"Shore bombardment." Topic

In Albert A. Nofi book he lists over 20 ship vs. batteries engagements with almost all having no U.S. casualties and unknown Spanish losses. I have yet to find an account where any U.S. ship was damaged by shore batteries.

There are accounts at San Juan of Spanish ships remaining within the range of their own shore batteries, but not much information of the benefit they received.

Were shore batteries ever effective?

Combined with mines, the Dardanelles in WW I. Also Wake Island.

I know there were several ship to shore bombarment in Manila Bay.

Yes, several Spanish ships had their gun removed and installed as shore batteries, however, the effectiveness remains questionable.

The Spanish Fleet in Santiago provided some sailors as infantry (twenty or so were at SJH), and a number of their Nordenfelt MG's went ashore as potential support of the city's defenders.

However, NO fire support of any kind was provided during SJH or afterwards, nor to El Caney. Indeed, the 20,000 Spanish troops likewise were never committed to action.

SJH was defended by around 1200 men that almost beat the 10,000 or Yanks facing them, holding them pinned most of the day.

I don't know why anyone thinks the SP-AM War was an inevitable "walk-over" or that there was no way Spain could have emerged victorious.

TVAG

You only have to compare the size, condition & quality of the two navies' ships to realise that Spain had no chance whatsoever.

The war wasn't a 'walk-over' but a 'take-over'. The US had to invade to claim the territory and suffered casualties due to recklessness.