Civil War Tanks?

[Reader347]

Of course being rail would make manuevering freely a bit tricky.

>
>
>
During the time armored trains were used rail transportation was critical and there was a lot of fighting to destroy or capture or defend junctions and such. It made sense to bring along some fairly heavy firepower for either attack or defense. During the post ww1 Russo/Polish war both sides used armored trains in battle, sometimes against each other's armored trains on the same or close by rails.

 

[Reader347]

It also strongly suggests that your assertion about steam pressure is wrong and whatever pressures were available in Britain in the 1850s were sufficient to start developing a steam tank.

>
>
>
Where did I say a steam tank couldn't have been developed in the ACW era? With the low pressures of the 1860s any armored vehicle would have been dead slow on anything other than a hard flat surface. Even the steam road hauling machines weren't fast except compared to oxen.

 

[frlmerrin]

>
>
>
Where did I say a steam tank couldn't have been developed in the ACW era? With the low pressures of the 1860s any armored vehicle would have been dead slow on anything other than a hard flat surface. Even the steam road hauling machines weren't fast except compared to oxen.

Well there were steam carriages even in the 1850s (in Europe) that could do 10+ mph.

Also for this purpose what sort of guage pressure do you think would be necessary for a tank to mover at 10 mph? You clearly have some ideas on this matter.

 

[Reader347]

Well there were steam carriages even in the 1850s (in Europe) that could do 10+ mph.

Also for this purpose what sort of guage pressure do you think would be necessary for a tank to mover at 10 mph? You clearly have some ideas on this matter.

>
>
>
Steam cars were faster than IC powered cars for a long time. 1850s steam carriages were light and built for use on a road. Across rough or soft ground the speed went way down, same as cars today.

I have no concrete ideas on steam tanks, I've just been responding to posts, I'm not a steam bug. If you look around on steam sites there's ideas for practically any type of vehicle (there have been steam planes and subs, for instance). Using the steam pressures of the 1860s would make for a slow and fairly large armored vehicle, judging by the road haulers and agricultural machines we know of. Even with IC engines this was true till after ww1.

 

[Sior]

British armoured road train in the Boar war

 

[frlmerrin]

Cool pictures. The last time I saw a picture of a MWH was about 30 years ago at the IWM (it is not there any more) I do remember however that it was steered from the front of the boiler rather than the rear by a huge steering wheel.

 

[Reader347]

Cool pictures. The last time I saw a picture of a MWH was about 30 years ago at the IWM (it is not there any more) I do remember however that it was steered from the front of the boiler rather than the rear by a huge steering wheel.

>
>
>
There's a video of a steam logging locomotive on cat tracks in deep snow with a steersman sitting in front of the boiler guiding a set of big skis that support the front end of the loco. There's a photo of a logging loco with steerable front wheels at the Wabeno Logging Museum in Wisconsin.

 

[TFSmith121]

Nice pictures; can anyone tell if those are dirt or paved roads?

British armoured road train in the Boar war

http://www.landships.freeservers.com/fowler_b5_armtract.htm

The one going down the hillside is dirt, and I'd guess the one with the fields behind it is as well, but the first two look like it is a park-like area; the road surface could be light-colored packed earth or (I suppose) light-colored stone macadamized road.

Best,

 

[Reader347]

The one going down the hillside is dirt, and I'd guess the one with the fields behind it is as well, but the first two look like it is a park-like area; the road surface could be light-colored packed earth or (I suppose) light-colored stone macadamized road.

>
>
>
Notice the one going down the hill has the wheels sunk into the dirt a little. The ones among or in front of the trees have the wheels totally on top of the road with a tiny contact area, like on a very hard surface road.

 

[TFSmith121]

Good observation

>
>
>
Notice the one going down the hill has the wheels sunk into the dirt a little. The ones among or in front of the trees have the wheels totally on top of the road with a tiny contact area, like on a very hard surface road.

Yes, the ones in the "park" or whatever it is definitely look like they are not sinking in at all. The "field" is a little harder to tell, but may be the same thing.

The putative "good roads" were not easy to find in North America (or South Africa) in the Nineteenth Century.

I wonder if a corduroyed road could even handle the weight of a traction engine...

Best,

 

[LeX]

What about a locomotive that doesn't run on rails? Give it its own suspension and buff the engine a bit to let it deal with the terrain.

 

[Reader347]

What about a locomotive that doesn't run on rails? Give it its own suspension and buff the engine a bit to let it deal with the terrain.

>
>
>
Small steerable locomotives is what the road machines were. Just a modified broadened wheel setup that wouldn't sink into the ground.