Semi OT. Today history was changed

[Lecivius]

Battle of Hampton Roads

[Orm]

[&:]

You lost me. Is it that this battle changed the course of history somehow?

[wegman58]

ORIGINAL: Orm

[&:]

You lost me. Is it that this battle changed the course of history somehow?

First battle between ironclad ships.

Bigger in the US (part of our Civil War) than the rest of the world I think.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: wegman58

ORIGINAL: Orm

[&:]

You lost me. Is it that this battle changed the course of history somehow?

First battle between ironclad ships.

Bigger in the US (part of our Civil War) than the rest of the world I think.

Thank you for the clarification. [:)]

It is a big deal here as well. Or big enough to be thought in our schools anyway. Or maybe was since I am not sure if it still is included.

My main confusion was because I do not think it changed history. Ironclads would have taken over anyway. The fleets were in a process of converting to ironclads and this battle might indeed have speeded up the process but it didn't change the process. And the battle didn't change the outcome of the civil war. In my humble opinion that is.

[geofflambert]

I think it was very big in much of the rest of the world.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhis ... s-spithead

[geofflambert]

The Monitor was not the only US ironclad in the area. So was the Galena. What was special about this day is that turret. That is a very big deal.

[geofflambert]

Here the Galena is after a battle elsewhere.

[geofflambert]

The end of the CSS Virginia.

[geofflambert]

Here is the Miantonomoh, with 15" guns!

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Battle itself was very irrelevant, but the leap advances in naval warfare coming as a result of the industrial revolution in naval warfare are seen for the 1st time in history: iron armored, steam propelled, heavy caliber armed ships.

[spence]

The objective of the CSS Merrimac was to break the Union blockade. In that it failed. Thus the battle was not irrelevant to the outcome of the American Civil War. As noted (or should have been) the Union landed an Army of 120000 men and marched on the Confederate capitol fairly shortly after the CSS Merrimac failed in its mission.

But with regards naval warfare and theories of naval warfare this was the first important battle that involved ships of iron propelled by steam and in the case of the Monitor, armed with large caliber guns in rotating turrets. The days of sail as the most important means of propulsion were OVER and the need for coaling stations to protect the far-flung mercantile "empires" of the various world powers of the time would ultimately solidify those "empires" into the colonial empires that would dominate political geography until WW2.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: spence

The objective of the CSS Merrimac was to break the Union blockade. In that it failed. Thus the battle was not irrelevant to the outcome of the American Civil War. As noted (or should have been) the Union landed an Army of 120000 men and marched on the Confederate capitol fairly shortly after the CSS Merrimac failed in its mission.

But with regards naval warfare and theories of naval warfare this was the first important battle that involved ships of iron propelled by steam and in the case of the Monitor, armed with large caliber guns in rotating turrets. The days of sail as the most important means of propulsion were OVER and the need for coaling stations to protect the far-flung mercantile "empires" of the various world powers of the time would ultimately solidify those "empires" into the colonial empires that would dominate political geography until WW2.

A niggling detail - the vessel fighting for the Confederacy was the CSS Virginia, built on the hull of the former SS Merrimac which had burned to the waterline. It is fair to say the vessel was more "Virginia" than "Merrimac" when it made its reappearance, so we should use the Confederate name for her.

[geofflambert]

The battle was also relevant because in a few days Norfolk fell, which might have been delayed considerably otherwise.

[Lecivius]

While there was no decisive winner in this battle, it changed history. All future orders for wooden warships were cancelled, with several left in the yards incomplete. Serious development assets were applied to armored ships (everything from cotton to iron). And the idea of broadsides vanished overnight in favor or movable guns, be it on a spinnable chassis or in turrets.

History was changed [;)]

[spence]

A niggling detail - the vessel fighting for the Confederacy was the CSS Virginia,

I suppose you're right about that but the "Yankee position" was that the CSA never had a legal existence so there never were any CSS anythings. I'm a Yankee.

Question 1) Was the USS Merrimac ever officially decommissioned in the US Navy prior to becoming that rebellious entity's vessel?

Question 2) Don't get the daily updates out here in the West on Quebec secession that I used to get when I worked at the border. What's going on with that these days?

[BBfanboy]

1. Regardless of legal status, a group of people big enough to call a nation built a weapon of war - a de facto instrument of a "state". They had their own names for their Regiments, so why not naval vessels?

2. There are still people in Quebec who feel their culture and language are under pressure (it is, but so is every other culture and language) and think that seceding will enable them to keep it. That would not happen - if anything the treatment from US and other trading partners would put more pressure on them to use English in their dealings. Their economy would also suffer, as would Canada's.

So they make noise and form political parties that want to complete the secession, but can never get quite enough support to do it. In recent years both the Bloc Quebequois (Federal party) and the Partie Quebequois (Provincial) have been in turmoil for leadership and economic platforms. I think most of the younger generation there has a bigger world view than "Quebec First".

[Zecke]

BAH¡..BAH..QUEBEC

The question is That France wanted the east coast of USA; since the beguining...

[Zecke]

and the British wanted the west coast of France since the beguining[:D]

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

While there was no decisive winner in this battle, it changed history. All future orders for wooden warships were cancelled, with several left in the yards incomplete. Serious development assets were applied to armored ships (everything from cotton to iron). And the idea of broadsides vanished overnight in favor or movable guns, be it on a spinnable chassis or in turrets.

History was changed [;)]

We have to disagree on this one. [:)]

[Lecivius]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

While there was no decisive winner in this battle, it changed history. All future orders for wooden warships were cancelled, with several left in the yards incomplete. Serious development assets were applied to armored ships (everything from cotton to iron). And the idea of broadsides vanished overnight in favor or movable guns, be it on a spinnable chassis or in turrets.

History was changed [;)]

We have to disagree on this one. [:)]

OK, always open to ideas. What do you disagree with?