Army mortars v screw galleys

On the Hedgehog it was a ASW weapon designed to be launched ahead of the ASW escort so that the escort could hold the submarine it was hunting in its SONAR instead of running over the target and dropping depth charges and loosing contact with the target. It fired a circular pattern (40 yds across) of fast sinking contact depth bombs about 200 yds ahead of the ship. FYI Variants of it are currently used by some navies.

Silverwall wrote:

JeffEngel wrote:Rams, by contrast, aren't going to be all that effective against an armored, steam-powered ship on anything short of another armored, steam-powered ship. A ram on a screw galley is going to have a challenge maneuvering to ram an armored steamship; it's going to suffer egregious damage in the attempt; and it may just make a lot of noise and rocking with the force of its impact if there's any below the water line armoring or internal compartmentalization. The armored steamship hitting the screw galley will break it in half and move on to the next.

Historical Steam ramming happened in exactly two scenarios:

One: you are fighting in extremely narrow waters I.e. the Mississippi river where there is no room to dodge.

Two: the ram-ee has lost way because of other battle damage and you can actually line up on them successfully C.F. the battle of Lissa

There are no successful intentional rammings of an underway ship in battle on the open ocean that I am aware of. There are several examples of fleets ramming their fellows in maneuvers CF the Victoria but these are accidents cause by inattention.

There are also a few cases of Subs being rammed by surface ships but that is more due to the total unmanouverability of the surfaced sub compared to the destroyer/cruiser/HMS Dreadnought doing the ramming. In many cases they had shock damage from depth charges as well.

I do not believe that open ocean ramming is a viable tactic in the steam age.

I too don't think it's got much chance in case of steamship vs. steamship, but that's not the issue here. It's steamship vs. screw galley. The armored steamship is far more heavily built, so if the collision can be generated, it's going to be in vastly better shape.

That still leaves the trickier problem of making it happen, and I'm not going to suppose that's an easy trick. But screw galleys are meant for fighting in relatively confined waters, so the nature of their operations biases things in favoring of ramming to start. Certainly after a while maneuvering under pedalmen (they're not rowers - what else are we calling them?) the screw galley will be much slower - it may not be long at all. And steamships with two propellers they can rotate either way will be fiendishly able to turn compared to a single screw screw galley. The screw galleys' forward facing armor and weapons mean they've got to maneuver to keep that aspect facing the enemy, so a pair of armored steamships can maneuver to get at least one closer to the galleys. (Although they're also likely to be able to get shots against something other than the armor before collision too, at which point the rams won't even be an issue.)

Maybe the real fix for screw galleys is just maneuver with more than one vessel - a dogfight with enough on a side is going to mean being able to bite the tender parts, and these armored steamships can start biting from a distance.

The correct solution to screw galleys is maneuver and long range fire, Tire the crew out and pound them to a pulp outside of their own range. The KH V11s are perfect for this but any steam powered ship will run rings round them, crew endurance will be low so if they can avoid the initial rush they are toast.

In Real Life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympias_(trireme) an amateur crew was able to sustain about 5 knots in a trireme and there is reason to believe professional oarsmen could get to 12k in a burst but even this impressive performance is laughable against even the slowest steamer. Realistically the screw galleys will have maybe 30 mins before the crews are spent because the greater mechanical advantage of the screw over the trireme oars is greatly offset by the greater mass or arms and armour. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galley#Propulsion for more especially the section titled "Boarding Prevails" for why ramming fell out of favour in Galley actions.

JeffEngel wrote:That still leaves the trickier problem of making it happen, and I'm not going to suppose that's an easy trick. But screw galleys are meant for fighting in relatively confined waters, so the nature of their operations biases things in favoring of ramming to start.

A think the Spar Torpedo armament of the Screw Galleys might argue against ramming tactics. Getting your keel broken as you run down a screw galley that's trying to torpedo you is probably a net loss in the attrition balance; Losing a steel steamship is a bigger loss that a wooden galley with iron plating on the bow.

Weird Harold wrote:

JeffEngel wrote:That still leaves the trickier problem of making it happen, and I'm not going to suppose that's an easy trick. But screw galleys are meant for fighting in relatively confined waters, so the nature of their operations biases things in favoring of ramming to start.

A think the Spar Torpedo armament of the Screw Galleys might argue against ramming tactics. Getting your keel broken as you run down a screw galley that's trying to torpedo you is probably a net loss in the attrition balance; Losing a steel steamship is a bigger loss that a wooden galley with iron plating on the bow.

Definite point there. Still, how much trouble is a ram, anyway? If it'd be a relatively light, cheap, minimal difficulty all around addition - and it's an honest question, I'm not trying to make a disguised claim there - it'd at least mean that getting close isn't something that's going to go all in favor of the screw galley and the spar torpedo, particularly if the armored steamship can maneuver better and avoid making that approach toward the screw galley's forward portion.

The real point would still be maneuver to bring guns to bear against the galley's side; the ram would just be playing the role, in this case, of an additional threat that may make maneuvering to lay the spar torpedo in more difficult and less safe.

One cost of the ram that has to be taken very seriously though is the likelihood of friendly impalement. They did enough of that in Earth's steam age, although I'm sure some of those accidents would have occurred even without the ram extending the hull.

The contest between steam powered ironclads an screw galleys isn't going to be won by ramming, but by gunnery. The guns on the screw galleys didn't penetrate the armor on the Rotweiler, but the Rotweiler did penetrate the iron plating on the galleys, iirc. The guns on the Cities/Haarahlds will be much more powerful than a Rotweiler. The iron plating on those screw galleys won't hold up against the kind of pounding the steam ironclads can dish out.

Don

-

I'm thinking squid mortars/RBUs. With contact fuses and incendary warheads. Fire a pattern - you only need one hit from a high angle to disable/destroy a screw galley.

Navalize a Katusha launcher.

But, new hulls with armor and steam power. No rigging issues....

Montrose Toast wrote:I'm thinking squid mortars/RBUs. With contact fuses and incendary warheads. Fire a pattern - you only need one hit from a high angle to disable/destroy a screw galley.

Navalize a Katusha launcher.

But, new hulls with armor and steam power. No rigging issues....

By the time you get to the new hulls, the issue is mute. The guns on the Cities will simply blow away a screw galley. In fact, the Rottweiler's gunnery managed to penetrate the armor on the screw galleys. I would suspect that Dreadnaught would have won had she not had to cope the the other galleons of Roshil's fleet.

When I started this thread, I was shopping for a way for the older conventional galleons to counter The screw galleys. The subsequent discussion more or less demonstrated that the idea I presented won't work.

Don

-

Hi JeffEngel,

According to HFQ, Lt. Zhwaigair had dubbed them 'cranksmen', which certainly sounds more impressive than 'pedalmen'; which may be why RFC is the author of all this, NTM our hopes and dreams for the next fix in the series.

L

JeffEngel wrote:

Silverwall wrote:*quote="JeffEngel"*Rams, by contrast, aren't going to be all that effective against an armored, steam-powered ship on anything short of another armored, steam-powered ship. A ram on a screw galley is going to have a challenge maneuvering to ram an armored steamship; it's going to suffer egregious damage in the attempt; and it may just make a lot of noise and rocking with the force of its impact if there's any below the water line armoring or internal compartmentalization. The armored steamship hitting the screw galley will break it in half and move on to the next.*quote*

Historical Steam ramming happened in exactly two scenarios:

One: you are fighting in extremely narrow waters I.e. the Mississippi river where there is no room to dodge.

Two: the ram-ee has lost way because of other battle damage and you can actually line up on them successfully C.F. the battle of Lissa

There are no successful intentional rammings of an underway ship in battle on the open ocean that I am aware of. There are several examples of fleets ramming their fellows in maneuvers CF the Victoria but these are accidents cause by inattention.

There are also a few cases of Subs being rammed by surface ships but that is more due to the total unmanouverability of the surfaced sub compared to the destroyer/cruiser/HMS Dreadnought doing the ramming. In many cases they had shock damage from depth charges as well.

I do not believe that open ocean ramming is a viable tactic in the steam age.

I too don't think it's got much chance in case of steamship vs. steamship, but that's not the issue here. It's steamship vs. screw galley. The armored steamship is far more heavily built, so if the collision can be generated, it's going to be in vastly better shape.

That still leaves the trickier problem of making it happen, and I'm not going to suppose that's an easy trick. But screw galleys are meant for fighting in relatively confined waters, so the nature of their operations biases things in favoring of ramming to start. Certainly after a while maneuvering under pedalmen (they're not rowers - what else are we calling them?) the screw galley will be much slower - it may not be long at all. And steamships with two propellers they can rotate either way will be fiendishly able to turn compared to a single screw screw galley. The screw galleys' forward facing armor and weapons mean they've got to maneuver to keep that aspect facing the enemy, so a pair of armored steamships can maneuver to get at least one closer to the galleys. (Although they're also likely to be able to get shots against something other than the armor before collision too, at which point the rams won't even be an issue.)

Maybe the real fix for screw galleys is just maneuver with more than one vessel - a dogfight with enough on a side is going to mean being able to bite the tender parts, and these armored steamships can start biting from a distance.

Hi Don,

Isn't thread drift fascinating if not fun?

Regarding defending galleons at anchor; the screw galleys have a maximum speed of 8 knots for up to 40 minutes, a velocity of 11.7333 feet per second or some 255 seconds to cover the last 1000 yards to the ship although a target ~56-60 mils wide at 1000 yards ought to be easy to hit with its 8-10" gun, so shooting back may be moot.

There could be a COW 37mm type gun [1.5 lb shot] with a 5 round clip [RoF 90 RPM] as mounted on some WWI airplanes although 1-3 pounders seem far too light to be effective; ore a recoiless Davis gun in 1.57"/2lb, 2.45"/6lb, 3"/12lb sizes, the latter used by the USN for ASW in WWI, or a tube type rocket launcher with a couple of dedicated loaders firing from the ship's fighting tops.

At anchor, the sails are furled so they're not in the way, and in action fighting sail is out of the way of the lower 'fighting top, while the topmost has no such restrictions in the first place of course.

The Davis recoiless gun worked by firing a weight equal to the shell in the opposite direction made up of lead shot and grease, later it was redesigned so the steel case was ejected rearward as well as clearing the breach for the next round.

I suspect the upper fighting top could have 4 mounts for a pair of Davis guns or rocket tube launchers while the lower could have 6 or 8 mounts for 3-4.

Because the angle to the screw galley might be too acute, the shell might require a spike to keep it from ricocheting off the deck, even if that complicates loading.

L


[quote="n7axw"][quote="Montrose Toast"]I'm thinking squid mortars/RBUs. With contact fuses and incendary warheads. Fire a pattern - you only need one hit from a high angle to disable/destroy a screw galley.

Navalize a Katusha launcher.

But, new hulls with armor and steam power. No rigging issues....[/quote]

By the time you get to the new hulls, the issue is mute. The guns on the Cities will simply blow away a screw galley. In fact, the Rottweiler's gunnery managed to penetrate the armor on the screw galleys. I would suspect that Dreadnaught would have won had she not had to cope the the other galleons of Roshil's fleet.

When I started this thread, I was shopping for a way for the older conventional galleons to counter The screw galleys. The subsequent discussion more or less demonstrated that the idea I presented won't work.

Don

-[/quote]