Forum Okrętów Wojennych

AvM pisze:

L'expédition Millot et Dupuis, composée des vapeurs Laokay, Hongkiang et de la chaloupe Sonlay, quitta Hongkong le 25 octobre 1872. Les navires étaient affrétés par le vice-roi du Yun-Nan pour transporter dans cette province des armes et des munitions de guerre
en passant par le Fleuve Rouge. L'expédition avait à sa tète MM.Millot, négociant à Schanghaï, Jean Dupuis et George Vlavianos

AvM pisze:Tych parowcow bolo wiecej

AvM pisze:Zaglowce pelnomorskie

In 1799 a British trader named Berry witnessed the departure of the fleet sailing down the Sàigòn River; he saw 100 galleys, 40 junks, 200 smaller boats and 800 carriers led by 3 European sloops. In 1801, one division of NguyeAn Ánh’s navy included 9 European vessels armed with 60 guns, 5 vessels with 50 guns, 40 with 16 guns, 100 junks, 119 galleys and 365 smaller boats.
Not all of these so-called ‘European vessels’ had been purchased overseas; most of them had in fact been built in the remarkable shipyard set up by Nguyen Ánh in Sàigòn. He himself supervised the work, spending several hours a day there. (...) As early as 1792, fifteen frigates were under completion, with a design that was partly Chinese (the stern and bow) and partly European; they carried fourteen guns. In 1804, Roberts, an English East India Company envoy to the Court of Huê, gave a description of some of these mixed vessels; it seems that several types existed, more or less close to
European or Chinese original models. They were, in his view, ‘originally built as a junk, but [with] the upper works finished in the European manner and rigged as a ship. The King had originally 17 junks, or Tows [Viet. tâu], similar to those’. The American John White saw similar vessels during 1819–20, praising their seaworthiness and the quality of their construction.34 We clearly have here a typical case of mixing local and imported techniques.
The acquisition of European know-how was possible due to a simple but clever idea: an old European vessel had been dismantled into its separate pieces, and then rebuilt so that Vietnamese carpenters could learn the finer points of European shipbuilding for large square-rigged vessels. At the same time, when the vessel was reassembled, a brand-new vessel was produced on the model of the old one. Berry said that Portuguese carpenters were working there; it is likely that Chinese carpenters had been hired as well, since war junks were also built in the shipyard. NguyeAn Ánh himself learned carpentry
and was very able at it. He absorbed navigational theory from the French books translated by the Bishop, particularly Diderot and d’Alembert’s Encyclopédie, whose chapters and plates referring to shipbuilding were especially detailed. The efficiency and know-how of the Sàigòn shipyards were highly praised by all European traders and sailors who visited the city during the years 1790–1802. Berry described the three European vessels built there as making ‘a most respectable appearance’. During White’s visit to Sàigòn in 1819, he praised the installation as equal to any in Europe. Roberts described the mixed designed vessels he saw in Tourane bay as ‘remarkably well constructed’.36 The three large European vessels were commanded by French officers, only four of them participating in the last and decisive battles of 1801–2. Concerning the number of French officers and sailors who enlisted in NguyeAn Ánh’s navy, it was noted that between during 1790–2 there is evidence of no more than 80 officers and sailors in Vietnam, and most of them left in 1792. One must assume, then, that only a very small number of naval officers and sailors were sailing on Nguyen Ánh’s vessels between 1792 and 1799. This means that all the crews and officers of the vessels – whether of European or mixed design – were Vietnamese, and had been trained to man these large square-rigged European vessels. The French captains vouched for their courage and skills. In 1822, Chaigneau told British visitors that Vietnamese ‘made brave and expert seamen’.
The combined use of large European wind-powered vessels (with considerable superiority in terms of artillery) and traditional galleys gave NguyeAn Ánh a real advantage over Tây So’n naval forces. As early as 1792–3, hundreds of Tây So’n galleys were sunk or taken during raids by European-designed vessels with heavy firepower. At other times, a mixture of both models gave the upper hand to the NguyeAn forces. The combined navy played a particularly important role during the decisive battles of 1801–2 (for example, in Thi Nai, near Qui Nho’n and in Huê), where both sides employed huge forces on land
and sea. (...)
After the final victory over the Tây So’n in 1802, Nguyen Ánh put his fleet to rest. It seems that only two European-style vessels were still in service during the 1810s. This abandonment of the navy seems to have been mainly the result of budgetary problems, as the government was then spending large amounts on building up fortifications and public works such as roads, canals, dikes, etc. As early as 1819, however, there is evidence of a new start in shipbuilding; Gia Long re-established a significant force and personally went to supervise the shipyards.
There is evidence of a similar technical continuity and quality for shipbuilding during Minh Mang’s reign, based on several accounts by foreign visitors stating that junks and European-style vessels and mixed ones were coexisting. These visitors also praised the quality of Vietnamese vessels. John White held the Vietnamese navy in high regard, as did Crawfurd, who commented that ‘their vessels, it has been remarked by good judges, are the best description of native craft anywhere to be seen in India, and fit to encounter without danger the worst weather’. As for Vietnamese sailors, Crawfurd added, ‘I know no people of the east so well fitted to make expert mariners’. In 1847, when the French navy engaged Vietnamese naval forces for the first time, the vessels destroyed included not only war junks, but also five fine corvettes. (...)
The political will to learn foreign techniques remained constant throughout Minh Mang’s reign, reaching a peak in the late 1830s, when he ordered the purchase of steamships. Vietnamese envoy Phan Huy Chú in 1833 had seen one for the first time in Batavia, an American naval vessel, and another emissary, Lý Vãn Phúc, described one during his trip to Calcutta. Vietnam’s first steamship was purchased on the orders of Minh Mang in 1839; three more followed – named Yên Phi, Vu Phi and Hu’o’ng Phi – and in 1844 aneven larger one was bought, called the Dien Phi. It is remarkable that the Vietnamese used steamboats as early as 1839. After all, the French never utilised steamboats on a commercial basis before 1816–18, and even then only on a small scale for coastal navigation. The first steamships in the English and French navies were not commissioned until the end of the 1820s. In Asia, the Dutch
commissioned the first steamboat for their navy in 1837, and the first commercial one followed one or two years later.

Two British gunboats, the Firm and the Cockchafer were purchased in Shanghai and transferred to the French flag under the names of Hoong-kiang and Lao-kay.

Jean Dupuis' (1896:114-115) Red River expedition consisted of two system gunboats, the Hong-kiang (under Captain Georges Vlavianos) and the lao-kai(under Captain d'Argence), a big steam launch, the Son-lay (under Captain Brocas), .

But in the canal of Son-chi, M. Gamier fell in with the " Mang-hao," a small steamer recently purchased by M. Millot, at Hong-Kong, and which taking the junk in tow, the small force disembarked at Ke-cho upon the 5th of November. M. Dupuis's