Army mortars v screw galleys

I'm wondering if as a temporary expedient one could mount army mortars in galleons to lob shells over the top of the armored castles in the front of those screw galleys. I know that there would be the normal problem of aiming cannon at sea, but it would certainly give the screw galleys something new to worry about...

Don

-

n7axw wrote:I'm wondering if as a temporary expedient one could mount army mortars in galleons to lob shells over the top of the armored castles in the front of those screw galleys. I know that there would be the normal problem of aiming cannon at sea, but it would certainly give the screw galleys something new to worry about...

Don

-

A couple of issues. Rigging would interfere with firing mortars and the moving ship will make accuracy a much bigger problem than firing cannon from ships. Ketch rigged ships would mitigate the former with just two masts fore and aft. Charisian Galleons are have thee masts and the associated rigging just about everywhere above the deck.

Cannon fire can intersect a ship anywhere along its path. A mortar has to land at its target at the end of an arced trajectory. If it doesn't land on target, its a miss. Cannon fire doesn't have to hit a target at the end of its flight path, it simply needs to intersect its target anywhere along its flight path. Cannon can sustain a much higher degree of error and still hit its target. Given moving firing platforms and targets, mortars might be a waste of resources for ship to ship action.

n7axw wrote:I'm wondering if as a temporary expedient one could mount army mortars in galleons to lob shells over the top of the armored castles in the front of those screw galleys. I know that there would be the normal problem of aiming cannon at sea, but it would certainly give the screw galleys something new to worry about...

Don

-

While I am sure that it can be done, there would be only a few place where they could be mounted due to the standing rigging and sails. In addition mortars have a great deal of residual burning propellants coming out of the muzzle (especially with black powder) that are generally considered as bad stuff when you are on a bone dry wooden platform. (Fire is always a major concern on wooden ships and RFC mentioned this several times in this series starting in OAR.) It would be necessary to cover the deck and hull around them with some type of metal foil. Then you would still have the problem of sparks in the sails and rigging.

USMA74 wrote:

n7axw wrote:I'm wondering if as a temporary expedient one could mount army mortars in galleons to lob shells over the top of the armored castles in the front of those screw galleys. I know that there would be the normal problem of aiming cannon at sea, but it would certainly give the screw galleys something new to worry about...

Don

-

While I am sure that it can be done, there would be only a few place where they could be mounted due to the standing rigging and sails. In addition mortars have a great deal of residual burning propellants coming out of the muzzle (especially with black powder) that are generally considered as bad stuff when you are on a bone dry wooden platform. (Fire is always a major concern on wooden ships and RFC mentioned this several times in this series starting in OAR.) It would be necessary to cover the deck and hull around them with some type of metal foil. Then you would still have the problem of sparks in the sails and rigging.

Humm... You mount them in the bow in front of the rigging or in the stern... Doesn't seem to to be any insurmountable problems here...

Don

-

n7axw wrote:

USMA74 wrote:
While I am sure that it can be done, there would be only a few place where they could be mounted due to the standing rigging and sails. In addition mortars have a great deal of residual burning propellants coming out of the muzzle (especially with black powder) that are generally considered as bad stuff when you are on a bone dry wooden platform. (Fire is always a major concern on wooden ships and RFC mentioned this several times in this series starting in OAR.) It would be necessary to cover the deck and hull around them with some type of metal foil. Then you would still have the problem of sparks in the sails and rigging.

Humm... You mount them in the bow in front of the rigging or in the stern... Doesn't seem to to be any insurmountable problems here...

Don

-

Bow and stern have the most movement on board ship. That makes those places the least suitable for accuracy.

PeterZ wrote:A couple of issues. Rigging would interfere with firing mortars and the moving ship will make accuracy a much bigger problem than firing cannon from ships. Ketch rigged ships would mitigate the former with just two masts fore and aft. Charisian Galleons are have thee masts and the associated rigging just about everywhere above the deck.

Cannon fire can intersect a ship anywhere along its path. A mortar has to land at its target at the end of an arced trajectory. If it doesn't land on target, its a miss. Cannon fire doesn't have to hit a target at the end of its flight path, it simply needs to intersect its target anywhere along its flight path. Cannon can sustain a much higher degree of error and still hit its target. Given moving firing platforms and targets, mortars might be a waste of resources for ship to ship action.

Sails tend to be bundled up and out of the way for fighting normally, so danger to them from mortar fire and sparks may be less under the most common fighting conditions than they would be (e.g.) while under full sail.

And mortars aren't all that demanding in terms of space, ammunition, or manpower. If you're not going to have a use for one in a given action, leave it unmanned or take it below. (By the same token though, those mortars may not have a whole lot of kick; the "token" mortar may well do insufficient damage to a screw galley's unarmored topside even if it hits.) A ship may have some use for small mortars for indirect fire on weakly protected targets above the maximum elevation of their guns, or by marines going ashore that could do ship action work when there isn't shore action work to do. In that case, the mortar against the screw galley is less a specific, planned response than a shrug-hey-why-not thing.

Angle guns may be better for this, for the ships that have them. No worries about them not having the punch to do the work if they hit! And they're placed to be safe for the sails and rigging.

The getting a hit problems remain, of course.

JeffEngel wrote:

PeterZ wrote:A couple of issues. Rigging would interfere with firing mortars and the moving ship will make accuracy a much bigger problem than firing cannon from ships. Ketch rigged ships would mitigate the former with just two masts fore and aft. Charisian Galleons are have thee masts and the associated rigging just about everywhere above the deck.

Cannon fire can intersect a ship anywhere along its path. A mortar has to land at its target at the end of an arced trajectory. If it doesn't land on target, its a miss. Cannon fire doesn't have to hit a target at the end of its flight path, it simply needs to intersect its target anywhere along its flight path. Cannon can sustain a much higher degree of error and still hit its target. Given moving firing platforms and targets, mortars might be a waste of resources for ship to ship action.

Sails tend to be bundled up and out of the way for fighting normally, so danger to them from mortar fire and sparks may be less under the most common fighting conditions than they would be (e.g.) while under full sail.

And mortars aren't all that demanding in terms of space, ammunition, or manpower. If you're not going to have a use for one in a given action, leave it unmanned or take it below. (By the same token though, those mortars may not have a whole lot of kick; the "token" mortar may well do insufficient damage to a screw galley's unarmored topside even if it hits.) A ship may have some use for small mortars for indirect fire on weakly protected targets above the maximum elevation of their guns, or by marines going ashore that could do ship action work when there isn't shore action work to do. In that case, the mortar against the screw galley is less a specific, planned response than a shrug-hey-why-not thing.

Angle guns may be better for this, for the ships that have them. No worries about them not having the punch to do the work if they hit! And they're placed to be safe for the sails and rigging.

The getting a hit problems remain, of course.

Don't disagree that having one on board would be a good idea even if its primarily for the marines or for ship to shore action.

Actually, the aiming issue might not be as bad as you think.
Regular cannon have to get direct hits to do their thing. Imagine mortar shells with proimity timed fuses set to go off about 200 feet above the galley. Not only would you raise the dickens with personnel, you would also shed the rigging. And the shrapnel would spread out allowing for a bit of leeway with the aim.

There is always going to be a certain amount of artistry at aimimg any kind of cannon from shipboard at a moving target. It just doesn't seem to me that the difficulty level here should be much worse than an ordinary cannon once everything is factored in.

Don

-

n7axw wrote:Actually, the aiming issue might not be as bad as you think.
Regular cannon have to get direct hits to do their thing. Imagine mortar shells with proimity timed fuses set to go off about 200 feet above the galley. Not only would you raise the dickens with personnel, you would also shed the rigging. And the shrapnel would spread out allowing for a bit of leeway with the aim.

There is always going to be a certain amount of artistry at aimimg any kind of cannon from shipboard at a moving target. It just doesn't seem to me that the difficulty level here should be much worse than an ordinary cannon once everything is factored in.

Don

-

Sadly, this has me thinking about a hedgehog launcher - a WWII weapon which was essentially a few dozen mortars mounted together to create a pattern of destruction wherever they are aimed - the shipborne issues would be compounded - except for the accuracy bit, since a hedge hog is an aim-over-there-ish weapon.

Theemile wrote:

n7axw wrote:Actually, the aiming issue might not be as bad as you think.
Regular cannon have to get direct hits to do their thing. Imagine mortar shells with proimity timed fuses set to go off about 200 feet above the galley. Not only would you raise the dickens with personnel, you would also shed the rigging. And the shrapnel would spread out allowing for a bit of leeway with the aim.

There is always going to be a certain amount of artistry at aimimg any kind of cannon from shipboard at a moving target. It just doesn't seem to me that the difficulty level here should be much worse than an ordinary cannon once everything is factored in.

Don

-

Sadly, this has me thinking about a hedgehog launcher - a WWII weapon which was essentially a few dozen mortars mounted together to create a pattern of destruction wherever they are aimed - the shipborne issues would be compounded - except for the accuracy bit, since a hedge hog is an aim-over-there-ish weapon.

The hedgehog was used for depth charge distribution against a submarine that wasn't localized beyond over-there-ish - you got "accuracy" under those conditions just by hosing down an area with pain. Surface fighting wouldn't have that kind of need except in case of fighting in the dark or thick fog, but the sub could be put out of action or driven off by underwater detonations that may not do much good against a ship when they go off in air.

If the idea is just to rip up sails and rigging, you're in better shape. That said, I've got no idea how bad sheer concussion is on sails or rigging, or how well these charges are going to spread jagged bits of metal to rip them up.

If you don't mind ripping through ammo and you do want to get things done in a hurry, you could use something hedgehog-like - a cluster of mortars firing shells in a narrow fan. While the army can do very good things with mortar accuracy and well-timed fuses for air burst, a ship has to worry about the sea under it pitching it in ways that the army only needs to fear if it takes to fighting during earthquakes.

But in the spirit of varying the exercise some, rockets with timed fuses for air bursts may be another source of indirect fire. I don't think I'd care to try them on any ships with any sails or rigging though.