| serge joe | 20 Jan 2015 10:23 a.m. PST |
To Al
Why did napoleon mistrusted some inventions? like ballones and submarines? greetings serge joe |
| MichaelCollinsHimself | 20 Jan 2015 10:58 a.m. PST |
I`m not too sure Joe.
I thought that the balloon corps was disbanded for economic reasons and also the apparatus and support for the balloons was too cumbersome for the fast-moving campaigns that Napoleon favoured?
But then the balloons had already been tried and used successfully in the 1790`s
Regards,
Mike. |
 deadhead  | 20 Jan 2015 12:51 p.m. PST |
I always wondered about balloons and asked some time ago. I thought that one balloon above Le Cailliou could have transformed the battle. The experts were very patient and explained that the technology was simply not there. Filling a balloon with something lighter than air, within 12 hours say, needed better resources than were available in 1815. Boney's mistake was timing. His ascendancy was just before the Industrial Revolution really took off. Steam power drove manufacture, but not locomotion, in 1815. 20 years later well…….. Submarines? You are kidding. Not for anything outside a harbour in 1815, so hardly a threat to the Royal Navy. Boney did not "do" technology. He did revolutionise strategy, but certainly not tactics. He "came on in the same old style" (OK, I know, but that is what is quoted…).. Of course, just typical of you…what a profound question! Why was he so conservative about how the battle was fought, when so radical about the means to get armies to the battlefield? He did not introduce rockets, he did not use riflemen, his artillery (carriage anyway) seems dated to me, in terms of mobility (apologies to Summerfield, if that amateur view is wrong), his idea of logistics was a joke……like Rommel, genius on the field, but where will the ammo resupply come from? |
| serge joe | 20 Jan 2015 1:53 p.m. PST |
The american whats his name fulton? did not see that as a problem! greetings serge joe |
| deadhead | 20 Jan 2015 3:46 p.m. PST |
He did not use them on the high seas……they were for attack inshore, in harbours, ideally against docked ships at anchor. |
| Supercilius Maximus | 20 Jan 2015 4:10 p.m. PST |
Didn't Napoleon reject the submarine as "ungentlemanly"? Whilst this sounds unlikely, I understand that he didn't like air rifles for much the same reason, it seems (ordered anyone caught with one to have his hands cut off, I believe). |
| serge joe | 21 Jan 2015 9:48 a.m. PST |
The word submarine us a too strong word it looks to me a boat under the cannons angle of the ship guns and the arms? think these throwing granates greetings serge joe |
| Murvihill | 22 Jan 2015 10:44 a.m. PST |
Balloons sound like a great idea, but like all flying objects it only takes one critical malfunction to destroy them. They were still trying to make them work 100 years later, but only got a marginal capability at best (dirigibles, failed; barrage balloons, succeeded). Submarines succeeded with the invention of the electric motor. Before that there was no way to vent exhaust gasses whether human or otherwise. Rockets may have been an invention whose time was right but for the societal biases against change… |
| deadhead | 22 Jan 2015 11:53 a.m. PST |
I asked about balloons some time ago and learnt much about why they proved impractical, from the experts
TMP link
An earlier thread touched on this too
TMP link |
| Supercilius Maximus | 23 Jan 2015 4:57 p.m. PST |
What was the operating ceiling for balloons and how much further could you see from, say, 500 or 1,000 feet? Would the limited availability of maps prevent the crew from interpreting what they could see? |
| imrael | 24 Jan 2015 11:20 a.m. PST |
I believe he embraced the Bricole :) |
| Lion in the Stars | 24 Jan 2015 1:45 p.m. PST |
500 feet up makes for a hugely improved range of vision. From a man on horseback, the horizon is about 6km away. 500 feet above the battlefield gives you a line of sight to about 40km away. |
| Brechtel198 | 24 Jan 2015 7:21 p.m. PST |
The French attempted to develop an equivalent of spherical case shot; did develop rockets with the Danes in Hamburg in 1813-1814; and Napoleon wanted experimentation for shell-firing naval guns. And Napoleon expanded on the Chappe semaphore telegraph and attempted to develop a mobile version to accompany the army into Russia in 1812. So, new technologies were tried under the Empire. B |
ScottWashburn  | 28 Jan 2015 12:28 p.m. PST |
Very few military leaders of any era have wholeheartedly embraced new technology. Many made use of it when it was handed to them, but few went out of their way to get it. Any military is conservative by nature and tends to use the things and techniques it knows rather than try new things. Change does occur, but it takes time and most commanders are more concerned with the next battle, not something years down the road. So it is not like Napoleon was especially resistant to innovation. He was probably about average on that score |
goes to sea with the Terrain Mat.
