Battle Of Hampton Roads: A Revolution In Military Affairs

Major Alan J. Deogracias II

• Publisher: Golden Springs Publishing
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781782896050
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: American Civil War History
• Index: History

This thesis examines the Battle of Hampton Roads, 8 and 9 March 1862, the first battle of ironclads, to determine if it was a Revolution in Military Affairs. This study is an analysis of naval developments prior to March 1862, the battle, and the impact the battle had on the U.S. Navy and the Royal Navy from 1862 to 1871. The battle signaled the end of the wooden warship era when the CSS Virginia destroyed two wooden warships on 8 March 1862. The USS Monitor influenced a change in naval design, which led the U.S. Navy and the Royal Navy to build turreted warships, which culminated in the launching of the first modern battleship in 1871. The transformation from sailing and steam ships with broadside armament to steam-powered turret ships led to a reduction in the size of the crews and the acceptance of engineers into the naval community. The battle led both navies to assign ironclads to their squadrons to counter ironclads of hostile nations. The battle influenced the development of tactics for fighting ironclads including ramming and coastal warfare. The Battle of Hampton Roads was a Revolution in Military Affairs and the onset of modern naval warfare.

CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION

The Battle of Hampton Roads is the most famous naval battle in history of the United States Civil War. On 8 March 1862 the Confederate ironclad ram, CSS Virginia destroyed two wooden battleships, which signified the end of the wooden warship era. The next day a turreted ironclad ship, USS Monitor fought the Virginia to a draw proclaiming the only way to stop an ironclad was with another ironclad. Winston Churchill states in his book The Great Democracies, “The Merrimac [Virginia] had made the naval revolution, but the Monitor one day later was a whole lap ahead of her.”{1} The battle symbolized a major change in naval design, organization, and tactics and had a great impact on the navies of the world.

This thesis seeks to determine if the battle of Hampton Roads was a Revolution in Military Affairs. The central question is whether the Battle of Hampton Roads was truly a Revolution in Military Affairs or merely an evolution of modern naval warfare? Subordinate questions that are related are what is the definition of a Revolution in Military Affairs? Second, what was the impact of the battle on naval organization? Third, what was the impact on naval shipbuilding? Lastly, what was the impact of the battle on naval tactics? To answer these questions this study will examine what impact the battle had on the United States Navy and the British Royal Navy from 1862 to 1871.

The thesis will be divided into five areas. First, it will define a Revolution in Military Affairs and discuss naval developments prior to the Battle of Hampton Roads. Second, this study will provide a general description of the CSS Virginia, the USS Monitor, and discuss the Battle of Hampton Roads. Third, it will examine the United States Navy prior to the battle and then show what changes were made to fleet organization, ship construction, and tactics after the battle from 1862-1871. Fourth, it will discuss the British Royal Navy prior to the Battle of Hampton Roads and what changes were implemented after the battle. Lastly, this thesis will summarize the findings from the previous chapters, draw conclusions, and determine if the Battle of Hampton Roads and its famous warships were a Revolution in Military Affairs or an evolution of a naval warfare.

The first step in determining if the Battle of Hampton Roads was in fact revolutionary is to understand what a Revolution in Military Affairs is. A Revolution in Military Affairs as defined by the United States Department of Defense, Office of Net Assessment is:

“Military revolutions are major discontinuities in military affairs. They are brought about by changes in military relevant technologies, concepts of operation, methods of organization, and/or resources available, and are often associated with broader political, social, economic, and scientific revolutions. These periods of discontinuous change have historically advantaged the strategic/operational offense, and have provided a powerful impetus for change in the international system. They occur relatively abruptly—most typically over two-to-three decades. They render obsolete or subordinate existing means for conducting war”.{2}

Prior to the Battle of Hampton Roads there were several Revolutions in Military Affairs that are generally agreed upon by military historians: the gunpowder/artillery revolution 1560-1660, social revolution epitomized by the French levee en masse in 1793, and the steam engine/railroad/telegraph revolution of the 1800s, subordinate parts of the greater industrial revolution. All of these Revolutions in Military Affairs brought about major changes in warfare. This thesis will determine if the Battle of Hampton Roads, and the ironclad warships involved meet the criteria of a Revolution in Military Affairs or was just another technological evolution in a larger naval warfare revolution that occurred over the late nineteenth century.

In order to determine the impact the Battle of Hampton Roads had on naval warfare it is important to understand the naval developments that had occurred prior to the historic battle. The battle was the first battle of ironclad ships but not the battle of the first ironclads, as is often erroneously taught in American History. In fact, both France and Great Britain possessed ironclad ships prior to the battle. To better understand the significance of Hampton Roads requires a review of the naval innovations developed between 1815 to 1871. The fielding of the steam engine, shell gun, screw propeller, iron-hull, and armor plate set the stage for the Battle of Hampton Roads and the impact it had on naval development in its aftermath.

Most naval historians consider the steam engine the greatest revolution in naval warfare. It changed naval warfare as it negated the importance of the wind for ships in battle. Equally important it led to a change in naval logistics, as ships became dependent on coaling stations and engineers to operate. The United States invented the first steam driven warship in 1814, Robert Fulton's USS Demologos. She was a catamaran hull, powered by a steam engine that turned a central mounted water wheel and was fully rigged for sail. She had a speed of six knots under steam and was armed with twenty 24-pound cannons. The ship was not completed before the end of the War of 1812, but tests showed that her ability to out maneuver sailing vessels and her powerful armament would enable her to easily defeat the British sailing frigates she was designed to engage. After the war, the Demologos or Fulton was assigned as a receiving ship in Brooklyn Navy Yard until a mysterious explosion in 1829 destroyed her.{3}

The United States Navy did not develop another steam driven ship until 1836. The Secretary of the Navy and other senior leaders were reluctant to adopt steam, despite the fact that U.S. commercial shipping had embraced the concept and there were hundreds of merchant steamers in American waters. Their reluctance was due in part to the unreliability of steam engines at the time and the inability of ships to carry enough coal for long voyages.

In 1836 the U.S. Navy built its second steam warship the USS Fulton II. She was a side paddle wheel steamship and had a top speed of fifteen knots under steam. The Fulton II performance in test trails convinced the U.S. Navy of the merits of steam propulsion and several paddlewheel ships were ordered for construction. During the 1840s the U.S. Navy built two ocean going paddlewheel frigates, the USS Missouri and the USS Mississippi. These frigates were large vessels that were used to protect U.S. merchant ships overseas. These vessels were extremely large, over 220 feet long, and were armed with two 10-inch guns and 8-inch guns. Other paddlewheel warships were built and served effectively in various roles in both the Mexican War and the Civil War but the paddlewheel design was viewed dead end in naval design. The side paddlewheel, which was the preferred configuration for sea-going ships, limited the amount of guns that could be mounted on the broadsides and it was vulnerable to enemy fire. Additionally, the machinery cluttered the deck, restricted the fields of fire, and slowed the ship when under sail. The transition to the screw propeller in the 1840s quickly led to its demise. The U.S. Navy built its last paddlewheel warship in 1863.{4}

While the U.S. Navy invented the steam engine and produced only a few steam-powered ships, the strategy of the Royal Navy from 1815 to 1871 was to not invent new naval technology and design, but to improve on the inventions of others. This period involved no major combat for the Royal Navy and the naval policy was to have enough powerful ships to deter war. Seven years after the United States Navy launched USS Demologos, the Royal Navy commissioned HMS Comet, a steam tugboat in 1821. She was a side paddlewheel ship, had a top speed of five knots and an armament of four 9-pound cannons.{5} The Admiralty was skeptical that steam propulsion could be used for warships and limited its use to a combat support role, because of the inefficiency of the engines and the large amount of coal they consumed.

“The Board deem it unnecessary to enter at present into consideration of the question as to how far the power of the steam engine may be applicable to the purposes of navigation: but . . . it would be attended with material advantages to his Majesty’s service, if it could be used for the purpose of towing ships of war out of harbor.”{6}

The Royal Navy, because of its worldwide commitments, maintained a sailing battlefleet from 1815 to 1850 while experimenting and testing to improve steam propulsion. The first major development of these experiments was the use of the paddlewheel.

Great Britain’s paddlewheel program was fueled by its rivalry with France and fears of cross Channel invasions by a French force ferried by paddlewheel steamers. From 1830 until 1852 the Royal Navy built paddlewheel steamers to maintain its advantage over the French Navy. The Royal Navy, for the most part, viewed paddlewheels as a transitional form of propulsion, and regulated its use to tug boats and mail carriers, though some warships were built. The limitations to the paddlewheel were that it was vulnerable to cannon fire, it limited the amount of weapons along the broadsides, and reduced the speed of the ship when under sail.

Therefore, they were restricted to limited operations and did not serve in the battlefleet. Used mostly in a support role, paddlewheel ships saw service during the Crimean War, 1854 to 1856, employed to bombard shore batteries and to move sailing ships of the line. The Royal Navy built over fifty paddlewheel ships with the last one commissioned in 1852. Despite its limitations, the paddlewheel served well and proved the tactical value of a ship that could operate independent of the wind. They also foretold the end of the pure sailing ship as the paddlewheels were often used to tow sailing ships into combat. Though paddlewheel ships were rendered obsolete by the invention of the screw propeller, they continued to serve the United States Navy and the Royal Navy into the early twentieth century in various support roles.{7}

In 1836 two inventors living in England, John Ericsson and Francis Petit Smith invented the first successful screw propellers without knowledge of each other’s work. Smith patented his invention in England, but it was Ericsson who conducted a successful demonstration of this new method of propulsion. The screw propeller, because of its location in the stern and under the waterline, solved the problems of the paddlewheel ships. The broadsides were no longer obstructed, so more cannons could be added to the armament and the propeller and the engine were protected from enemy fire because they were below the waterline. Additionally, the screw could be disconnected and raised when the ship was under sail, which eliminated the drag of the immovable paddlewheels. This innovation was the most important feature, since sail was still the primary means of propulsion in the 1840s.

In April 1837 Ericsson’s steamship the Francis B. Ogden, towed the Admiralty’s barge down the Thames River at a speed of ten knots. The trip was flawless, but the Admiralty thought a ship could not be easily steered if the propulsion was in the stern and deemed the test a failure. Captain John Stockton, United States Navy, impressed with the experiment convinced Ericsson to immigrate to the United States were his work would be appreciated. In 1843 Ericsson and Stockton built the first steam screw propelled warship, USS Princeton.{8}

The Princeton was a sleek ship 164 feet long, thirty feet wide, fully rigged for sail and her top speed under steam was thirteen knots. She was the fastest steam ship in the world at that time. She was also the most modern ship of her time and had several new innovations to include blowers to force a draft in the furnace of her engines, engines that burned smokeless coal, telescopic smoke pipes, and two large wrought iron cannons, named the Peacemaker and the Oregon, that fired 225-pound cannon balls. Unfortunately, on a voyage in 1844 one of her cannons exploded during an exhibition and killed the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Navy, and several bystanders.{9} Captain Stockton unjustly blamed Ericsson for the mishap, which soured relations between the inventor and the Navy. In 1861, the Navy and Ericsson's mutual distrust for each other would surface again during the submission of Ericsson's design for an ironclad ship.

Despite the accident, the Princeton was a success and served with distinction during the Mexican War, thus prompting the Navy to build more steam warships with screw propulsion. The Navy built several new wooden battleships in the 1850s to include the large steam frigates USS Merrimac, USS Minnesota, and USS Roanoke. Built in the American tradition of the USS Constitution, these warships were of greater size and armament than frigates of other navies. The Merrimac was 256 feet long, fifty-one feet wide, her armament included twenty-four 9-inch cannons, with fourteen 8-inch and two 10-inch cannons mounted along her broadsides. While impressive, it was observed that the Merrimac was only a large sailing ship and her engines were underpowered to drive her at combat speed for any length of time. This problem would continue to plague this class of ships, which is why the Merrimac was in Gosport Navy Yard having her engines upgraded when the Confederates seiz...

Table of contents

• Title page
• TABLE OF CONTENTS
• ABSTRACT
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
• CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
• CHAPTER 2 - THE BATTLE OF HAMPTON ROADS
• CHAPTER 3 - IMPACT ON THE UNITED STATES NAVY, 1862-1871
• CHAPTER 4 - IMPACT ON THE ROYAL NAVY, 1862-1871
• CHAPTER 5 - CONCLUSION
• SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY