Spitbank Fort Showing the Masonry Portion of the Fort for 7-Inch 7-Ton RML Guns Facing Landward

The Redan Palmerston Forts Society Above : Spitbank Fort showing the masonry portion of the fort for 7-inch 7-ton RML guns facing landward. The structure above the entrance is the later Battery Observation Post. Below : The courtyard showing the stairs to the roof battery and the access to the basement magazine level. 24 No. 41 October 1997 Palmerston Forts Society The Redan SPITBANK FORT A History and Description David Moore A previous article in The Redan No.28, with granite, with wrought-iron June 1993, described the history of the embrasures.1 two outer Spithead Forts No Man’s Land and Horse Sand. This article will By 1861 they reconsidered the plans describe the third of the forts that were and decided that the foundations designed to guard the Spithead should be prepared for forts 200 feet in anchorage and the inner approaches diameter instead of 300 feet as it was to Portsmouth Harbour. advisable to adopt an iron construction to permit a reduction in History , purpose and construction the intervals between guns. This would The authority for constructing Spitbank make the forts capable of mounting Fort is dated 14-9-60. Right from the 123 guns instead of 100 in comparison start it was undecided as to what form with masonry construction.2 the forts at Spithead should take. There were many changes in the plans. Work began at Spithead in 1861. In April 1862 the Secretary of State for At first, in 1860, it was suggested that War directed that the Royal the forts should be of casemated Commission reassemble in order to masonry design. To meet the reconsider the expediency of possibility of an enemy anchoring constructing forts at Spithead in the large ships close to any of the forts on light of the events in Hampton Roads the shoals to engage them at short during the American Civil War. Work range, it was recommended that they stopped in Spring of 1862 and political should be of large dimensions, and arguments as to the suitability of forts that the more important should have such as these to protect the harbour three tiers of guns in casemates so as ensued; various reports were asked for to increase the possible amount of fire by Parliament and supplied before on any point, and give a command work eventually re-commenced on over the decks of attacking ships. The Spitbank in March 1867. Much of the forts were to be built of masonry, faced discussion was a consequence of the battle between the Merrimac and the No. 41 October 1997 25 The Redan Palmerston Forts Society In spite of this the Southsea government let the Castle 3634.13 yds Horse sand Fort matter stand for another year. The construction 1204.6 yds 3221 yds 2138.8 yds finally resumed in the Spring of 1864 when the contractors began work 4667.8 yds on the foundations under the superintendence of Spitbank 3725.2 yds Mr. Hawkshaw C.E. The Fort first stone was set in March 1867 at a depth of 17ft. Below L.W.O.S.T. and No Mans Land the fort was completed in Fort June 1878. Monitor in Hampton Roads and the The original intention of the Royal role of the forts. The House of Commons Commissioners was to build a total of decided that it was expedient to five sea forts on the shoals in the Solent suspend the construction of the but problems with obtaining a good Spithead Forts while its was considered foundation on the one proposed for if the experience gained in that action Sturbridge and the need to cut costs is of such a nature as to induce the resulted in only two of the forts being Commissioners to modify the opinion under construction in 1864, those on expressed by them in their report of the shoals of No Man’s Land and Horse 26th. February 1861 and the value of Sand. As a substitute for the now iron-roofed gunboats for the defence of abandoned one at Sturbridge the ports and roadsteads was fully Commissioners decided to place two considered. The Defence Committee smaller forts on the shoals at Spit Bank replied that it preferred to be guided and Ryde Sands. The one on Ryde by the recent experiments at Sand also had to be abandoned. Shoeburyness which were carried out to determine the effect of heavy shot The Special Committee on Spithead on armour plated war vessels the Defences, including Lt. Col. William results of which fully justified the Drummond Jervois R.E,. decided on 15 original intention for defence of July 1864 that :- Spithead. The Commission, with which certain other naval and military “On referring to the several reports of officers were associated, submitted the Defence Commissioners, we find their report in May 18623 after taking a that they originally proposed that lot of evidence. They considered that Spithead should be protected by a the ultimate expense of providing for combined system of forts and floating the defence of Spithead with armour- batteries. They recommended the plated ships, either movable or construction of five advanced forts, stationary and connected by booms namely, on the Horse Sand and No and chains, would far exceed the cost Man’s Land, the Sturbridge and Spit of the forts. That even if booms could Point, and a point intermediate be efficiently maintained forts would between the fort on the Horse Sand and be indispensable for their protection. Portsea Island. The works on the Horse That is was unwise to fetter any of our Sand and No Man’s Land were for the ships or crews to harbour defence and purpose of bringing a fire to bear on the thereby reduce our offensive power at channel of approach to Spithead; those sea. That the inevitable progress in the on the Sturbridge and Spit were power of guns would increase the intended to command the anchorage, power of forts as against ships and supposing an enemy to have passed 4 increase the area defended by them. the outer forts; the ‘intermediate’ work 26 No. 41 October 1997 Palmerston Forts Society The Redan was for the preventing of light draught form the Engineer, Mr. Hawkshaw, vessels from passing between the Horse stating that it was not possible to Sand and Portsea Island. obtain a suitable foundation for the fort at Ryde Sand. To compensate for Of these forts, those at the Horse Sand this the Committee proposed to and No Man’s Land are at present increase the fire from Puckpool. under construction. Nothing, has however, as yet been done towards the In November 1868 the Committee construction of the inner works to decided to cut costs by allowing for command the anchorage, the only that portion of the forts at Spit preliminary trials at Sturbridge having Bank and St. Helens that would be led to the conclusion that a good exposed to powerful fire to be provided foundation could not be obtained on with armour, that was one half of that shoal . Spitsand and one third of St. Helens. Under these circumstances, and after In December 1869 the Committee visiting the locality, we unanimously decided that further experiments to test recommended that such a work should the effect of projectiles on the granite be constructed on the Spit bank, in the basement of Horse Sand Fort and other position shown on the accompanying forts at Spithead were unnecessary, chart, about 600 yards to the south-west and that the construction of the forts of the point on which it was originally should at once be proceeded with. proposed by the Defence Commissioners to erect a fort. The foundations to Spit Bank Fort are similar to those for the Horse Sand Fort. A work so placed would, in conjunction It was intended to mount 15 guns, in with the batteries at Fort Monckton, one tier, nine in an iron superstructure bear immediately upon the anchorage occupying more than half of the of Spithead; it would also cooperate circumference looking seaward, and with the works on Horse Sand and No six in granite casemates facing Man’s Land, and with the Blockhouse landward and towards Portsmouth Point and Southsea Batteries in the Harbour. Preparations were also made defence respectively of the outer to fit two turrets on the roof of the fort. channel to Spithead, and of the inner A final attempt by the House of channel to Portsmouth harbour .5 Commons to oppose the defence scheme resulted in the appointment of In August 1865 the Defence Committee a Committee to look into the approved the report of the “construction, condition and cost” 7 of Fortifications Committee of the 11th. the forts already in progress. The 1868 June 1865, relative to the sites of the Committee reported that the work at proposed forts on Spit Bank and Ryde Spitbank was Sand and approved the design submitted by Lieut. Col. Jervois for ...well and solidly built, and there those forts. have been no failures the arrangements for the service of the In April 1866 the Defence Committee, guns and for the supply of ammunition approved the designs for works at Spit are good and satisfactory. Bank, Ryde sand and St. Helens forts of The expenditure to June 30th. 1868 one tier of casemates with iron walls was reported by the Committee as on those portions facing seaward, the being £45,101 with £23,249 further for rear parts to be of granite. Each fort the foundations and £47,365 for the was to carry two turrets on top, each completion of the masonry.

Load more