Variation on a theme -for Gustavflyer.

[vikingbear]

Hi Grizz, Those designs won't be in the book, just a bit of fun really.

Hi John,

Oh I know they won't be in your book, It was a bit of wishful thinking on my part as you must have a pile of these "fun designs " by now and would still make great models!


GRIZZ

 

[rebelatsea]

Hi Grizz, you are right I do, I have attempted at one time or another attempted to make sense of some of he outlandish prints and pictures of ACW ships ,not just CS by US too. I've got a ring binder full.

 

[rebelatsea]

That thing really is a monster! I've never heard much about the Yazoo Monster.

When I get a day free (LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!) I'd love to make a model of that thing.

OwenEgan, Here is what I have been able to piece together for my own research and the help of the learned gentlemen on here .
Name: CSS Yazoo


"The un- named monster" was at the time, and remains, the biggest warship ever built inland.
Type: Ironclad Frigate.
Paddles: two independent side-wheels powered by 4 western river type engines.
Screws: two 8.5ft, . Speed: 10 knots calculated, 13 – 16 knots intended.
Dimensions: 310ft (OA), x 70ft over knuckle, x 13ft (D), 3,410 tons.
Hull: 289ft (BP) x 56ft (B) x 13ft (DPH),
Guns: 12 probably intended to be 4 – 7"mlr pivots and 8 – 6.4" Brooke mlr.
Armour: 4.5" ins iron, from Shelby Iron Co. Casemate slope 30 degrees
Design: Thomas Weldon Builder: T. Weldon / J. McFarland, Yazoo City Navy .Yard, Mississippi.
Laid Down: October 1862 Destroyed to prevent capture 21 May 1863
History:
Conjectural general arrangement drawing by the Author using input from multiple sources
Designed to utilise existing side-wheel and screw engines.
The vessel was "Skiff built" with both ends of the hull configured the same, which has caused much confusion over the years, being taken to mean that the vessel had one screw at each end. However the original design for the "Nashville" type was for a twin screw configuration. Distribution of weights, layout of machinery boilers etc, plus the disadvantages of drag conferred by a screw at each end indicate that a more traditional layout was intended
Designed by Thomas Weldon to a modified Nashville type plan, as indicted by the proportions of her dimensions, construction was supervised by Lt Isaac Newton Brown CSN. There is some doubt as to whether this was a State or CSN sponsored vessel, but the CSN met the bills !
The four paddle engines would have been geared in pairs, with both wheels independently driven.
It is difficult to see the purpose of such a large ship, but with a relatively high freeboard and designed speed perhaps Weldon and Brown saw her taking control of the Mississippi, and even getting into coastal waters.
No name was ever assigned but CSS Yazoo has been suggested as appropriate.

 

[rebelatsea]

If there was ever a time I'd have preferred for David D. Porter to be MORE verbose about something, accurately or not, it's in his uncharacteristically concise description of "the monster." Dang the man...

There was no money in it for him !

 

[rebelatsea]

Don't go out of your way, but I would like to see the corrected versions when you have time.

The fourth one, The last one the Yazoo Monster is a little more difficult

 

[OwenRichards]

Thank you for doing these and sharing them.

 

[rebelatsea]

Don't go out of your way, but I would like to see the corrected versions when you have time.

Well, here is the last one, I've stuck to Davisons dimensions, 317ft x 48ft, and added gunport covers.

 

[BAYmodeller]

Nice work!!

 

[vikingbear]

Well, here is the last one, I've stuck to Davisons dimensions, 317ft x 48ft, and added gunport covers.View attachment 47973

Hi John great design as always.

John, was just trying to remenber, know you posted several of your 340 foot "Yazoo Monster" designs, but did you ever post one of your 370 X 48 foot " Yazoo Monster'' design version?

Sounds like you have enough material to produce two books for models. Just think, you could have you own book (s) for models, the "1866" version. Persionally, I would like to see that French design sw ironclad with thr Somners connection.

GRIZZ

 

[rebelatsea]

Hello Grizz,
370ft? I never did one ! I can't claim credit for all the Monsters, several others have produced drawings.

 

[georgew]

Well, here is the last one, I've stuck to Davisons dimensions, 317ft x 48ft, and added gunport covers.View attachment 47973

Hi Rebel,

Curious about why we see frigate gun ports on this vessel and not on the other variants?

 

[rebelatsea]

Hi John great design as always.

John, was just trying to remenber, know you posted several of your 340 foot "Yazoo Monster" designs, but did you ever post one of your 370 X 48 foot " Yazoo Monster'' design version?

Sounds like you have enough material to produce two books for models. Just think, you could have you own book (s) for models, the "1866" version. Persionally, I would like to see that French design sw ironclad with thr Somners connection.

GRIZZ

Here it ,apologies for the quality of some of it. There is no scale, but around 250 / 270 foot in length OA seems about right.
I've outlined the above water bits i cam make out. I think it would have carried a full sailing rig, but that's not there either.

 

[rebelatsea]

Hi Rebel,

Curious about why we see frigate gun ports on this vessel and not on the other variants?

Simple Georgew - I forgot to add the gunport covers ! The original outline in Davison's book of his "Wilmington" had square ports ,I just followed the examples with the others !

 

[vikingbear]

Hi John,
Thanks for that draft, it is a very interesting design, one that can be easily "fleshed out" with the help of several copies of drawings of French ironclads I have collected. Can see a raised fc & qd, both armed with a gun on a pivot, a deck covering the gun deck with boats and typical fittings...The thing that stands out at first glance is the masts, it almost seems like it was designed with four masts in mind, maybe a bark rig? It would seem to have not enough room to fit in a 4-masted ship rig type.

You know something, this does look like a design that could be built in the south. Simple straight lines with sw's. Even the underwater lines we can see seem to be easy to build construction.

As for the keel size, have not seen enough europe designed underwater water lines to make any judgement. Do know though that keels were enlarged to slow down the roll rate.

again thanks,

GRIZZ

 

[rebelatsea]

Hi John,
Thanks for that draft, it is a very interesting design, one that can be easily "fleshed out" with the help of several copies of drawings of French ironclads I have collected. Can see a raised fc & qd, both armed with a gun on a pivot, a deck covering the gun deck with boats and typical fittings...The thing that stands out at first glance is the masts, it almost seems like it was designed with four masts in mind, maybe a bark rig? It would seem to have not enough room to fit in a 4-masted ship rig type.

You know something, this does look like a design that could be built in the south. Simple straight lines with sw's. Even the underwater lines we can see seem to be easy to build construction.

As for the keel size, have not seen enough europe designed underwater water lines to make any judgement. Do know though that keels were enlarged to slow down the roll rate.

again thanks,

GRIZZ

The first thing that came to mind was a paddlewheel Gloire ,but it's not big enough. I wondered if it was intended as a conversion of a French PW vessel but can't find a match. It would have almost certainly have had too deep a draught for Southern waters, which was or would have been one of the problems with Norths ironclad.

 

[vikingbear]

Hi John.
Your thoughts about a french PW conversion made me think of something............have to look it up later on line..........one of the Confederate Officers in Europe was shown two (?) old sw frigates for sale. They were not french.....but British built...........ex East Indian warships? Something like that........the officer was........God hate that, can't remenber his name, but will get back to you if find any info.
You think the old east indian company used any sw frigates in this length range?

Will be back!
Grizz

 

[rebelatsea]

He Grizz, I knew about the EIC offer, vaguely, but no more than that. I't something that never occurred to me, someone on here may know.

 

[rebelatsea]

He Grizz, I knew about the EIC offer, vaguely, but no more than that. I't something that never occurred to me, someone on here may know.

Actually ,looking at that diagram the proportions are more British than French. French builds tended to be more slender in beam and without such deep keels.

 

[rebelatsea]

He Grizz, I knew about the EIC offer, vaguely, but no more than that. I't something that never occurred to me, someone on here may know.

In the "Confederate Naval Build Up" by David G Surdam, reference is made to 10 steam vessels made to carry ordnance which the EIC no longer needed. I have sent an email to [email protected] asking if they have more information.

 

[georgew]

In the "Confederate Naval Build Up" by David G Surdam, reference is made to 10 steam vessels made to carry ordnance which the EIC no longer needed. I have sent an email to [email protected] asking if they have more information.

Hi Rebel, suggest you check the papers of Gen. Beauregard, I seem to remember that he recommended buying the former EIC vessels. Some of them were very large with deep drafts and more suitable for carrying cargoes to Bermuda, Bahama or Havana. It is not clear whether some of the vessels in question were former "Bombay Buccaneer" warships used by the EIC. I believe that a number of these smaller craft were transferred to what became the RN squadron based in the Indian ocean. Also, I believe that these vessels were all side-wheelers.