LORD NELSON AND AGAMEMNON
11.8in. On paper, at any rate, they had a decided edge
LORD NELSON AND
AGAMEMNON
Lord Nelson and Agamemnon were the Royal Navy’s last and most formidable
pre-Dreadnought battleships. In this article Keith McBride looks at the lengthy gestation
process of the design and the arguments surrounding the composition of their main and
secondary batteries.
T hinking about the Royal Navy’s battleships for
1903-04 began in early 1902; there was a feeling
that the King Edward VIIs, as yet incomplete, were too
large and not powerful enough. They had moved on from
the standard armament of the 1890s, but so had the ships
designed and projected by other powers. Philip Watts, the
new Director of Naval Construction, had a reputation for
packing a heavy armament and other military features
into ‘export’ ships smaller than the Admiralty designs of
his predecessor, Sir William White. Sir William May, the
Controller (= USN Chief of Bu Ord, Buships and much
else), had implemented a series of studies which suggested
that much more gun power and armour was needed for
new ships to be militarily effective. The 6in gun was by
now ineffective against the latest battleships. Fitting addi-
tional 12in turrets would have required much larger ships,
but an improved secondary battery seemed easier, and also
necessary, as Krupp armour permitted better protection for
the enemy’s secondary batteries, which were the main
target of one’s own. It was at first hoped to keep to a
displacement of 14,000 tons, that of the Duncans of 1898
and 1899, while carrying an armament at least as powerful
as the King Edward VIIs and attaining the Duncans’ speed
of 19 knots.
A very large number of designs were sketched or worked
out in detail. From May 1902 many were ‘Wattsian’, with
more armament packed in than the ‘Whiteian’ designs of
the period up to 1901. Not all are recorded, but the ‘A’
designs mostly had the King Edward VII armament in a
smaller hull, the ‘B’s four 12in, eight 9.2in and twelve 6in
in a battery. Protection was reduced in these, the parts of
the barbettes fore and aft of the citadel being reduced to
10in and the 1in upper deck armour being abolished. The
speed of ‘B1’ was reduced to 18 knots, the barbettes thick-
ened again and the turret backs reduced in favour of the
armour deck slopes. ‘B2’ had thicker barbettes. One
nameless design under consideration in May 1902 was of
19,000 tons, with 18.5 knots speed, four 12in, twelve
9.2in and twelve 6in; a British predecessor of the Aki and
Satsuma.
‘C’ and her successors were much more radical. The 6in
guns were abolished and the heavy guns placed in trian-
gular redoubts at the ends of the ship, each having twin
66
turrets and magazines, and the steering gear better
over the Formidables. Some time in 1904-05 work began
on the Danton design, with four 12in and twelve 9.4in.
Russia had moved from the Borodinos to the Imperator
Pavels, basically similar, but with an 8in secondary battery.
protected. All this extra armour weighed 600 tons. Four
7.5in guns on the main deck were replaced by two 9.2in
on the upper. This would weigh 100 tons extra and cost
£10,000 more. It would also require extra space extending
Germany had gone from 9.4in and 5.9in guns to 11in and
6.7in with the Deutschlands of 1900. America had
followed the heavily armed Georgias with the even more
powerful Connecticut and Louisiana of 1902, about which
so far forward as to throw the foremast out of position.
Magazines and shell rooms would have to be worked in
abreast the machinery spaces.
The extra weight would require more power; 16,000ihp,
the Admiralty were well informed. It is thought that ships 300 extra tons and £30,000 extra cost; a lot in gold sover-
on Lord Nelson lines were planned to follow, but changed eigns. 13,500ihp would have driven the original 14,000
for the much more advanced South Carolina when the ton ship at 18 knots, but every extra ton had its price. The
Dreadnought was announced. Finally, Austria-Hungary Board of Admiralty was anxious to keep the ships as small
had just about completed the Erzherzogs, and was consid- as possible, which resulted in a cramped design, especially
ering their successors. Her Chief Constructor, Siegfried with so many turrets.
Popper, prepared five designs, three of which were half-
way to the Dreadnought. The design chosen, which Minute to Controller 31/12/02
became the Radetzky, was remarkably like what was to Mods to B3
12in, a twin 9.2in and two single 9.2in. It is not clear how
these barbettes were arranged; possibly asymmetrically, or
even superimposed. The side armour within the citadel
become the Lord Nelson, though with emphasis on speed
rather than heavy armour.
As there were major disagreements on the British
B3a as B3 except that the 2 single amidships 9.2 in guns
dispensed with. FB fwd inc to 24ft. Fwd 12 ax ht inc
to 27ft. Training of 12in can be inc to 50 deg abaft &
was reduced to 7in except for 8in abreast the redoubts. design, the Controller held a conference in his room on 2 bef beam – 280 deg.
The ‘D’ designs were also very heavily armed, with four November 1902. At this meeting it was decided that the Assume that 150t can be saved by mods of armour of
12in, eight 9.2in housed in twin turrets and four in single side armour should be increased from 9in to 12in abreast 12in & 9.2in barbettes. Cost wd be £1,240,000.
ones. Apart from the latter, the heavy armament was the machinery spaces, a very big and heavy change as 9in B3b armt as B3, B3a mods to FB and ax ht of 12in made.
concentrated in two redoubts, fore and aft. Again, most of had been standard from the Majestics (with Harveyized Cost becomes £1,300,000.
the citadel side had 7in armour. The redoubts had 8in armour) of 1892 onwards. It may well have involved the B3c As B3b but single 9.2in replaced by double, making
armour from the main deck up, on front and sides, 6in on introduction of new rolling machinery. The armour right 12 (i.e. 4 x 12in , 12 x 9.2in.) Cost goes up to
the rear (and presumably on the front of the after forward was to be increased to 6in, the 4in plating was to £1,370,000.
redoubt.) An 8in ring protected the 12in barbettes where be carried higher, more armour was to be fitted abreast the B3a 15,400t, B3b 15,950, B3c 16,350
they rose above the redoubt. A similar arrangement was
proposed for the Warrior class cruisers. The redoubt was
roofed by 2in – plunging shell was not yet a serious threat!
The gun shields were as for ‘A’.
Parallel sketch designs with speeds of 18.5 and 18 knots
were tried and there were many armament variations. In
most, the heaviest guns remained four 12in of the 40-
calibre Mark IX model as in the Duncans and Formidables.
One variant apparently carried 12in, 9.2in and 7.5in, but
was soon dropped. Designs with twelve or sixteen 10in
and no 12in were also considered. This ‘All-Medium-
Gun’ idea was widely favoured at the time and Brazil
ordered such ships from Elswick. However, Admiral May’s
studies suggested that for ships of about 15,000 tons, the
9.2in, firing a 380lb shell, was a better proposition than
the 10in 500pdr. The Constructor responsible for the new
battleships was J H Narbeth, who many years later
presented a paper giving an outline of his problems to the
Royal Institution of Naval Architects.
After a considerable time, it became clear that the
14,000 ton limit could not survive if the ships were to
carry a heavier armament than their predecessors. By
November 1902 a displacement of 16,000 or 16,100 tons
and the abolition of the 6in armament were being consid-
ered.
At this point it is as well to see what ‘Foreign Powers’
were up to. In 1900 France had authorized the République
class, much larger than previous French ships. The first of
this class had a 164.7mm (6.4in) secondary battery, later
going to single turreted 194mm (7.6in) when the twin
6.4in turrets proved cramped. Their side armour was Lord Nelson with funnel bands and short funnels, photographed between 1909 and 1911. (CPL)
67
WARSHIP 2005
‘B3a’ had only eight 9.2in, housed in four twin turrets; this
permitted freeboard forward to be increased to 24ft and
the axial height of the forward 12in guns to 27ft. The
training arcs of the 12in could be increased to 50° fore
and 50° aft of the beam; 280° for each turret. It was hoped
that 150 tons could be saved on the 12in and 9.2in
barbettes. The resulting ship would cost £1,240,000 and
displace 15,400 tons, not much more than the Formidable.
‘B3b’ would retain the ten 9.2in and include ‘B3a’s
improvements; she would cost £1,300,000 on 15950 tons.
‘B3c’ would retain twelve 9.2in, plus of course the four
12in. She would cost £1,370,000 and displace 16350 tons,
the same as the King Edward VIIs.
In January 1903, at a rather late stage, the Admiralty
asked the Ordnance Board to obtain designs for a more
powerful 12in gun, as introduced by the Americans in
1902. This became the Mark X 45 calibre; Narbeth noted
that four would require some 95 to 100 tons extra weight,
besides stronger mountings and a considerable ‘growth
factor’. In fact, this major change was handled quickly and
easily; the existing mountings and ring bulkheads proved
to have strength to spare. The turret rings were in fact
considerably smaller than previous ones. It was some time
before enough data on firing the new charges in the
existing Mark IX 40 calibre gun was available, but all
went well. The Mark X was used not only in the Lord
Nelson and Agamemnon, but the as yet undreamed-of
Dreadnought, Bellerophon, Invincible and Indefatigable. The
Vickers 12in design and mounting were accepted, while
the 9.2in 50 calibre ones were by Elswick.
Agamemnon as completed. (CPL)
68
LORD NELSON AND AGAMEMNON
As always, ammunition stowage presented problems.
The ships, like most pre-dreadnoughts, had fore and aft
ammunition passages below the armoured deck, and it was
hoped to stow fourteen 9.2in rounds per gun in these. The
size of the charge cases was fixed at 36in x 20in diameter
for 9.2in and 45in x 17.5in for 12in, which would permit
the use of existing cases. The new 50 calibre 9.2in, just
introduced for the King Edward VIIs, was to be used,
requiring the larger charges.
Much concern was felt about a new ‘Rendable’ type
shell, which was an armour-piercer with a sizeable burster;
a 6in specimen pierced a 10in KC plate and was picked up
intact. Admittedly, the equivalent range was only 800
yards, but who knew what a larger calibre ‘Rendable’
might do?
Designs ‘B3’, ‘B’ and ’B5’ were in the lead at this point
in time. ‘B3’ carried four 12in and ten 9.2in,‘B4’ four 12in
and twelve 9.2in and ‘B5’ twelve 10in. All had 18 knots
speed, slower than the reported speeds of most foreign
ships. ‘B3’ and ‘B4’ could carry their secondary guns in
either an 8in battery or in separate redoubts for the same
weight. About October 1903 the ‘B’ designs were redesig-
nated ‘G’ onward. Designs ‘E’ with 16 10in, ‘F’ possibly
with eight 12in, and ‘H’ with twelve 12in and of 18,400
tons, were also considered at various times. Narbeth
favoured ‘F’ and brought up the possibility of ‘H’, but it
was decided to stick to the ‘G’ designs with the traditional
four 12in. The designs with all 10in were rejected on the
ground that this gun could not pierce the belt or main Lord Nelson, photographed at Devonport. (CPL)
turrets of the French 1900 programme République/Liberté
class at 3,000 yards. (This point is mentioned by Oscar additional 200 tons. The way ahead should have been
Parkes as having been raised by Admiral John Hopkins, a clear, but in fact the fur was about to fly. On 5 September,
recent Controller.) A very powerful 10in 50 calibre gun, Philip Watts the DNC wrote that ‘I personally concur in
with penetration equal to a 35 calibre 12in MkIX, was the trustworthiness of the results obtained’. It was
designed, but apparently not built. intended that the ships should be capable of being docked
By April 1903 Narbeth reported that the design could at any at the three Home Ports, Portsmouth, Plymouth or
be completed in full detail in three months, and asked to Chatham.
be relieved of other duties to concentrate on this once the New docks were planned or building at the former two;
final decisions had been made. As usual, model tests were Chatham had dropped out of the first rank while France
only begun at this late stage; the Constructive was the main threat, but was now coming back into
Department had a portfolio of models available, and from contention as Germany moved into the position of
extensive experience over the past fifteen years or so, had Potential Enemy No 1. The Entente Cordiale as yet lay in
a good idea of how the design would work out. It was the future. On 17 September, Watts wrote to the
hoped to call for tenders from the shipbuilders in July and Controller proposing an increase of beam in order to
to place contracts in October. ensure stability. The Board had somewhat reluctantly
On 17 April, reports on test tank model ‘OT’ arrived agreed to twin rudders, now Watts proposed three. It now
and were evidently satisfactory; the after part was came out, after much prodding by the Controller, that the
unchanged from the Formidable. Orders were given for it design could not be docked at Chatham, and could only
to be run at 16,350 tons displacement and 16,150ihp. In be docked at Portsmouth by using the Fountain Lake
the meantime, Vickers reported that the new 12in 45 entrance and doing additional dredging outside it. By this
calibre gun would fire the existing 850lb shell at 2850fps, time, displacement had grown to 16,500 tons, again
and that the mountings would stand 3100fps. The Mark X without Board Margin, which did not inspire the Board’s
would weigh 57 tons, and the guns for the 1904-05 ships confidence in the design, especially since it had been so
could be supplied from June to September 1905. It would long in preparation.
be possible to fit enlarged chambers if the new propellent A long and angry typed note of October 1903 shows
under discussion was adopted. Money was, as ever, tight, that it had been the Admiralty’s intention to build three
and the Controller did not want contracts placed too of ‘the new battleship’ by contract under the 1903-04
early, before work on the hardware could be started. programme, which had been laid before Parliament in
On 6 August 1903 design ‘G’ was formally approved by March 1903. Design work had been in progress since July
the Board of Admiralty, the displacement being 16,350 1902, about the usual time-scale. Since it was now too
tons, without a Board Margin, which would mean an late to put the 1903-04 ships out to tender, they were laid
69
WARSHIP 2005 LORD NELSON AND AGAMEMNON

down as King Edward VIIs in the Dockyards, Africa at
Chatham, Britannia at Portsmouth and Hibernia at
Devonport. The opportunity was taken to fit longer 6in
guns in these ships, and ‘the New Battleships’ were
deferred to the 1904-05 programme. May and no doubt
the rest of the Board were very angry at Watts, but the
latter was in a stronger position than might be thought;
only two years before, his predecessor White had been
eased out hastily after the fiasco over the Royal Yacht
Victoria and Albert; to lose a second DNC in two years
would, to quote Oscar Wilde, have looked like careless-
ness. Naval matters were rightly of intense public concern
at the time and such a scandal might have brought the
government down.
Apart from losing the year 1903-04, the deadline for the
1904-05 naval estimates was now getting near; work
continued with great intensity on what had been Design
B3b, but was now re-numbered design ‘G’. On 13
November, the Controller asked the reason for the infe-
rior hull form of G5; Watts explained the variations in the
‘G’ series:
– G was the 16,350 ton design as approved on 6 Aug 03.
– G1 was as modified after approval; she had an additional
pumping engine for the turrets, a 3in torpedo director
tower, extra coal hoists, increased torpedo air
compressor plant, and a wider beam; this put her up to
16,500 tons.
– G2 was G1 lengthened to give a 200 ton Board Margin
for any additional weights added later and started at
16,900 tons. Despite the additional engine, only
enough hydraulic power was provided to work the 12in
turrets and the 9.2in ones on one side simultaneously.
– G3 was G increased to 16,550 tons, with boats carried
at flying deck level. It might be necessary to use 45ft
steam pinnaces instead of the usual 56ft ones. The
sides of the 9.2in gunhouses were reduced to 7in from
8in, the roofs were to remain unchanged. If the weight
of boats and the thickness of the 9.2in turret sides were
kept as in G1, G3’s displacement would be 16,600
tons.
– G4 was G1 but with only 10 x 9.2in (4x2 and 2x1) to
give 200 tons Board Margin, i.e. 16,500 tons ‘Legend’ or
‘Navy List’.
– G5 was G4 but with beam reduced to 79ft 6in to get,
just, into the Chatham docks, everything else
unchanged. Speed would be slightly reduced but on 13
November Watts wrote to the Controller that he
should still expect 18kts.
G5 was finally accepted by the Board of Admiralty on 10
February 1904.
As usual, a mass of detail had to be settled. The stern
had to be safe without support when docking, there had to
be sufficient space to enter the 9.2in turrets from their
roofs but below the flying deck on which the boats and
12pdr anti-torpedo boat guns were placed. More electric
power was needed, but the dynamos were not to be in the

Sir Charles Monro and General Birdwood in dicussion on the quarterdeck of Lord Nelson during the Gallipoli campaign, with other
battleships of the British squadron visible in the background. (CPL)

engine rooms. It took a lot of effort to shoehorn every-
thing into a limited hull space; the citadel was only 190ft
long against 225ft in the King Edward VII. Every effort was
made to adjust the various armour and backing thick-
nesses to present a smooth exterior, with no angles into
which enemy shells might bite. The side armour was KC,
turret tops being KNC. The 12pdr anti-torpedo boat guns
were increased to twenty-four; no-one worried unduly
about the extra topweight.
Throughout the design process, weight and space were
at a premium. It was decided to accept a slightly deeper
draught rather than to increase length or beam. It was as
usual suggested that weight be saved by fitting faster-
running machinery, but the Controller and the First Lord
(= Secretary of the Navy) stuck firmly to the traditional
policy of fitting slow-running machinery, which was less
liable to hot bearings and other forms of grief.
The reasons for the docking fiasco are obscure, but it is
at least possible that Watts, who has been described as a
brilliant but lazy man, careless over detail, was trying to
get the Admiralty committed to larger ships than they
wanted, and that he either could not or would not get the
Constructive Department to do what the Board wanted.
Two final bridges remained to be crossed. In 1902,
thanks to British mediation, Chile and Argentina had
A wartime view of Lord Nelson, possibly during the Dardanelles campaign, showing the searchlights added to her mainmast. (CPL)
declared peace with each other. This threw two Chilean
battleships building in Britain and two Argentine cruisers
building in Italy onto the open market. After much nego-
tiation and intrigue, the cruisers went to Japan, as Kasuga
and Nisshin, the necessary amount of gold coin being
made available by the British embassy in Rome, just in
time for them to sail and take part in the Russo-Japanese
War. The British Government agreed, somewhat reluc-
tantly, to purchase the two Chilean battleships, which
became HMS Triumph and Swiftsure. However, they
insisted on two armoured ships being sacrificed from the
1904-05 programme, and one ‘G5’ battleship and one
Minotaur class armoured cruiser, provisionally named
Orion, were accordingly cancelled. In the meantime, Sir
John Fisher, the First Sea Lord designate, wrote to Lord
Selborne, urging him to cancel the two remaining Lord
Nelson battleships, given that thinking about the
Dreadnought was already well advanced. However, Lord
Selborne refused, saying that he favoured building each
year the best ships possible in that year. Even at the first
two meetings of the Dreadnought Committee in late
1904, Watts advanced ‘Super-Lord Nelson’ designs, first
with four 12in and eighteen 9.2in, of which six were in
casemates under the muzzles of the 12in guns (possibly
like the German ships of the early 1890s?), and then with

70 71
WARSHIP 2005
The bow of Lord Nelson in dry dock during the First World
War. (CPL)
four 12in and sixteen 9.2in housed in eight turrets, four
per side. He got no support, and this effort may merely
have been a committee tactic to draw out possible critics
of the Dreadnought.
The remaining two ships were laid down, with a
planned completion date of 22 August 1907: Lord Nelson
at Palmers on the Tyne, and Agamemnon at Beardmore’s at
Dalmuir. The dates were not kept as Lord Fisher seized
their turrets for the Dreadnought, so that they were not
ready for service until 1908. On trials they did well.
Agamemnon ran hers, possibly with ballast instead of
turrets, on 17 to 28 August 1907, with great success. She
achieved 11.75 knots on the 1/5 power thirty-hour
economical speed trial against a hoped-for 11.2, on the
30-hour 7/10 power ‘maximum continuous speed’ trial
16.86 against 16.25, and on the eight-hour full power trial
18.8 knots against a contract speed of 18, the draught at
the start being in each case 26ft 6in forward and 27ft 6in
aft. Vibration was reported as very slight at all speeds,
especially during the 1/5 and full power trials. Steering
qualities were exceptional, the Agamemnon responding to
72
the slightest touch of the rudder, but being easily straight-
ened by using plenty of opposite helm. Even inexperi-
enced quartermasters had no difficulty holding the ship
on a steady course and she handled much better than the
smaller Majestic or Irresistible.
Her turning circle was exceptionally small, the average
tactical diameter being 363 yards against 530 for the
Duncan and 438 for the King Edward VII.
Behaviour in the small amount of bad weather encoun-
tered was good, though some water was taken over the
bow, due to its shape and the new-fangled (for the Navy)
hawsepipe anchors. There were the almost inevitable
minor defects: poor ventilation in the Leading Stokers’
bathrooms, minor troubles with the compasses and the
reversing gear. It was also noticed that part of the fore
funnel became red hot during the full power trial, causing
the flying deck to rise, which suggests some over-enthusi-
astic stoking.
During the transitional period while only a few dread-
noughts existed, they were in the front line, but by 1914
their lack of speed, usually listed as 18.5 knots, hampered
them. The British pair were well liked by their crews, who
were quite prepared to take on early dreadnoughts or
battlecruisers. They were better protected than the
Dreadnought against both gunfire and underwater attack.
The two-calibre armament gave little trouble except at
long ranges, near the limit for the 9.2in. Their metacen-
tric height was 3.4ft against 5.3ft in the King Edwards,
which made them steady gun platforms, though less
resistant to capsize. Being heavily armoured, they were
sent to the Dardanelles, where they exchanged some hard
knocks with the Turkish shore batteries, and supported
the Gallipoli landings. Afterwards they remained in the
Aegean to keep an eye on the Goeben/Yavuz. Standing
orders were that neither ship was to engage her singly. On
22 January 1918, when she made her long-awaited sortie
from the Dardanelles, one was away, as the local
commander, Admiral Gough-Calthorpe, had sailed in her
on a ceremonial visit, so the Raglan and M28 passed
unavenged. The then First Sea Lord, Admiral Wemyss,
thought this ‘perfectly damnable’, but was apparently
unable to do anything about it. As it happened, the
Goeben hit three mines, and was not repaired until the
late 1920s, while the Breslau was also mined, and sank.
While at Salonika, Agamemnon claimed to have shot
down a Zeppelin; perhaps a case of the old vanquishing
the new.
At the end of the war, Agamemnon was converted into
the world’s first radio-controlled target ship, but the day of
mixed armament ships was gone. They were always
regarded as very good, tough ships, but the First World
War came too late for them. Like the mule, they had
neither pride of ancestry nor hope of posterity, but, as
shown at the Dardanelles and Gallipoli, they could
deliver a good kick.