Lets discuss the effects of steam driven tanks if they're invented in the late 1800's

Industrial advantage means leverage viz steam-engine tanks.

Folks like the Confederates would get squashed like grapes.

Can't help but think that the CSA would have been delighted of the USA tried to mass produce armoured steam carriages. The Northerners would have just squandered their industrial advantage on a pointless, wasteful project. Yeehah!
 
Can't help but think that the CSA would have been delighted of the USA tried to mass produce armoured steam carriages. The Northerners would have just squandered their industrial advantage on a pointless, wasteful project. Yeehah!

The Union has such an industrial advantage that it could try to produce these by the score and still be overwhelming in artillery and everything else.
 
Oh! I forgot about those models, and those are all geared steam engines like I talked about!
How about this, James Boydell (pat. in 1846 and 1854) and his Steam tractor that was used against the Russians in Crimea!
.
IMA_V8_I6_Nov_1953_01b-3.jpg

More Tracked Steam vehicles before 1900 here

 

amphibulous

Banned
Oh! I forgot about those models, and those are all geared steam engines like I talked about!
How about this, James Boydell (pat. in 1846 and 1854) and his Steam tractor that was used against the Russians in Crimea!
.
IMA_V8_I6_Nov_1953_01b-3.jpg

More Tracked Steam vehicles before 1900 here


Behind the lines is one thing, but given armour and used as a tank... it's hard to design a better artillery target, isn't it?
 

frlmerrin

Banned
I think that a 19th Century steam tank is a big ask and probably un-realistic. A 21st century steam tank with fluidised bed boilers and a steam turbine is achievable and would be useful in reducing the logistics chain associated with today’s large, fuel hungry MBTs but why bother? You can improve the logistics chain for a small fraction of the cost of the steam tank development programme.

However, a self-propelled gun is probably a realistic aspiration sometime between 1855 and 1866 or 1884 if you want to drive it with a turbine.

Texian has already noted the existence of the Boydell steam traction engines and their use by the British in the Crimean war. What he does not seem to have mentioned is that they were used as artillery tractors (among other duties). It is also worth noting that Boydell invented the endless rail which can be seen in Texian’s photo. It refers to the blocks of wood on hinges attached to the wheels and enabled the traction engine to work in very muddy ground such as the Lincolnshire fens. Thus it had a fair degree of off-road capability but you wouldn’t want to take it up a steep hill. Incidentally I am almost certain that the photos does not show an 1850s Boydell but a later one.

Let’s try for a steam self-propelled gun contemporary with the ACW as the OP hints at wanting.

Because of the metallurgy needed for HP boilers it is going to have to be British in that period. No one else can roll plate thick enough for a good engine.

The concept of caterpillar tracks was around by the 1830s in Britain and Russia at least but nobody actually built anything until the 1870s or 1880s. Then nobody seems to have got the things working properly for another 20 or 30 years. Thus whatever gets built before 1880 is going to have a Boydell endless rail instead.

They need to do away with the three wheel Boydell design and go for a four wheeled chassis. You probably need rear steering wheels to deal with the weight distribution (see below).

You want a scotch marine boiler rather than a Lancashire as it will be better on rough ground but I don’t think it matters that much, both types are available in the 1860s. It does need to be a short fat boiler however to conserve space and as high pressure as possible. You also need some modification to the furnace it needs to be vertical feed to protect the fire man from the hot coals when going over rough ground. Put the boiler at the back and fireman/furnace in the centre.

You could probably have a double expansion engine, 1865 is a little early for a triple expansion engine. Realistically a simpler engine is more likely but I like the idea of a double expansion engine.

Plate the sides with large 5/8” plate which the British were using on some of their gunboats in the mid1860s to protect the crew from rifle-musket fire.

Add a 40 lb Armstrong breach loading rifle at the front on a swivel mount. This gun will outrange many of the guns that can threaten the vehicle which is why it might be a fair self-propelled gun but a poor tank.

Put as much armour on the front as you can say 1” or 2” which offsets the weight of the boiler and a small 5/8” shield that moves with the gun to protect the crew.

Put a fire wall with speaking tube between fireman’s station and gunners.

Actually you might want to put the commander’s station on top of the boiler behind a 5/8” screen so he has a good view. If so he will need a speaking tube too.

Add a small number of ammunition lockers to the front compartment a maximum of 20 rounds say and pull an ammunition limber behind.

The above self-propelled gun design is credible and achievable but would be an absolute nightmare to operate until the design had matured, a bit like a WWI tank. I note some of the ‘training tanks’ used on the Western Front did not even have 5/8” armour although it was better metal than was available in 1860.

If you want anyone other than the British to build this thing they either have to buy the parts from the British or they have to wait 5-10 years or so for their metallurgy to mature by 1870 Bessemer steel is widely available although not yet plentiful everywhere.

 
Top