Английская Википедия:CSS Tuscaloosa (ironclad)

Содержание

Текст

Текст

Текст

Текст

Текст

Текст

Текст

Текст

Текст

Шаблон:Infobox ship imageШаблон:Infobox ship careerШаблон:Infobox ship characteristics

CSS Tuscaloosa was an ironclad warship that served in the Confederate States Navy during the American Civil War. Construction began in May 1862, under a contract with Henry D. Bassett. Her engines were taken from the steamboat Chewala, and she was armored with Шаблон:Convert of iron and armed with four cannons. In January 1863, she was launched, and traveled down to Mobile, Alabama for service on Mobile Bay. Both Tuscaloosa and her sister ship CSS Huntsville were found to be too slow for practical use, and were relegated to service as floating batteries. Union forces captured Mobile in April 1865, and Tuscaloosa was scuttled on April 12, as she was unable to escape due to an inability to steam against the current on the Spanish River. Her wreck was discovered in the 1980s.

Background and description

During the American Civil War, the Confederate States Navy determined that it was unable to keep up with the Union Navy's ability to produce traditional warships, and eventually decided to emphasize construction of ironclad warships.Шаблон:Sfn Before the war, Mobile, Alabama, had been the second-most important trading port on the Gulf of Mexico, and gained greater importance to the Confederacy after the fall of New Orleans in early 1862. The city lay on the northern edge of Mobile Bay, which opened into the Gulf of Mexico.Шаблон:Sfn In December 1861, the state government of Alabama had purchased a cotton lighter and converted her into the ironclad CSS Baltic, transferring her to the Confederate government in May 1862. However, Baltic was a decrepit and ineffective vessel.Шаблон:Sfn

For further defense of the Mobile area, the Confederate States Department of the Navy contracted for two additional ironclads earmarked for Mobile to be built at Selma, Alabama.Шаблон:SfnШаблон:Efn The contract for the construction of Tuscaloosa was given to Henry D. Bassett, and work on the ironclad began in May 1862.Шаблон:Sfn The contract, in the amount of $100,000, called for the vessel to be completed by July 1, 1862, and iron armor, cannon, and boilers were intended to be supplied by a developing foundry at Selma.Шаблон:Sfn This time frame was not met.Шаблон:Sfn Tuscaloosa and her sister ship CSS Huntsville are considered to be Huntsville-class ironclads, which was an improved version of the design used for the ironclad CSS Albemarle.Шаблон:Sfn Confederate naval constructor John L. Porter created an alternate design of ironclad known as the "diamond hull". In order to simply construction, the diamond hull ironclads had minimal curvature in their hulls, creating a hull shape whose cross-section resembled a hexagon. Porter is usually given credit for planning Huntsville and Tuscaloosa, but naval historian Saxon Bisbee suggests that someone else designed the two vessels, as they were substantially different from Porter's other diamond hull designs, and incorporate elements of riverboat design that Porter's other designs do not.Шаблон:Sfn

No ship plans for Tuscaloosa are known to exist, but the Port Columbus Civil War Naval Center preserves a draft plan for a vessel believed to be a sister ship of Tuscaloosa that was never completed. The Port Columbus draft shows a vessel that would have had dimensions of about Шаблон:Convert long between perpendiculars, a beam of Шаблон:Convert, a depth of hold of Шаблон:Convert, and a draft of about Шаблон:Convert; Bisbee states that these figures are approximately what contemporary sources suggest TuscaloosaШаблон:'s size was.Шаблон:Sfn Naval historian Paul H. Silverstone states that she was Шаблон:Convert long overall, with a beam of Шаблон:Convert, and a draft of Шаблон:Convert.Шаблон:Sfn The Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (DANFS) agrees with Silverstone's figures for length and beam, and with Bisbee's 10.5-foot depth of hold, but gives draft as Шаблон:Convert.

It was originally expected that the Columbus Naval Iron Works would produce custom-built machinery for Tuscaloosa, but this was not possible due to lack of time and shortage of machinery.Шаблон:Sfn Instead, engines were taken from the steamboat Chewala for use in Tuscaloosa.Шаблон:Sfn Modifications to allow ChewalaШаблон:'s engines to work for Tuscaloosa was done by William Penny & Company, a branch of the Columbus Naval Iron Works in Prattville, Alabama.Шаблон:Sfn Her boilers were fitted and repaired by the Columbus Naval Iron Works.Шаблон:Sfn Tuscaloosa was equipped with two engines, but it is not known how many boilers she had.Шаблон:Sfn Chewala had been a sternwheel steamer, but Tuscaloosa was a screw steamer, requiring a system of gears to transfer the power to the screws.Шаблон:Sfn The machinery was installed by January 1863.Шаблон:Sfn Bisbee states that she had two screws,Шаблон:Sfn while Silverstone says she had only one.Шаблон:Sfn

TuscaloosaШаблон:'s armor was Шаблон:Convert thick.Шаблон:Sfn The new foundry in Selma had come to naught, and pig iron was scarce, making armored plate hard to come by. Tuscaloosa received her iron plate in December 1862 and January 1863, it was produced by the firm of Scofield & Markham in Atlanta, Georgia and by the Shelby Iron Company in Shelby, Alabama.Шаблон:SfnШаблон:Sfn She was armed with three 32-pounder guns and a 6.4-inch rifled cannon;Шаблон:Sfn the rifled piece was a Brooke rifle.Шаблон:Sfn The DANFS states that she had a crew of 120, while naval historian W. Craig Gaines places her crew at 40.Шаблон:Sfn The ship's crew found conditions aboard so bad that they slept on shore in a cotton warehouse for part of the year.Шаблон:Sfn

History

Tuscaloosa was launched at Selma on February 7, 1863.Шаблон:Sfn She steamed to Mobile under her own power, where she was fitted out.Шаблон:Sfn Admiral Franklin Buchanan supervised her trial runs. The trials began in April, and found that she was too slow and that her boilers leaked. Another attempt at using coal, which was in limited supply, instead of wood and installing forced draft fans to improve ventilation and speed did not lead to substantially better results. Tuscaloosa could only go about Шаблон:Convert, which was barely faster than the current in Mobile Bay.Шаблон:Sfn Buchanan reported that the ship's machinery worked well,Шаблон:Sfn and Bisbee attributes most of the speed problems to the nonstandard hull.Шаблон:Sfn

Bisbee notes that Tuscaloosa was "a failure as a self-propelled vessel".Шаблон:Sfn Huntsville also had a limited ability to move under its own power, so the two vessels were relegated to use as floating batteries.Шаблон:Sfn The two vessels were unfit for naval combat in open water.Шаблон:Sfn Tuscaloosa was captained by Commander C. H. McBlair. By early 1864, the Confederates were expecting a Union attack on Mobile Bay. In mid-February, the ironclad CSS Tennessee was launched, but when trying to get past the bar, became stuck due to insufficient water levels until May. While Tennessee was stuck at the bar, Tuscaloosa was sent to the lower part of the bay to aid in the defenses there.Шаблон:Sfn Union Navy forces attacked in August, bringing on the Battle of Mobile Bay,Шаблон:Sfn which was a Union victory.Шаблон:Sfn

After the defeat in the bay, the Confederates only had four warships left to defend Mobile: Tuscaloosa, Huntsville, the ironclad CSS Nashville, and the gunboat CSS Morgan.Шаблон:Sfn Union forces did not attempt to take Mobile itself until January 1865, when a land force led by E. R. S. Canby began advancing against it. The city was defended on land by Spanish Fort and Fort Blakeley. Sieges of the forts began in late March, and Spanish Fort surrendered on April 8 and Fort Blakeley on April 9. The city of Mobile surrendered on April 12. Tuscaloosa and Huntsville were unable to steam against the current in the Spanish River,Шаблон:Sfn and Tuscaloosa was scuttled at the confluence of the Spanish River and the Mobile River on that same day.Шаблон:Sfn Huntsville was sunk as well, and the wrecks served as blockships.Шаблон:Sfn TuscaloosaШаблон:'s crew and supplies were transferred to Nashville.Шаблон:Sfn The wreck was discovered in the 1980s,Шаблон:SfnШаблон:Sfn and Bisbee notes that the wreck is "apparently almost completely intact".Шаблон:Sfn

Sources

• Шаблон:Cite book

• Шаблон:Cite book
• Шаблон:Cite book
• Шаблон:Cite book
• Шаблон:Cite book
• Шаблон:Cite book

Further reading

• Шаблон:Cite book
• Шаблон:Cite book