thanks to
Ed Tyhurst and the Newhaven Museums.
Ed Tyhurst and the Newhaven Museums.
Copyright Steve Sullivan, January 2020
