C.S.S Monitor?

October 26 1861-After reading an ad in a Newspaper for a ship design to counter the new mysterious Confederate Ironclad, a confident swedish immigrant to the United States named John Ericsson presents his plans to the U.S Navy Ironclad board. He presented his plans to Commodore Hiram Paulding, Commodore Joseph Smith, and Commander Charles Henry Davis. Paulding looks at the plans first and with a confused expression hands them off to Smith. When Smith recieves these plans he bursts out laughing. He calls Ericsson a novice and tells him his ship would never even float, much less sink a ship. Ericsson tries to explain although his design would work, even though its unconvetional, he goes on to say Smith was a poor choice for the board. Smith infuriated, tells Ericsson to bring him a real design or to never come back. Ericsson infuriated tells Smith he would give the Confederates the Design. Smith starts laughing again and says "they would be wasting what little iron they got". Smith Storms out of the room and Immediatly departs for Richmond. As hes exiting Washington D.C he is stopped by a Union patrol and they search him and discover the plans. They are at first convinced he is a confederate spy, but Ericsson tells him these are fake plans to throw off the confederate production of thier Ironclad. He lying to the Soldiers explains that this design would never work and only a fool would believe it. The Soldiers let him go.

November 1 1861-Ericsson arrives in Virginia and asks for a Audience with Confederate Secretary of the Navy Stephen Mallory. Believing Correctly he is a Union defector his Audience is immediatly Granted. Mallory meets with Stephen and asks why he has asked a audience. Ericsson tells him he has a Ironclad design. Stephen explains he already has a design made, but says that because Ericsson had come all this way he would look at his plans. He looks astonished and realizes the superiority of this design. He immediatly telegraphs the Norfolk Navy Yard to halt construction and scuttle what work they have done. He invites Ericsson to oversee its construction to which Ericsson happily accepts.

November 6 1861-Ericsson has arrived at the Norfolk navy yard and immediatly begins construction. He soon realizes it would take several years to build the whole thing at one site and Commisions Builders in Charleston, Richmond, New Orleans, Mobile, and Savannah to construct the different components.

Winter of 1861-Construction moves on, but much slower than Ericsson hoped. The Confederate Government begins to eye the project with suspicion as it is run by a recent turncoast and is Costing them alot of money. Mallory manages to convince the government to still back the project, but this loses him alot of support.

March of 1862-After 5 Months of Construction most of the components have been made, including the all important revolving turrent. All the components by the end of the Month had been shipped to the Naval Yard.

April 25 1862-C.S.S Monitor is finished. Stephen Mallory, Ericsson, and even President Jefferson Davis attend this event. The ship is pushed off into the water and begans swaying back and forth. If the ship were to sink now, the confederate Naval effort would forever be ended. The ship rightens itself. Franclin Buchanan would command this new vessel. The Ironclad steams off to Hampton roads to break the blockade, stopping just out of sight for the night. The Union Ironclad Galena was heading south at the same time, the two seemed destined to clash in battle. Hundreds of Miles away New Orleans is under assault from the United States Navy.

April 26 1862-C.S.S monitor steams into Hampton Roads and opens fire on U.S.S Cumberland damaging its masts. The Cumberland unleashes a Boardside on the Mystery ship, most rounds dont come close, but the few that strike bounce off. The Captain of the Cumberland is shocked and tries to sail away, but the prevailing winds are blowing into the Chesepeake bay, The Cumberland is a sitting target. The Monitor makes circles around the Cumberland and after a hour of firing on it sinks the Cumberland. The U.S.S Congress and U.S.S St. Lawrence both attack the Monitor but are quicky repullsed back. The moving turrent is able allow the monitor to strike both ships. Two hours into the battle. The Congress is sinking and the St. Lawrence is smoking badly and ran aground in the shallow waters nearby. The Steamships Roanoke and Minnesota steam away from the Scene. The First battle of Hampton roads was a resounding Confederate Sucess. It steams back to Norfolk to reload its ammo and repair its slightly damaged turrent.

April 27 1862-The Roanoke and Minnesota retreating towards Washington D.C encounter the U.S.S Galena, a ironclad invented by a colleague of Ericsson and the design the Ironclad board selected. Now that a Union Ironclad had came, the Roanoke and Minnesota turn back around with the Galena to avenge their earlier defeat. The Monitor had reloaded and got its quick repairs it steamed back to hampton roads.

April 28 1862-The Second battle of Hampton Roads begins as the Galena opens fire on a docked Monitor. The Monitor steams towards it. Both after exchaning fire a few times suffer little damage. The Monitor steams behind the Galena and fires on its rear begining to damage it. The Galena attempts to turn to fire on the Monitor, but the monitor turns with it so it cant fire on it. The Monitor with its turrent is still able to fire and eventually breaks all the Armor in its rear. Water rushes in on the Galena and the sailors abandon ship. The monitor shoots on the Minnesota slowing it down, eventually sinking it as well. The Roanoke is the only ship which escapes. The Confederates win the day again. Stephens orders all Confederate Shipmakers to constrcut copies of the Monitor. For the First time in the War, Confederate Merchant ships are able to go to Europe and sell thier cotton for weapons. The Confederate Economy now has a chance.

May 5 1862-New Orleans falls, a major blow to the Confederate War effort. In addition the Union Navy is about to take Island No. 10, it is almost certian the Anaconda plan will succed and strangle the Conederacy to death. The Monitor, its Tenders from North Carolina, Raliegh and Beafort. Head to destroy the Union Navy in the Mississippi River, although thier chances of success our doubtful. The World looks in awe as a Rebelling Nation now has the worlds most powerful navy.
 
While the post is lengthy, the idea within it is sadly ASB. There are also profound internal flaws and the whole text is rather poorly written.

Among the many fatal issues I noticed, you've ignored Ericsson's personal views on secession and slavery, don't realize subcontracting out construction of various components doesn't help when there are no manufacturers anywhere in the CSA capable of building said components, and are blithely assuming the CSA can somehow "ship" the various parts of her Monitor to Norfolk for fianl assembly.

On another note, it would be helpful if you had someone who speaks English review your posts for you so that they can help you with your many spelling, grammatical, capitalization, and other errors. I'm sure many members would be glad to help you. Presentation counts and even the best idea, which this most definitely is not, can be fatally hurt by sloppy writing.
 
While entirely unlikely, it isn't impossible. As mentioned Ericsson wouldn't head South if offended by the North.

However, Ericsson would have recognized the industrial shortcomings of the Confederacy and probably suggested the simpler idea of a stationary turret with the guns (more likely gun) on a rotating turntable within, as the USS Keokuk. Technically, the guns would have been mounted in a cupola, which has inclined sides like a cone, rather than a turret, which had straight sides like a cylinder.

The CSS Monitor could mount four cupolas, two upon the centerline, one fore and aft, and two amidship en echelon, which would give a general all around fire arc to three to four guns.

The great counterpart to OTL CSS Virginia was the USS New Ironsides which was immensely successful but entirely overshadowed by the monitors.
 
However, Ericsson would have recognized the industrial shortcomings of the Confederacy and probably suggested the simpler idea of a stationary turret with the guns (more likely gun) on a rotating turntable within, as the USS Keokuk. Technically, the guns would have been mounted in a cupola, which has inclined sides like a cone, rather than a turret, which had straight sides like a cylinder.


That's essentially the type of ironclad the CSA did build: A stationary armored shield with a gun which pivoted between multiple ports. Nearly every CSA ironclad had pivot guns at the bow, stern, or both. Many CSA ironclads, like CSS Albemarle, had nothing but pivot guns and no broadside guns.

The Confederacy's industrial limitations meant that "casemate" ironclads were the way to go because the casemate type were within the CSA's abilities. Suggesting as the OP did that the CSA would be able to build a USS Monitor, or even a USS New Ironsides, without first building the necessary industries is wholly ASB.
 
That's essentially the type of ironclad the CSA did build: A stationary armored shield with a gun which pivoted between multiple ports. Nearly every CSA ironclad had pivot guns at the bow, stern, or both. Many CSA ironclads, like CSS Albemarle, had nothing but pivot guns and no broadside guns.

The Confederacy's industrial limitations meant that "casemate" ironclads were the way to go because the casemate type were within the CSA's abilities. Suggesting as the OP did that the CSA would be able to build a USS Monitor, or even a USS New Ironsides, without first building the necessary industries is wholly ASB.

What could be adopted, particularly since it was used on the South American ironclad Huascar would be a manually rotated platform within the armoured turret.
 
What could be adopted, particularly since it was used on the South American ironclad Huascar would be a manually rotated platform within the armoured turret.


That's very true, but we need to remember another of the reasons Mallory and the CSN chose the casemate design they did: Sloped armor gives more protection for a given thickness than vertical armor.

Both the CSA's production of iron and their ability to roll plate are limited, so they must squeeze every bit of protection from every inch of plate. Sloped armor allows them to do just that.

Don't forget how, where, and by who most of the CSA's ironclads were constructed either. Building a sloped wall is far easier than building a vertical cylinder and, aside from CSS Merrimac, CSA casemate ironclads featured faceted ends rather than rounded ones.

Sure, the CSA could build a Huascar-style turret. Such a turret would require more iron plate, more time to roll that plate, and more construction time requiring more skilled people.

And the result still wouldn't be a CSS Monitor.

Absent of improved technology and industry available to the CSA than in the OTL, the OP's suggestion is still ASB.
 
Don't forget how, where, and by who most of the CSA's ironclads were constructed either. Building a sloped wall is far easier than building a vertical cylinder and, aside from CSS Merrimac, CSA casemate ironclads featured faceted ends rather than rounded ones.

Sure, the CSA could build a Huascar-style turret. Such a turret would require more iron plate, more time to roll that plate, and more construction time requiring more skilled people.

I'm not sure if we read the same article (or was it a book?) that mentioned about the Virginia being built with, as you mention, faceted ends to her casemate. Two fixed hexagonal or octogonal turrets could be mounted fore and aft with a armoured superstructure amidships to protect base of the smoke stack and a basic conning tower. At the very basic two pyramidal fixed turrets could be mounted above the waterline.
 
The World looks in awe as a Rebelling Nation now has the worlds most powerful navy.

above all else in the post, this is the statement I take most issue with.

At the time, the USN while catching up to the rest of the world by adopting its own ironclads, it was nowhere near being considered "the most powerful navy in the world". Actually the monitor and merrimack weren't even the worlds first ironclads, they just happened to be the first two to engage each other.

A better bet to have the CSN getting such a title would be to have the hunley work out better and get a decent number built. Even then however it's still kind of doubtful that a fleet of hunley like submarines could establish any kind of dominance, as they could only go so far as their incredibly limited air supply and crews muscles could take them.
 
I'm not sure if we read the same article (or was it a book?) that mentioned about the Virginia being built with, as you mention, faceted ends to her casemate.


Try reading my post again.

I explicitly stated that CSS Virginia/Merrimac had rounded ends while most of the casemate style ironclads who followed her had faceted casemates.

Two fixed hexagonal or octogonal turrets could be mounted fore and aft with a armoured superstructure amidships to protect base of the smoke stack and a basic conning tower. At the very basic two pyramidal fixed turrets could be mounted above the waterline.

While that is possible, it's also a waste of time, labor, and materials for a polity which is running short of each. Building two or three armored somewhat smaller superstructures instead of a single casemate would be both more complicated and require more materials while also being unnecessary. Lacking the heavy smoothbores and rifles available to the Union Navy, the CSN generally tried to arm it's ironclads with more guns and that required more space than a pair towers would provide.

Anyway, a relative lack of heavy ordnance and the armor a design may require usually combined to leave many CSA ironclads with casemates not much larger than one of Keokuk's armored "towers". If you bother to examine CSS Albemarle and compare the length of her two-gun casemate against the length of her hull, you'll realize she's basically a one-tower version of the Keokuk design you've been suggesting.

The CSN used what little was available to them about as well as possible. Constructing "multiple" casemate designs in order somewhat to turreted mimic Union ironclads would not be a good use of of those resources and ignores one of the purposes behind building those armored ships in the first place.
 
As far as I can see, the main point of the post would be that the Union has NO ironclads, and that the Virginia's performance against the wooden-based US navy can be repeated

The problem with this is that its illogical - the enemy has a powerful weapon that can sink our ships, here's the chance to have one too, nah, lets not bother

OK maybe the time differential doesn't make that discussion logical, but certainly after the Virginia attacks the Union is going to at the least copy it, if it has already rejected other plans

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
As far as I can see, the main point of the post would be that the Union has NO ironclads, and that the Virginia's performance against the wooden-based US navy can be repeated

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

The US Navy will have the USS New Ironsides and the USS Galena at least. It is also highly likely that without Ericsson the Navy would just turn to Eads to supply them with ironclads. Eads was an engineer equally as brilliant as Ericsson. The ironclads he built were mainly used on the Mississippi River campaign.
 
I explicitly stated that CSS Virginia/Merrimac had rounded ends while most of the casemate style ironclads who followed her had faceted casemates.

Actually there is no good indication that the Virginia was completed with rounded ends to her casemate. The journal Warship International had an extensive article about her conversion a few years back and that was very interesting. There are no surviving blueprints or photographs of the ironclad, let alone any actual first hand images of her.

A conical structure would be much more difficult to build than a multi-faceted casemate - more so than the Albemarle's - that would give the appearance of being rounded.
 
Actually there is no good indication that the Virginia was completed with rounded ends to her casemate. The journal Warship International had an extensive article about her conversion a few years back and that was very interesting. There are no surviving blueprints or photographs of the ironclad, let alone any actual first hand images of her.


I read that article too. :rolleyes: Anyway, the post you're quibbling about now has everything to do with you misreading my posts and nothing to do with the OP's ASB proposals.

A conical structure would be much more difficult to build than a multi-faceted casemate...

Which is something I've pointed out at least twice now. :rolleyes:

Getting back to the OP's ideas:

  • The suggestion that the CSA could build a monitor-style vessel is wholly ASB and betrays a profound ignorance of the industrial abilities required for such a project versus the industrial abilities actually available.
  • The events the OP has flowing from the construction of a monitor-style vessel are wholly ASB also as they betray a profound ignorance about many topics as widespread as sea keeping, trade, and ironclad construction by other navies.


Instead of being ASB, your idea about Keokuk-style construction is "merely" implausible. While such construction could be accomplished, it would require more time and materials both of which are in short supply and thus limit the number of ironclads the CSA could field.

Your idea also manages to ignore the fact that many mid-to-late war ironclads constructed by the CSA were already essentially of a single tower Keokuk-style. Shortages in materials and ordnance resulted in smaller casemates containing as few as two pivot guns such as in Albemarle or two pivots and two broadside guns such as with Chicora and Palmetto State.

Building multiple smaller casemates aboard single vessels, which is basically the Keokuk-style and your idea, would again require more time and materials leading us back to the original objections.

Building such vessels would not be in the CSA's best interests as their performance is not substantially or even marginally better enough to justify their increased material needs and construction times.
 
Your idea also manages to ignore the fact that many mid-to-late war ironclads constructed by the CSA were already essentially of a single tower Keokuk-style. Shortages in materials and ordnance resulted in smaller casemates containing as few as two pivot guns such as in Albemarle or two pivots and two broadside guns such as with Chicora and Palmetto State.

I ignore the mistaken use of 'already essentially' when the only similarities between the two designs are that they float and possess armament, armour and steam propulsion. There is a difference between casement and turreted warships.
 
There is a difference between casement and turreted warships.


And, with much in this thread, you're deliberately ignoring that difference in order to play the part of pedant.

Keokuk's armored towers are closer in operation and construction to casemates than they are to moving turrets or even turntables within stationary turrets.

Keokuk's towers were stationary, faceted structured which contained single guns that could be pivoted between three ports. In that, Keokuk's towers very much resembled in operation and construction the faceted, bow and stern portions of most CSA casemate ironclads which also featured single guns which could be pivoted between three ports.

Once again, the OP's suggestions are wholly ASB while your suggestions are merely implausible.
 
Top