"Chain Obstacles" Topic

I tried asking on the Ironclads Yahoo site, but haven't gotten a response. I know TMP will not let me down. I am working on some homebrew Ironclad rules and am starting to add obstacles to the game. My question is, what was done to break chains that confederates strung across harbors/rivers? Just simple force of ships pushing, mines, cutting? Any help/ideas would be appreciated.

Gert

I can't remember the source or the action but I want to say it was 1864 and somewhere in the eastern theatre. My recollection is that the union sent a "workers party" by flat bottom rafts into the confederate area to knock down the posting for the chains (not certain if that was chained to another boat or tree..I seem to recall the later). In the story, the union soldiers get discovered and have to run/paddle away.

I also recall from another book on the Missippi that the union avoided the chains as much as possible as they hung the vessel up.

Sorry I can't recall anything more. Hopefully, someone with far more knowledget will write you.

Erik

Thanks Erik,
I also think a chain was deployed at Charleston Harbor, but I can't find any info as to how the ships got through.

So, for now I have:
1. a workers party by boat to dismantle the chain. Probably would have to be done at night.

Anyone else have info?

Gert

New Orleans

link

Two forts, Jackson and St. Philip, nearly opposite each other, the former very strong and casemated, the two mounting in all two hundred and twenty-five guns, commanded the approach. In addition to these, a heavy chain had been stretched across the channel, buoyed upon schooners, and directly under the fire of the batteries, so that any vessels attempting to remove it could be sunk…

…The chain had been cut a few nights before, and the schooners that sustained it were trailing along the river bank….

I think it was parties of men in ships boats using axes and what not that cut the chain barrier.

Thanks for the link G-Dog

The chain/obstruction at Charleston was not broken. The navy planned to send workers in small boats to get it. However, ft Sumpter and Moultrie plus a number of torpedoes around the barrier made this plan suicidal at best.

So, is it safe to say that a ship could not force it's way through? The only option would be to send out a boat to deal with the obstruction.

I remember reading somewhere that they had trouble keeping the tide from breaking the chain(s) at Charleston. The implication was that they were more of a psychological than actual barrier.

"The implication was that they were more of a psychological than actual barrier."

I understand that to be the case as well. One must remember that all the powerful period toys we take for granted or possibly blow off as foolish were completely untested and misunderstood. Does it really matter if a obstruction actually works? Unlike gamers with nothing to lose beyond a few hours a naval officer facing the threat has a 30 plus year career, the lives of real men, the responsibility for valuable government property, the financial survival of his children, and even his name in history riding on the decision. It is natural to pass.

However, it was assumed torpedoes were tied to the obstruction. Every sailor in the world feared them with just cause. The monitor, USS Tecumseh, was near indestructible by gunfire. However, the torpedo sent it to the bottom so fast that witnesses noted her propellers were still spinning as she rammed her bow into the bottom.

Something that was apparently fairly successful at Charleston were the rope obstructions that would foul propellers and sidewheels. The Union did not run into them but there were a number of incidents in which they stopped Confederate vessels – including ironclads.

Thank you gentlemen. I will try to do more research myself, but for now will assume that for the 'action' that would take place during a game, the chain will not be broken.

Cloudy- were these rope obstructions tied off on land, or floating off of an anchored object?

In "The Night the War was Lost" Charles Dufour gives a nice description of how the chain obstructions below the forts of New Orleans were removed.

The USS Pinola moved against one of the de-masted schooners that was holding up the chain, damaging itself in the process and getting fouled with the schooner. It unloaded five 180 pound charges of powder which were to be detonated electrically, but they failed to go off. Meanwhile the USS Itasca moved up to another schooner and "unincumbered by a petard man had sensibly gone to work and unshackled the chains binding her schooner and thus opening the desired channel." The Itasca then became grounded and the Pinola redeamed itself by pulling it free. The Itasca then returned to the chain and "in running close by another schooner ran on a chain and carried it away breaking the schooner partially adrift and carrying away some booms astern moored by chains to the schooner, thus still more effectively clearing the passage" (these quotes are from original sources, and appear in Dufour's book as quotes).

The impression I get is twofold:

First, the chains do not need to be broken, they only need to be sunk by dealing with whatever is holding them up, and this is done fairly easily (assuming that one doesn't waste too much time with fancy explosive contraptions). There is a chance of fouling.

Second, as noted in previous posts, the chains seem to have provided a formitable psychological obstruction; an attack was not considered to be possible until the chains were removed.

So, maybe the "most realistic" thing to do is not use chains in a game at all, because the battle wouldn't be launched in the first place until the chains had been removed.

…but what's the fun in that :-)

If you do use chains then perhaps the ships should be ordered not to pass through the obstruction (i.e they should given orders declaring that the chains cannot be broken, it doesn't matter if it's true or not). This seems to be what you're planning on doing.

Another alternative is to put one or two openings in the chain. These would represent areas where the supporting rafts have been cleared prior to the battle, and thus the chains have been sunk in these areas. The ships will be ordered to only attempt to pass through the opening(s). This seems to be the way things played out at New Orleans.

See illustration here:

link

There's a much nicer illustration in Dufour's book, but I can't seem to find an online version of it.

My post on Fog of War for Naval Games (in the WWII forum) would be relevant here.

I'd use cards for both sides to allow them to play things like obstructions and to counter them (among other things), rather than try to micro-model everything.

gert1746, rather than transcribing from my printed copy of a "Treatise on Coast Defense" by Viktor Von Scheliha, check out this partial Google Books link and look at page 205 onwards. There's actually lots of great info in this book:

link

P.S. I just noted that it's the complete book and not a preview since you can download the .pdf :-)

That's a fascinating book, thanks for drawing attention to it. Just been reading some of the battle reports it includes – really interesting stuff.

You're welcome. Isn't the Internet grand? I'm fairly certain that the battle reports for the most part come from the "Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War Of The Rebellion" (whew…). Unfortunately it appears that the scans of the illustrations are rather crappy and the printed version has large foldouts and colored maps after page 173 which I don't believe are in the .pdf. Ah well, there's still hope for the printed word :-)