Big Ships, Deep Seas

[Mark F. Jenkins]

Some of the post-war monitors where ocean going, right?

In the sense that they could cross oceans, escorted. None of them would have been able to actually fight in ocean areas unless it was unusually calm. (This situation obtained right up until BB4, USS Iowa, in fact; the first few "battleships" were still rather low-profile and thought of, at least initially, as coastal defense ships.)

 

[Frederick14Va]

According to nearly every navy vet I've ever met, he had a dream assignment!

I've always been told that when they modernized the Iowas in the 80s, the flood of requests for assignment to one of them was unprecedented. Even retired old men were trying to re-enlist for a chance to serve on one.

Not all were so eager... I was in the Navy during that time (80's) and had a host of mates that had served duty on the Jersey, Mo, or Wisk.... They all were eager to get off the vessels to another duty station quick as possible... Of course most would think it would have such a nostalgic draw.... but reality was they were mostly used at that time as a show piece.. rarely actually went anywhere or did anything.. the common directive to stand tall look mean and look pretty... got old after awhile.... any port they were in had issues with hoards of people coming to see it... wanting to get on it to look around as if it was a theme park tourist attraction... which with all the new weapon systems now upgraded and onboard was highly restricted access...

 

[TinCan]

The USS North Carolina is nicknamed "ShowBOAT"...

I'm sure the old girls are not offended.

Landlubber!

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

(I asked chellers to move these posts out of Mike Serpa's XV-inch gun thread, because we were rather adrift from that topic... but in interesting waters, nonetheless!)

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

There are a few "what-if" images of Warrior vs. Monitor, which are spectacular in appearance, but which utterly ignore the underwater dimension-- for the most part, where the Warrior could go (high seas), the Monitor couldn't, and where the Monitor could go (shallow littorals), the Warrior couldn't.

One of my favorite Monitor vs. Warrior images can be seen at this link:

http://radojavor.deviantart.com/art/Monitor-vs-Warrior-166716563

 

[rebelatsea]

We should probably get back to Civil War XV-inch guns... Sorry!

LOL, partly my fault Mark .

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

One of my favorite Monitor vs. Warrior images can be seen at this link:

http://radojavor.deviantart.com/art/Monitor-vs-Warrior-166716563

That's the one I was thinking of, actually. It brings to mind the battle between Monitor and Warrior in Harry Harrison's Stars and Stripes Forever, a book I began with great expectations but ended up absolutely loathing. In that book, Monitor wins... that aside, the part that drives me right up a wall is that the battle takes place off Biloxi, Mississippi, which is a great way to make my basic point: 1) The water off Biloxi MS in the 1860s was about sufficient to float a paper boat. Monitor would have had challenges maneuvering there, let alone Warrior; the only way the latter could have been there is if one posits a massive tsunami in the Gulf. 2) Historically, Monitor nearly sank on her voyage to Hampton Roads, and then did sink on her very next ocean voyage. Not a lot of support there for the idea that she could round Florida and get into the Gulf.

Harrison (and some others) frequently treat water areas as if they're some sort of flat floor that all vessels can slide around on with equal ability.

Anyway, the two warships were simply designed to operate in different areas. The only conceivable scenario for a head-to-head that I can think of is Warrior sailing into New York Harbor or Hampton Roads to challenge Monitor, but even then I can't think of a good military reason for Warrior to do that in the first place.

 

[Mr. King]

It looks to me like the Warrior could simply ram her, easily ride up onto her deck, and just push the Monitor under with all 9,000+ tons like drowning a toddler.

I don't think Monitor's guns would have done enough damage to matter...

 

[Mr. King]

Mine

LOL, partly my fault Mark .

as well. sorry.

Post-war naval is an interesting topic, though.

 

[rebelatsea]

That's the one I was thinking of, actually. It brings to mind the battle between Monitor and Warrior in Harry Harrison's Stars and Stripes Forever, a book I began with great expectations but ended up absolutely loathing. In that book, Monitor wins... that aside, the part that drives me right up a wall is that the battle takes place off Biloxi, Mississippi, which is a great way to make my basic point: 1) The water off Biloxi MS in the 1860s was about sufficient to float a paper boat. Monitor would have had challenges maneuvering there, let alone Warrior; the only way the latter could have been there is if one posits a massive tsunami in the Gulf. 2) Historically, Monitor nearly sank on her voyage to Hampton Roads, and then did sink on her very next ocean voyage. Not a lot of support there for the idea that she could round Florida and get into the Gulf.

Harrison (and some others) frequently treat water areas as if they're some sort of flat floor that all vessels can slide around on with equal ability.

Anyway, the two warships were simply designed to operate in different areas. The only conceivable scenario for a head-to-head that I can think of is Warrior sailing into New York Harbor or Hampton Roads to challenge Monitor, but even then I can't think of a good military reason for Warrior to do that in the first place.

Glad I'm not the only one Mark, my copy went in the recycling bin in short order.