Aye Candy: Confederate Ironclad Texas

AndyHall

Colonel
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
8629687418_7dbe465bb5_b.jpg


Renders of a digital model of the Confederate casemate ironclad Texas, as she might have looked if completed as planned in 1865. Texas was laid down at Rocketts, the shipyard on the east bank of the James River below Richmond, in the late summer of 1863. Texas was similar in form to other ironclads designed by John L. Porter, but featured a very short casemate housing only four guns. The casemate was fitted with eight gunports – three each ahead and astern, each set served by a single gun on a pivot, and one gun on each broadside. Texas differed from most Confederate ironclads in having two screws, which may have been a choice forced on the builders by the availability of machinery. When Richmond was evacuated ahead of advancing Federal armies on April 2, 1865, Texas was still being plated with armor, and had yet to have her engines installed. The nearly-complete ironclad was abandoned where she lay.

This model is based on plans of Texas by David Meagher, published in John Coski’s superb history, Capital Navy: The Men, Ships and Operations of the James River Squadron. Meagher’s drawings of Texas are (as always) finely-drawn and detailed. I departed from them in a few places, though, that need mentioning.

8630358164_5f87194a87_b.jpg


Meagher’s drawings show Texas as having a flat deck forward and aft, but other sources, notably Bob Holcombe’s 1993 master’s thesis from East Carolina University, point out that Texas’ deck had both camber (i.e., higher along the centerline of the vessel than at the sides), and also a sort of “reversed sheer,” in which the height of the deck rises as one approaches midships. This reportedly gave Texas an odd appearance, but was presumably done to help with the deflection of enemy shot.

Other reconstructions of the ship depict this feature using flat planes with hard angle, but for a variety of reasons – actually only one reason, because it looks better – I’ve chosen to make both the deck’s camber and “reverse sheer” smoother and more graceful. I also departed from Meagher’s drawings by reducing the diameter of the smokestack to match contemporary plans that survive today.
texascasemate1.jpg


Meagher’s reconstruction of the casemate (above) is odd, as well, in that his interior plan includes a pivot gun set up to fire from any of the three after-facing gunport, but puts the forward gun on a Marsilly carriage, along with the two broadside guns. This impractical arrangement seems unlikely to have been used in practice. Additionally, Meagher places the pilothouse on the casemate behind the ship’s funnel, which would substantially block its view directly forward. This, too, seems to be an unlikely configuration.

Whatever its other limitations, though, Meagher's plan represents a formidable warship that like other Confederate ironclads constructed during the war, never quite managed to have the opportunity to prove themselves in action. Special thanks to CWT user Kazziga for his assistance in compiling material on this remarkable warship that almost was.

As before, full-size versions are available on Flickr.

8628580821_d20ba2bda2_b.jpg


8628580651_22ce66f999_b.jpg


8629686870_2b658a8ed1_b.jpg


8628581185_d3cf1b7efd_b.jpg


8628581351_f5da4ffd75_b.jpg


8629687554_86a74365b5_b.jpg


8628581727_35b7494bd8_b.jpg
 
Boats would've been lowered and cast off, or maybe towed astern, going into action.
 
Im afraid Mr Meagher's work should be treated with some caution.
CSS Texas did NOT have a ram for example, and the forward gun was on a pivot as was the after gun. Her original casemate design was as Columbia, form which the design was a development and the deck camber and fore and rise was for seaworthiness purposes.
Far too big for river work, it is quite clear that both her and William Graves' CSS Virginia II were intended for deep water activities, if they could be got out.

Sources differ as to whether her engines were aboard or not, they were English built, either imported through the blockade or taken from a blockade runner of the Don class, according to Union sources.
Someone here may be able to identify the vessel, if the latter is true.
 
Just to clarify my first comment, the forward overhang of the hull at the bow, with it's armour constituted the ram, it was not added, as indicated in the photos above.
CSS TEXAS IN SERVICE.JPG
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks. Meagher's hull lines for Texas are much more full than Geoghagen's were for Wilmington, even though they have the same midship section. The fuller lines make for more bouyancy, and are arguably easier to construct -- no individual, frame-by-frame lofting, just the same curve of the hull line pushed a little further outboard with each succeeding frame -- but it's pretty damned ugly. This ironclad may not have killed many Yankees, but I bet a few fish died laughing.
 
Good job by the way. It is hard to imagine those on the waterways at times. The White River in Arkansas had several and I am sure the locals just wanted to stare.
 
Amazing! I love Ironclads so much! I just love how they can sit below the water like that!
 
Simply beautiful Andy! I'm with you I don't think they would put the pilothouse aft of that stack.

You'd think... but it wouldn't have been the only one. The New Ironsides had a similarly-placed pilothouse... when they cut the stack down so the pilots could see over it, they were practically asphyxiated by the exhaust gases, and the funnel was restored. I assume the problem would have been fixed on the New Ironsides 2.0, but there never was one. :O o:
 
Back
Top