Gunfire at Sea - What Was Noteworthy About How Was This Innovation Discovered/created in the British Navy?

Gunfire at Sea

1. What was noteworthy about how was this innovation discovered/created in the British Navy?

It was happened by incident and found by serendipity. The changes were not new technology creation but it was an innovations and improvements of existing technology. It was starting from the officer Admiral Sir Percy Scott who has a good leadership. He walked up and down to look at his crews during the practice. He also pays attention into the detail of operation and result, an observant leader with inquisitive mind. Scott does not let anything passed easily. When he noticed the differences of result between one gun crew to the others. He looks into detail and find out the differences. Then he added his own improvements both to the gun and procedures. He was also a man who has innovative mind. He would like to improve it and also has ability to find better way of doing things. In this case we can notice that an innovator was not an expert in this field. This process was consisting of the interaction of fortune, intellectual climate, and the prepared imaginative mind. However, this “original thinking” and Scott’s contribution were not really implemented and developed for British Navy.

2. What was noteworthy about how was it introduced to U.S. Navy?

William S. Sims, an American junior officer, met British Admiral Sir Percy Scott at the China Station. Scott had a reputation for high accuracy in naval artillery with his innovation. Sims had learned everything he could from Scott about this new innovation of continuous-aim firing. Sims spent his time, with Scott’s active assistance in training and modifying the gear on his own ship and tried out the new system. Over 2 years, he had reiterated three principal points and recorded it with all the succeeding in his report.

Sims tried to introduce it to U.S. Navy which can be separated in 3 stages.

a. There is no response when he had directed his comments to the Bureau of Ordnance and the Bureau of Navigation. The report was filed away and forgotten. He and his reports were ignored even though the benefits were so clear with all evidences.

b. He wrote more reports, making it more serious, in a form that they would be dangerous documents to leave neglected in the files. Finally, Washington responded. The Bureau of Ordnance responded, firstly, U.S. equipment was as good as British. Secondly, the trouble should be with the men, which is not their responsibility. The continuous-aim firing was impossible. The Washington or the Bureau of Ordnance resisted to this innovation and changes.

c. Finally, Sims decided to wrote to the President, Theodore Roosevelt, who always like to respond to such appeals when he convenient.

From