Submarine Guns

[Dilandu]

The Union fleet sunk a single CSA vessel. The CSA sunk a single vessel and lost the Hunley. The USS Spuyten Duyvil cleared wreckage. The Russian navy sunk one. I did not see how many ships were sunk trying to use a spar torpedoes. Not a very effective record.

You forgot a few. Two chinese vessels - composite cruiser "Yangwu" and aviso "Fuxing" were sunk by French spar torpedo attacks at the battle of Fuzhou. The first was attacked by the decidated torpedo boat, the second by the armed ship launch.

Basically, hovewer... yes, the spar torpedoes were problematic weapon. They were hard to operate, especially in open sea. The spar could be esaily broken either before the attack by waves, or during the attack by miscalculation about the enemy ship position. The towed torpedoes were generally considered as large improvement - and then came Whitehead and Lay with there self-propelled and wire-guided torpedoes.

Always felt sort of compassion toward Lay. His wire-guided torpedo wasn't actually bad - he just haven't got actual experience as naval engineer, and all his designs were hydrodynamically poor.

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

Good point about the Chinese development of spar-torpedoes. We often overlook developments that occurred outside the ACW. However, towed torpedoes appear to pre-date spar torpedoes (see Fulton's 1804 Nautilus for example, Brutus di Villerio's vessesl, etc.) and weren't improvements at all. H L Hunley originally used a towed torpedo, but in open water, the torpedo tended to drift with the current if the towing vessel slowed or stopped, creating a very dangerous situation for both vessels. That is precisely why Hunley was altered to utilize a spar torpedo and why spars were utilized on Confederate gunboats as well. I know of no examples of broken spars, but would be interested to hear of examples if any are known.

Obviously the movable spar versions with percussion fuses were the best option to keep the torpedo from exploding on driftwood or otherwise that might crush percussion caps. In the US, there wasn't any success (that I am aware of) with wired-guided torpedoes, but I know they were utilized elsewhere- not sure of the level of success. The Whitehead self-propelled was the real advancement in the 1860s, although it took about three decades for those to be developed enough for common adoption by the world's major navies.

I am also pretty confident that E.C. Singer did not invent the spar torpedo. The earliest examples I can find come from Francis Lee in Charleston in 1861- designed for his percussion torpedo and his torpedo ram (Torch). There is indirect evidence that the New Orleans Museum sub may have used a spar torpedo, but dating of this sub is very imprecise. In fact, if we use sub features as a chronological marker, then the NOM sub would have been the first in the ACW era- likely not the case... just a thought.

 

[jgoodguy]

You forgot a few. Two chinese vessels - composite cruiser "Yangwu" and aviso "Fuxing" were sunk by French spar torpedo attacks at the battle of Fuzhou. The first was attacked by the decidated torpedo boat, the second by the armed ship launch.

Basically, hovewer... yes, the spar torpedoes were problematic weapon. They were hard to operate, especially in open sea. The spar could be esaily broken either before the attack by waves, or during the attack by miscalculation about the enemy ship position. The towed torpedoes were generally considered as large improvement - and then came Whitehead and Lay with there self-propelled and wire-guided torpedoes.

Always felt sort of compassion toward Lay. His wire-guided torpedo wasn't actually bad - he just haven't got actual experience as naval engineer, and all his designs were hydrodynamically poor.

According to Flotte du Fujian Yangwu was sunk. Fuxing was attacked by mines and spar torpedoes, boarded and sank from French shelling damage. So the French get a 1, not a 2.

 

[Dilandu]

However, towed torpedoes appear to pre-date spar torpedoes (see Fulton's 1804 Nautilus for example, Brutus di Villerio's vessesl, etc.) and weren't improvements at all.

Well, they haven't got electric fuzes that time. Without them, the towed torpedo is incredibly hard to operate.

In the US, there wasn't any success (that I am aware of) with wired-guided torpedoes, but I know they were utilized elsewhere- not sure of the level of success.

Hm, as I recall, the US navy tested the Lay No.2 and No.4 torpedo in 1870s, and ordered an "Improved Lay" torpedo in 1880s. They were used for quite a long time (generally because there were no other guided torpedoes in inventory), but weren't ordered for mass production.

Lately, they also tested the Ericsson guided torpedo. And also a Lay-Height torpedo in mid-1880 (she was tested by navy, but not accepted).

The US army have interest in Sims-Edison guided torpedo and later in Patrick one, which was tested in France in 1889 with the US army personnel presented.

And, of course, the famous (now, sadly, almost forgotten) Hammond radio-guided torpedo of early 1900s-1910s - one of the first weapons, that were rejected not because the weapon itself was flawed, but because the simulation war games showed that the tactics, for which it was construtcted, was unworkable.

 

[Dilandu]

According to Flotte du Fujian Yangwu was sunk. Fuxing was attacked by mines and spar torpedoes, boarded and sank from French shelling damage. So the French get a 1, not a 2.

Ok, well, 1-and-half, deal?) She WAS holed by spar torpedo, after all.

 

[jgoodguy]

Ok, well, 1-and-half, deal?) She WAS holed by spar torpedo, after all.

1.5 for the French.

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

Well, they haven't got electric fuzes that time. Without them, the towed torpedo is incredibly hard to operate.

Not electric fuses... those may have been invented by Samuel Colt in the 1840s.
Fulton's torpedo was apparently a horological (clockwork).

 

[rebelatsea]

The trouble with towed torpedoes was that if the towing vessel slowed down or stopped, the torpedo didn't, and unless the crew were quick and severed the cable, there was good chance of a self inflicted BANG !

 

[Dilandu]

The trouble with towed torpedoes was that if the towing vessel slowed down or stopped, the torpedo didn't, and unless the crew were quick and severed the cable, there was good chance of a self inflicted BANG !

Well, with electric fuze they simply did not activate it before attack. as far as I could recall russian "Krylatka's" attacks.

By the way, "Krylatka":

The original "Krylatka" towed torpedo from the war of 1870s, in the exposition of Central Naval Muesum.

 

[4th-MSM]

While looking through one of a few original copies of the Scientific American that I just purchased at a flea market, I found an article relevant to this thread. This is from page 9 of the July 5th, 1862 edition. (I'm not sure why it's posting sideways)

 

[bankerpapaw]

You would have to be mighty close to your target to be effective.

 

[georgew]

Looking at Spar torpedo.
The Union fleet sunk a single CSA vessel. The CSA sunk a single vessel and lost the Hunley. The USS Spuyten Duyvil cleared wreckage. The Russian navy sunk one. I did not see how many ships were sunk trying to use a spar torpedoes. Not a very effective record.

It is probably useful to consider the spar torpedo craft as area denial weapons. You don't have to sink a lot of ships to make your opponent more hesitant to risk vessels. I think the real problem was that in practice they were "single strike" weapons. To get a maximum effect your needed a number of them to hunt in packs. Two or three vessels coming in on different bearings makes defending against them much more difficult. Remember also that there were two strokes with misfires by Confederate torpedo craft (USS Memphis and USS Octarara). Those attacks would have prompted Union captains to be more leery of penetrations up inland waterways. Southern torpedoes of any type forced Union planners to incorporate dedicated anti-torpedo counter measures including nets, booms and the Erickson anti-torpedo "rake".

 

[JohnDLittlefield]

While looking through one of a few original copies of the Scientific American that I just purchased at a flea market, I found an article relevant to this thread. This is from page 9 of the July 5th, 1862 edition. (I'm not sure why it's posting sideways)

View attachment 109681

Nice find!

 

[Dilandu]

While looking through one of a few original copies of the Scientific American that I just purchased at a flea market, I found an article relevant to this thread. This is from page 9 of the July 5th, 1862 edition. (I'm not sure why it's posting sideways)

Quite interesting, thanks!