The Laird Rams Join the CSN

[Saphroneth]

But they were seized before they were ready for sea so this is just speculation. The US government were going purple with the thought of warships that were BETTER than anything they had going to the Confederate navy. It was all our fault, apparently.

My point is that if we're considering the Laird Rams joining the CSN, then that means it's at least possible they're armed with British weapons. There are alternatives - like having them armed with, say, French weapons - but if evaluating how effective the Laird Rams would be in warfare then it's at least worth considering the possibility that they're fitted with guns which were available in the nation that built them.

 

[Old Soldier]

My point is that if we're considering the Laird Rams joining the CSN, then that means it's at least possible they're armed with British weapons. There are alternatives - like having them armed with, say, French weapons - but if evaluating how effective the Laird Rams would be in warfare then it's at least worth considering the possibility that they're fitted with guns which were available in the nation that built them.

Apparently, Lairds were working with a French company who would have armed them 'for Egypt' before transferring them to the CSN. With what, is still an open question as it never happened. They WERE armed with British guns when they were accepted into the Royal Navy after seizure - 2 x twin 9" rifles.

 

[Saphroneth]

Apparently, Lairds were working with a French company who would have armed them 'for Egypt' before transferring them to the CSN. With what, is still an open question as it never happened. They WERE armed with British guns when they were accepted into the Royal Navy after seizure - 2 x twin 9" rifles.

If I had to guess, I'd say that if armed with French weapons - given the desire for them to have AP weapons - the likely ones are either 1858-60 pattern RML guns, or the later Canon de 19 C modèle 1864 RML guns. The French also had RBL guns but those were in this period less effective against armour and seen as such.

The M.1864 would be pretty devastating, but I'm not sure if any could be fitted - though OTOH the French might well see it as a useful combat test of the design...

 

[rebelatsea]

If I had to guess, I'd say that if armed with French weapons - given the desire for them to have AP weapons - the likely ones are either 1858-60 pattern RML guns, or the later Canon de 19 C modèle 1864 RML guns. The French also had RBL guns but those were in this period less effective against armour and seen as such.

The M.1864 would be pretty devastating, but I'm not sure if any could be fitted - though OTOH the French might well see it as a useful combat test of the design...

I hadn't considered the use of French weapons, the 1858 -60 MLR were not good - they couldn't penetrate a Warrior target, and the BLR were longer ranged but not effective AP, but as you say the 1864 weapons had the bugs ironed out.

It hasn't been mentioned that the Admiralty were quite happy for others to do the research and development, anything good being immediately aquired, so they had no objections to private companies building warships for other nations.

 

[Saphroneth]

I hadn't considered the use of French weapons, the 1858 -60 MLR were not good - they couldn't penetrate a Warrior target, and the BLR were longer ranged but not effective AP, but as you say the 1864 weapons had the bugs ironed out.

"Couldn't penetrate a Warrior target" makes them worse than some but not necessarily useless - the 11" Dahlgren fits that description, as I understand it! Warrior was pretty tough and Monitor turrets with their unbacked shield are pretty vulnerable to spalling, plus of course battering can knock out the spindle even if it doesn't have an internal terminal effect.

 

[Old Soldier]

BUT THEY WERE NEVER ARMED AND WERE NOT CSN VESSELS.

 

[Saphroneth]

BUT THEY WERE NEVER ARMED AND WERE NOT CSN VESSELS.

Well, yes. But look at the forum and thread title, if you please...

"What if... the Laird Rams join the CSN".

To wave it off as "they didn't" does rather suggest that you're not interested in the discussion, old chap...

 

[Old Soldier]

Just keeping my feet in reality, as the chances of both crossing the Atlantic to engage the USN were not high. Their seaworthiness was questionable. And HOW would the CSN have used them? Defensively or in the Attack? Where would they have used them? (I like the idea of a strike at New York Harbor).

 

[Saphroneth]

Just keeping my feet in reality, as the chances of both crossing the Atlantic to engage the USN were not high. Their seaworthiness was questionable. And HOW would the CSN have used them? Defensively or in the Attack? Where would they have used them? (I like the idea of a strike at New York Harbor).

I'm not sure I particularly follow why their seaworthiness is in question - Scorpion sailed to Bermuda and Wivern ended her life in Hong Kong. Reed of course did object to their behaviour but they seem able to cross the Atlantic, at least, so long as they're not being taken through the stormy season.

The basic roles that they could have been employed on are blockade breaking (they could punch out almost any USN blockade station) or attacking US commerce or harbours in the same sort of way. They could probably sail up the Potomac, actually, which would certainly have made some headlines!

 

[rebelatsea]

"Couldn't penetrate a Warrior target" makes them worse than some but not necessarily useless - the 11" Dahlgren fits that description, as I understand it! Warrior was pretty tough and Monitor turrets with their unbacked shield are pretty vulnerable to spalling, plus of course battering can knock out the spindle even if it doesn't have an internal terminal effect.

Agreed, penetration isn't the be all and end all as battering can be very effective causing breakage, spalling and splintering of timber, plus concussion in the gun crews.

 

[13 IL Cav & 64 GA Inf]

Sir, my uninformed thoughts...

For them to do any damage, they have to either attack Union harbors - and do what? Send a landing party ashore?...or attack the Union fleet. They have to come to me. For once the USN doesn't have to hunt them down. And there isn't unlimited options for them to really cause war-changing damage so the Union can rally the masses at a few vital points. Once ID'd, the Hounds of Heck will descend. This will kinda be like the RN hunting the Bismarck. Once known to be out on the open ocean, all ops will cease until they are found and killed. I don't care about armor and guns. They are two ships. When rundown by 100 vessels, you're doomed. Rammed, burned, boarded, something bad is going to happen. I will take my loses - and like Jutland, the prisoners might attack their jailers but at the end of the day, the jailers will prevail. While potentially spectacular, those two vessels had no more ability to change the course of the war than giving the Confederacy two Sherman tanks and no ability to reproduce, repair, supply same. By the way, where are they going to get a steady supply of coal? They might have done a lot of damage but they would have a short and VERY exciting life. The blockade comes down for awhile. This isn't going to be a 6 month free-for-all window. Couple of weeks maybe. And while ports like Bermuda and the Bahamas have a backlog of supplies to run into Confederate ports, what ships are going to do it? The already available runners are going as fast as they can. And while no one will have to wait for moon phases and tides and nightfall and other runner concerns and the voyage total might be able to get bumped up some, the distances stay the same. And the wear and tear on ships built as disposable items will vastly increase. What other shipping is immediately available? The blockade would have been reestablished upon the completion of Operation Sink-Ex. And this will happen in the what - late 1863 time frame? How many ships does the USN have by then? And she can't leave a few on station to provide the semblance of manning the blockade at least as well as in April 1861? When the Brits and French agreed to abide to that paper tiger? The blockade would have been reestablished upon their demise.


"What the heck is that and how do we fight her?!?" You don't believe that the USN didn't start thinking about that soon after the Battle of Hampton Roads kerfuffle? That was a first-time, self-critiquing, learning exercise. Think less CSS Virginia and more CSS Tennessee II.

Other posters milage may, and has, varied.

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

Well stated, @USS ALASKA.

 

[Saphroneth]

Well stated, @USS ALASKA.

The Bismarck analogy rather misses that the RN had radio and aircraft during the hunt for the Bismarck? And the contemporary USN was rather dreadful at stopping ships at sea - they tended to operate reactively, i.e. when word reached Washington of a raider being in X location they'd send out word for USN cruisers to converge on that location.

This didn't work.

 

[13 IL Cav & 64 GA Inf]

The Bismarck analogy rather misses that the RN had radio and aircraft during the hunt for the Bismarck? And the contemporary USN was rather dreadful at stopping ships at sea - they tended to operate reactively, i.e. when word reached Washington of a raider being in X location they'd send out word for USN cruisers to converge on that location.

This didn't work.

I don't think he meant the analogy to be absolute.

 

[Saphroneth]

I don't think he meant the analogy to be absolute.

But the whole point of the analogy is that it's easy to hunt down a Confederate ship - and yet we know that the Union had serious trouble hunting down Confederate ships.

That's the reason why I was making my point about the contemporary USN being dreadful - the Union struggled to hunt down raiders.

 

[edgeworthy]

Something I should point out - this totals 61 Monitors, but a lot of them were never finished (many of the Cascos never finished as monitors, for example).

So if you think the US had 60 monitors in the Civil War, you are counting ships that were never finished and in some cases which would have sunk by themselves if finished as Monitors.

Is this the point where I again mention that the the Navy List of 1862 lists 28 Ironclads?

Plus another five added by 1865, and 16 Ironclads launched for foreign orders. Which gives the Royal Navy a potential 49 Ironclads, that were all historically completed, without having to lay down a single extra hull!

Spoiler

One of which, the Spanish Navy ship Arapiles, was the vessel that gave the US Navy the vapours during the Virginius Affair.

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

Is this the point where I again mention that the the Navy List of 1862 lists 28 Ironclads?

Mention whatever you wish.

The fact that this forum is discussing the Confederate/United States Navy in a conversation is what makes
CivilWarTalk such a great site.

 

[Saphroneth]

So something I think is worth considering is the USN's reaction to the Laird Rams being a known threat. I mean that in the sense of what kind of reaction they can actually make with the information they have or can have available to them.

There's no radio, and indeed no telegraph across the Atlantic, so the news that the Rams have sailed will probably be only a few days to a week or so ahead of the Rams themselves. (Mail steamers were faster than warships in transit.) Assuming for the moment that the Rams were clocked as Confederate ships but too late for them to be seized in Britain, or alternatively that some US provocation or other like their threat to employ privateers has led to the British rescinding the neutrality acts - as I think we have to do if the Rams join the CSN - then the US has news of the Rams being en route in time to react, but not necessarily in time to do much. The time it takes a messenger ship to reach the further blockade stations is potentially considerable.

The USN could opt to concentrate all their heavy ships to try and defeat the Rams, but if they do this then they have to guess where the Rams will show up - and they are at risk of the Rams seeing this US fleet and sailing off to go somewhere else, where they now know the USN heavy ships are not. In addition, if the USN withdraws their ships from potentially vulnerable blockade stations, that means they have broken their own blockade and cannot re-impose it for a month or so legally.

Since I don't think the USN would want to simply surrender the blockade entirely, what I would suspect is that the ships of force on the blockade stations would be concentrated into flotillas outside the most major ports (Charleston, possibly Savannah, Mobile, the James river and Wilmington) and the hope would be that these concentrations of force would be able to successfully fight off the Rams.

Elsewhere, given the possibility of the Rams attacking northern ports, there would presumably be the naval batteries fully manned (they were certainly in better shape for guns than earlier in the Civil War!) and at least some ships available in the major harbours.

It might be interesting to get a sense of where the major ironclads and steam frigates were on or about, say, March 1 1865, as a sense of where the Union naval assets would be during a period late in the war. I evaluated how many monitors were actually finished at this point in an earlier evaluation.

Onondaga - 1/1, 12 feet 10 inches
Passaic class - 7/10 (Patapsco, Weehawken sunk, Camanche wrong side of the continent), 10 foot 6 inches
Canonicus class - 4/9 (Catawba, Oneota, Ajax, Wyandotte not finished, Tecumseh sunk), 13 feet 6 inches
Miantonomoh class - 1/4 (only Monadnock finished), 12 feet 3 inches
Dictator - 1/1, 20 feet 6 inches

So far as I can tell:

Onondaga - James

Passaic - Charleston
Montauk - Cape Fear
Nahant - Charleston
Lehigh - Charleston
Sangamon - James
Catskill - Charleston
Nantucket - Charleston

Canonicus - Charleston
Manhattan - New Orleans
Saugus - James
Mahopac - James

Monadnock - Cape Fear

Dictator - cruising the Atlantic coast



So a lot of ships at Charleston and a fair number on the James, both of which would be serious prospects to take on - but not a lot elsewhere. The USN would probably have to accept their blockade of anywhere else being knocked out if the Rams showed up, at least if they had serious guns to go in their turrets...

 

[USS ALASKA]

...if the Mississippi and North Carolina had come into play as commerce raiders would they been able to deal a massive amount of damage to merchant shipping and commercial shipping and whaling as did the CSS Shenandoah?

Sir, those ships would have begun CSN missions in early '64. So after spending all that time / money / effort to get them operational, the Confederates are going to use them to chase ever vanishing US flagged vessels? Go for it - what a waste. Those two ships were intended to break the Federal blockade. Can't do that chasing fishing boats around. The other CSN commerce raiders didn't change the course of the war, it won't matter. These vessels had issues with open ocean sailing. Please see @Old Soldier 's posts on this. Sending them into the North Atlantic / North Pacific weather is going to be sporty.

Please see - https://civilwartalk.com/threads/how-successful-were-rebel-privateers-and-commerce-raiders.145631/

As far as searching fur them goes, the Bismark was sighted by naval aviation, was she not? Take that out of the equation and hunting those two ships in civil war might have been a much more daunting prospect, no?

My analogy was not about technology but effort and importance. As soon as those ships left port, other activities would have been curtailed until they were cornered and killed. And being blockade breakers, they have to come to me. That greatly limits their operational options.

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[USS ALASKA]

But the whole point of the analogy is that it's easy to hunt down a Confederate ship...

Once again sir, I never said that. I don't believe anyone has stated it would be easy - just that it could, and would, be done.

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[USS ALASKA]

Good vid to go with the one posted by @7th Mississippi Infantry in post #95...section on HMS Wivern and HMS Scorpion

The Development of Ironclads - The first 10 years in the Royal Navy

Drachinifel

Today we start to look at the ironclad age, with a rundown of the first decade of ironclad development in the RN.

Cheers,
USS ALASKA