Clash of Ironclads: HMS Warrior vs Gloire

So, inspired by similar threads in the post-1900 section, I thought of going back to the origins of armoured ships.
Please ignore for the sake of this thread why France and the UK would ever go to war in ~1862 and why the two ships are alone going at it in an old fashioned duel.
Assuming clear visibility and moderate wind/sea conditions who would win? The French wooden hulled ironclad Gloire? Or the British iron hulled HMS Warrior?

I am afraid they are invulnerable to each other's shots, still the British ship should be better, being faster and having 110 pounder rifles. Maybe ramming would decide it like at Lissa?
 
From something I read - decades ago now, strewth! - my understanding is that the Warrior's big guns could indeed pierce Gloire's armour, whilst its armour could withstand Gloire's guns.
Of course, given the gunnery those days, the two would probably have to be damn close to even hit each other.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
It should be remembered that the fps for Warrior's 68-lber guns that is often quoted (1580) is actually the 12-lb powder charge, and they did have a 16-lb charge which developed 2040 fps mean velocity over 340 yards.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DBY5opvFChQC&pg=PA532&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false


ETA:

" Penetration trials carried out by the Admiralty during the 1860s showed that British 68lb shot would penetrate upto 8 inches of composite plate armour similar to the Monitor's at upto 100yds and 6 inches at upto 500yds."

Gloire's armour was 4.7 in thick, and as such the Warrior could penetrate her at over 500 yards.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Incidentally, the Warrior's 110-lber rifles had defective breeches, so they were not as effective as her 68-lber smoothbores. On the other hand, the 68-lbers were very effective, and were kept on by the RN as AP guns for several years. (Trivia note - the 68-lbers were rebored as RML guns and were not actually disposed of until 1921!)
 
I just read about th Warrior class ironclad, even though she was built in response to the Gloire, Wikipedia said she couldn'the stand up to the fire power of two and three Deckers. So she might be able to sand up to the Gloire.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I just read about th Warrior class ironclad, even though she was built in response to the Gloire, Wikipedia said she couldn'the stand up to the fire power of two and three Deckers. So she might be able to sand up to the Gloire.
It depends very much on the range - remember this is an era when guns can lose over 90% of their muzzle velocity before reaching their maximum range.
If the Warrior couldn't stand up to the firepower of a three decker (presumably armed with 68 lber guns) then all that means is that her armour can be penetrated at some range - since Gloire and Warrior have for all intents and purposes identical armour thickness (there's about 5mm in it) then they're more or less evenly matched armour wise.
Gloire's guns are 6.5 inch bore, Warrior's are 8.1 inch bore for the 68-lbers and she also has the bigger (problematic) 110-lber rifles.
So overall it should be that Gloire can only penetrate Warrior at ranges Warrior can already penetrate Gloire.
 
So it looks like the Warrior is the clear winner here.
Still, on wiki you can read that in tests the Gloire's armour proved resistant to British 64pdrs at 20(sic!) Metres range!

Also, I think that at that time shells had no armor piercing power, or am I wrong? And roundshot damage would not be instantly crippling I suppose. If no vessel catches fire they might have to pound each other for a pretty long time. Ramming might really be an option, as seen at Lissa, and would possibly favour the Warrior, with its clipper bow.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
That's correct, shells were not AP at this point - this significantly contributed to the stalemate at Hampton Roads, the Virginia didn't have much solid shot.
(It's solid shot not round shot at this point, the 110-lbers did have solid shot but since it was not round then "round shot" is inappropriate.)

The goal of firing was not necessarily to destroy the enemy vessel or set them afire but to win the firepower battle and disable the enemy - for example by injuring the gun crews or the like.
In a hypothetical Warrior-Gloire battle the captain of the Warrior has said he would use his superior speed to keep his distance until the French gunnery was more or less silenced. One assumes he would then close to finish her off or to board.
 
I just read about th Warrior class ironclad, even though she was built in response to the Gloire, Wikipedia said she couldn'the stand up to the fire power of two and three Deckers.
Wiki says that the reason Warrior was built as a frigate was because the Admiralty was concerned that she couldn't stand up to battleships, not that she actually couldn't. And I'm not even sure that's true: I suspect the reason both ships were built with frigates is because it was better to have heavy guns on one deck, and they were intended to use their speed to pick off ships from the line of battle rather than sit in it themselves.

If the Warrior couldn't stand up to the firepower of a three decker (presumably armed with 68 lber guns)
The only 68pdrs on screw battleships are pivot guns. For the Royal Navy, the standard is the 32pdr; for the French, it's a 42- or 30- pounder (though they were also keen on shell guns). All of the above would just have bounced off either ironclad.
 
Wiki says that the reason Warrior was built as a frigate was because the Admiralty was concerned that she couldn't stand up to battleships, not that she actually couldn't. And I'm not even sure that's true: I suspect the reason both ships were built with frigates is because it was better to have heavy guns on one deck, and they were intended to use their speed to pick off ships from the line of battle rather than sit in it themselves.

I would concur with the above. The French tried one class of two ironclads with two gun decks, it does not seem to have been repeated.


The only 68pdrs on screw battleships are pivot guns. For the Royal Navy, the standard is the 32pdr; for the French, it's a 42- or 30- pounder (though they were also keen on shell guns). All of the above would just have bounced off either ironclad.

The British did have an 8" shell gun which is of the same calibre as the 68pdrs but was much lighter and had an odd chamber arrangement and besides was considered in no way robust enough to fire solid shot. It would not have been much of a threat to ironclads.
 
Top