The Confederates deploy self-propelled torpedoes in 1863

[robertp6165]

The original Whitehead torpedo was invented in 1866 and perfected in 1868...just three years after the end of the Civil War. The torpedo used compressed air as the means of running a small reciprocating engine, which propelled the torpedo through the water, technology which would have been available during the Civil War.

Lets assume that some un-named genius at the Confederate Torpedo Bureau...which, in OTL, produced naval mines, land mines, and spar torpedos for the navy...comes up with the idea for something akin to a Whitehead torpedo, say in late 1862. He is able to produce it by mid-1863, just in time to be married up with the C.S.S. DAVID.

The DAVID is a cigar-shaped torpedo boat, propelled by a steam engine using smokeless, anthracite coal. It is almost invisible in the water. A contraption to carry one torpedo on either side of the boat is devised, and the DAVID fires both of these from a range of 500 yards against the U.S.S. NEW IRONSIDES in Charleston harbor on the night of October 5, 1863. One torpedo misses, but the other strikes amidships, sinking the Union vessel, which goes down with all hands. The Union ship never detects the approach of the DAVID and her sinking is a mystery.

The Confederates, overjoyed by the result, hurriedly construct several more DAVID class boats and torpedoes for them. Squadrons of them are posted at Charleston, South Carolina; Mobile, Alabama; and Wilmington, North Carolina.

On the night of February 17, 1864, a massed attack by ten of these boats is made on the Charleston blockading squadron. Almost all of the Union blockaders are sunk, and the remainder flee for the safety of their base at Beaufort, South Carolina. One of the escaped blockaders brings back a report of almost invisible Confederate boats firing "infernal weapons," but these reports are incomprehensible to the Union naval command. The next day, the Confederate government declares the blockade of Charleston is officially lifted. Although the blockade will be restored within a few weeks, the blockaders will patrol at a much greater distance outside Charleston harbor, making it much less effective.

On August 4, 1864, a surprise night attack by the Mobile Squadron on the Union fleet preparing to attack Mobile Bay sinks two Monitors, the Union flagship, HARTFORD, and two other Union steam sloops. Admiral Farragut insists on being the last man off his ship, and drowns. The attack throws the Union fleet into disarray, and the attack on Mobile is called off.

The next night, an attack by the Wilmington Squadron sinks three Union blockaders, but the rest, alerted by the first explosion, get steam up and escape. They return the next day and the Wilmington blockade is not lifted, but like the blockade at Charleston, is much less effective because they patrol at a greater distance away out of fear of the Confederate "infernal weapons."

So, how might these events have affected the war? Would Mobile and Wilmington have been taken before the end of the war? Can the Union develop effective countermeasures? How does it affect naval development in the postwar period?

 

[Agrippa]

The best countermeasures are the deployment of small Union vessels to act as screening units at night - "torpedo-boat destroyers" not much larger than the David herself, just enough for a few men and light artillery piece. I wouldn't expect these ships to actually sink anything, but rather they would get the warning out and let the blockaders slip their anchors and get underway. Given the exteme limitations of the early Whiteheads (particularly the first model), that should be enough to preserve the fleet in the face of an attack.

The post-war USN would be interesting. Historically, the navy did look at the torpedo but went almost exclusively down the path of the spar torpedo, a dead end technology. Here, we can expect the navy to be full-fledged supporters of the mobile torpedo and the torpedo boat.

 

[David S Poepoe]

Too many drownings. Unless the ship completely explodes wooden ships sink pretty slowly. Loss with all hands is unlikely if not at high sea.

I also get the feeling that the number of mobile or locomotive torpedoes will be fairly limited, maybe produced only in the couple dozens. However, once they are used in battle I doubt the Confederacy will remain quiet about it. They will be shifted about to blockaded ports and used on anyship that get a good head of steam up. The Union may adopt a blockade at a distance, which forces the Confederate to adapt, tho exactly how successful is questionable.

Frankly the way Confederate newspapers reported practically everything I doubt there will be much surprise in the end.

 

[1940LaSalle]

One little flaw in this whole scenario: the use of a compressed air motor presupposes the existence of a machine tool industry to make both the motors and the compressors. In the Confederacy? I don't think so. On the other hand-for what little this might be worth, considering the Confederate Navy was minimal-I could see this as a Union weapon, since the necessary industrial know-how did exist in the north then.

 

[robertp6165]

One little flaw in this whole scenario: the use of a compressed air motor presupposes the existence of a machine tool industry to make both the motors and the compressors. In the Confederacy? I don't think so.

We tend to look at such things, with our modern eyes, and say they are impossible. But necessity is the mother of invention, and the Confederates managed some relatively complicated engineering at times when it was required. The early steam engines, one might remember, were invented without the existence of a machine tool industry, and the type of engineering we are talking about here is no more complicated (and indeed, probably less so) than that. Would the torpedoes be as efficient as they would if their motors and compressors were made via a machine tool industry? No. But they don't have to be. All they have to do is work.

On the other hand-for what little this might be worth, considering the Confederate Navy was minimal-I could see this as a Union weapon, since the necessary industrial know-how did exist in the north then.

The Union also has no real need for the weapon to spur it's development.

 

[1940LaSalle]

We tend to look at such things, with our modern eyes, and say they are impossible. But necessity is the mother of invention, and the Confederates managed some relatively complicated engineering at times when it was required. The early steam engines, one might remember, were invented without the existence of a machine tool industry, and the type of engineering we are talking about here is no more complicated (and indeed, probably less so) than that. Would the torpedoes be as efficient as they would if their motors and compressors were made via a machine tool industry? No. But they don't have to be. All they have to do is work.



The Union also has no real need for the weapon to spur it's development.

And to counter both of the above points, might I point out that early steam engines were all one of a kind/prototypes; i.e., there were no interchangeable parts, and one or two men at a bench could do the necessary filing, milling, etc., to make them work. You can't afford to do that with weapons, especially in wartime; for that, you need mass production, which in turn means interchangeable parts, a standardized design, and a machine tool industry. The Confederacy was grossly deficient in all three, and therefore would not have been able to produce self-propelled torpedos on a scale sufficiently massive to inflict significant damage.

OK, they might have been able to make a handful-say, a dozen or so-but they would have been very labor-intensive, and not really articles of mass production given that likely there would have been a lot of hand-finishing and fitting. Now you have essentially a dozen items one step above prototype grade, but they're all untested (there's another advantage of mass production: it affords practical testing and R&D), so how well they work-or whether they work at all-is a complete crapshoot every time.

The only latter-day instance I can think of where prototype weapons worked significantly: Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And even then the parts required had an incredible support structure in US industry and government.

 

[Dean_the_Young]

The only latter-day instance I can think of where prototype weapons worked significantly: Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And even then the parts required had an incredible support structure in US industry and government.

Those two were also tested before hand in the Trinity Test, and incorporated very well understood and practiced concepts. (Barometer, aerial detonation, redundancies and safety features, etc.)

 

[MerryPrankster]

One little flaw in this whole scenario: the use of a compressed air motor presupposes the existence of a machine tool industry to make both the motors and the compressors. In the Confederacy? I don't think so. On the other hand-for what little this might be worth, considering the Confederate Navy was minimal-I could see this as a Union weapon, since the necessary industrial know-how did exist in the north then.

There were industrial centers in the South, albeit not as many as in the North.

Perhaps the South adopts the weapon first, but the North gets hold of the design or captures some torpedos intact and begins mass-producing the weapons.

 

[1940LaSalle]

There were industrial centers in the South, albeit not as many as in the North.

Apart from the Tredegar Iron Works, which ones are you thinking of? I doubt they were much more than glorified cottage industries. True, Atlanta had its railroad shops, but they weren't intended for weapons production-and besides, the Confederates needed to keep their railroads running.

Perhaps the South adopts the weapon first, but the North gets hold of the design or captures some torpedos intact and begins mass-producing the weapons.

Maybe they could develop a couple of crude prototype weapons that (likely as not) turned out to be duds, inflicting nothing more on Union ships than a heavy "thud" upon impact. Then I'd agree: it would take a few smart machinists/ordnance experts to turn the tables, and what there was of the Confederate navy would soon be reefs.

Oh, two other things:

1) The Confederacy was short of raw materials needed for industrial mass production while you're at it. Likely a compressed air motor (especially in the 1860s) would have been built of brass or possibly bronze. The Confederacy had minimal significant deposits of non-ferrous metals (apart from some minor gold deposits in North Carolina and Georgia), unlike the Union, which could draw on the copper veins of Michigan's Upper Peninsula.

2) The necessary machining skills were largely absent from the Confederacy. Consider this: where were virtually all the clocks made in the US at the time? Why, places like Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania (especially around Lancaster). And that equals the existence of a machine tool industry plus skills in working brass/bronze.

I maintain that if self-propelled torpedos were to have come about in the Civil War, the Union had everything it needed--and the Confederacy didn't.

 

[Douglas]

I think it's more than a little handy for New Ironsides to be the first ship sunk.

Really, the first time a locomotive torpedo sank a warship was in the 1890s, and that was one sitting in port, completely surprised.

 

[MerryPrankster]

I maintain that if self-propelled torpedos were to have come about in the Civil War, the Union had everything it needed--and the Confederacy didn't.

Did they have a Torpedo Board thinking of things like this around the clock?

 

[MerryPrankster]

Maybe they could develop a couple of crude prototype weapons that (likely as not) turned out to be duds, inflicting nothing more on Union ships than a heavy "thud" upon impact. Then I'd agree: it would take a few smart machinists/ordnance experts to turn the tables, and what there was of the Confederate navy would soon be reefs.

The machinists wouldn't know about them in the first place if they failed.

 

[robertp6165]

And to counter both of the above points, might I point out that early steam engines were all one of a kind/prototypes; i.e., there were no interchangeable parts, and one or two men at a bench could do the necessary filing, milling, etc., to make them work. You can't afford to do that with weapons, especially in wartime; for that, you need mass production, which in turn means interchangeable parts, a standardized design, and a machine tool industry.

Ummm, just how do you think they made weapons in quantity before the invention of interchangeable parts? We are not talking about something that has to be manufactured in huge quantities for this scenario to work. I am talking about three squadrons of ten torpedo boats, each capable of carrying a maximum of 2 torpedoes each. So to launch the attacks mentioned in the scenario, you need 60 torpedoes, maximum. Even if all the parts have to be hand made, like guns were before interchangeable parts were developed, it is not impossible.

OK, they might have been able to make a handful-say, a dozen or so-but they would have been very labor-intensive, and not really articles of mass production given that likely there would have been a lot of hand-finishing and fitting. Now you have essentially a dozen items one step above prototype grade, but they're all untested (there's another advantage of mass production: it affords practical testing and R&D), so how well they work-or whether they work at all-is a complete crapshoot every time.

Even if they have a fifty percent failure rate, which is unlikely, half of 60 torpedoes is 30 sunk Union ships. Even if they only make half that amount of torpedoes, and half fail, we are talking 15 sunken Union warships. That would still be the worst naval disaster the Union suffered during the entire war.

The only latter-day instance I can think of where prototype weapons worked significantly: Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And even then the parts required had an incredible support structure in US industry and government.

We are not talking incredibly high technology here. All of the constituents in the mix had been around for literally thousands of years...its just that nobody had thought to run a reciprocating engine off of compressed air before.

 

[robertp6165]

Maybe they could develop a couple of crude prototype weapons that (likely as not) turned out to be duds, inflicting nothing more on Union ships than a heavy "thud" upon impact.

The Confederacy was quite good at making fuses and explosives. If it hits, it won't just "thud." It will go BOOM!

 

[robertp6165]

I maintain that if self-propelled torpedos were to have come about in the Civil War, the Union had everything it needed--and the Confederacy didn't.

The Confederacy would undoubtedly have had a far more difficult time of doing it. But it was not beyond their capability.

 

[MerryPrankster]

By 1940LaSalle's standards, it was the North, not the South, that should have deployed submarines.

 

[1940LaSalle]

The Confederacy was quite good at making fuses and explosives. If it hits, it won't just "thud." It will go BOOM!

The key phrase is in bold: any torpedo would necessarily have to be ballistic; i.e., aim it, let 'er rip and hope for the best. Stray currents could send such a weapon wildly off course; a floating log could intercept it; you name it and it could go wrong. The likelihood of success is significantly less than 0.5.

OK, I'll concede that maybe the Confederacy could have pulled off a handful of such weapons, but as I said before, they'd be a step above one-of-a-kind prototypes, and it would commandeer skills and resources that might have been better used elsewhere to be used on a gamble.

Prankster: by pure industrial capabilities, you're right. However, the Confederacy tried their one-of-a-kind Hunley out of desperation. On the other hand, the Union had no need to try measures that desperate.