Details of Confederate ironclads

[jimkrauzlis]

It would be interesting to compare the underwater profiles of the ironclads, and to see how they carried their ballast, given the anticipated effect the high weight above the waterline from the iron used on deck most likely caused. That would most definitely affect the stability and seaworthiness of these vessels...guess I will have to read up a bit on this genre of vessel.

Cheers!
Jim

[rebelatsea]

Jim,
The distribution of weights on the CS ironclads was much better than that of the USN monitors, but some constructors did not seem to be able to get the calculations right , John L Porter being notorious for that, having said that not all of his designs were bad seaboats.
The underwater form was certainly a factor in the behaviour of the 2 Charleston ICs, Palmetto State and Chicora. Their wide beam due to the Porter knuckle meant that they did not roll much, but the narrow fore and aft run meant that they pitched and took head seas green over the foredeck, even inside the harbour in a chop.
CSS Columbia and the other vessels built with the Pierce knuckle, were better seaboats by far, but they also had a wider run fore and aft. The USN was quite impressed by the behaviour of Columbia (under tow). Having said that Tennessee II in USN service was said to be quite comfortable at sea, and she had the earlier from of knuckle.
I think it is no coincidence that the better seaboats were those that had been altered, from the original plan and those that had the Pierce knuckle and beamier runs fore and aft
Again the behaviour of CSS Raleigh, built to the original 150ft IC gunboat plan, at sea contradicts my earlier argument - a case of the builder getting his weights right ?

John

[GB Rodney]

That was very useful information CT, thank you. I will be building several of your models and your work really shines a light on this forgotten area of Civil War studies.

I find the ACW interesting, but have only recently started looking at the naval and riverine aspects of the war. It strikes me is that Confederate ironclads look more modern and better designed than their Union opponents, although the reality was the future lay with the powered gun turret which was probably beyond southern industrial capacity to manufacture even if the technology could have been developed. Your information on armour construction in the Confederacy shows what a remarkably good job was done with very basic materials and infrastructure.

I do wonder what would have happened had the South built adequately powered seagoing ironclads and managed to concentrate 10 or so of them in a fleet. I suspect Tsushima would not mow be remembered as the first fleet action between armoured ships!

Keep up the excellent work, and have a prosperous and peaceful 2012!

[ct ertz]

GB Rodney, I look foreword to your builds.

The Union's monitors did have powered turrets, but they were hard to control. I think they used a small donkey engine run off the main boilers.

Confederate ironclads, with a few exceptions like the CSS Missouri and CSS Baltic, were well built. They were not crude, just rough. By the last year of the war, engine quality, gun quality and armor quality had improved to the point where the last generation of Confederate ironclads, had they been launched, would have been a challenge to the US Navy.

Fleet actions with the CSN never turned out well. At Memphis the rebel fleet was decimated and at Mobile nearly every Confederate ship was sank, burned or captured.

By mid war sea going ironclads were no longer important to the Confederate navel strategy. Defending rivers and harbors, and disturbing the blockading fleet long enough for runners to get in and out was the thought of the day. The CSS Raliegh did a great example of disturbing the blockading fleet to let in blockade runners. It did it exactly once.

The CSS Georgia kept the Union Navy out of Savannah with out firing a shot.

Also, one lone rebel ironclad could tie up huge amounts of Yankee resources and manpower. The little CSS Albemarle took on a number of Union ships, sank one and damaged several others, a took over 400 hits in the proses. With out damage to its self.

The CSS Missouri tied up a number of Union ships until wars end.

Still, it would have been quite the fight had any number of those last generation Rebel ships fought as fleet.

Corey

[cdavenport]

if you guys really want to enjoy CT's builds, I suggest you purchase his CD. There are limited numbers available and there are some 44 models on the disk! What a bargain! I'm trying to think of some display modality.

[jimkrauzlis]

I agree, Major! I'm presently awaiting my copy, but have purchased a number of Corey's models as they became available. I also have tried to fill out my inventory with Avery's USS designs, not to mention those models designed and produced by the late Magnus Morck. I am currently looking for more of the Yankee fleet, particularly some of those sailing ships and combination screw and sailing ships such as the screw sloops USS Hartford and USS Wabash. I wonder if any of our outstanding designers has any thought of attempting some of the screw sloops?

Very much enjoying these posts and learning quite a bit, thank you very much!

Cheers!
Jim

[GB Rodney]

My mistake - meant to say battle of Lissa, not Tsushima, as first fleet clash of ironclads, was still thinking of turreted ships.

[rebelatsea]

Corey, Memphis was a case of too much steamboat, not enough Navy, and Buchanan was on a hiding to nothing at Mobile. Farragut said he didn't think Old Buck was such a fool,and he was right.

[ct ertz]

The only othe "fleet" action I can think of is the three ironclads in Charleston Harbor that would work together. If I remember right, on a couple occasions they damaged the union wooden warships.

[rebelatsea]

The Charleston Squadron had the potential to deal a knockout blow to the blockade there.
With 3 operational ICs and at least 4 spar boats (Davids). A co-ordinated night attack should have been possible. The reasons for it not being done , I believe, owed much to internal political rambling between the military / civilian heads, and overall to Beauregard's belief that the the ICs were a waste of time.
Palmetto State and Chicora sortied at least twice, on one occasion damaging and driving off the wooden blockaders.

When the monitors attacked Ft Sumter, all three ironclads and the davids were
anchored in line with steam up in case they came or attempted to come through into the inner harbour.