Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum

Author Topic: "Spar"ring partner  (Read 12718 times)

emike123

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2348
    • Bullet and Shell
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2013, 07:56:41 PM »
Went to the Piggly Wiggly today and saw this spooky clown balloon.  JBB, are you moonlighting on us?


John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2013, 09:00:06 PM »
Yep, the hollow submarine cylinder actually draws part of the explosion to it because it has a lesser p.s.i. inside.  The other part of the explosion goes right through the target ship's hull.
Regards,
John

joevann

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 354
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2013, 09:48:04 PM »
I thought I saw some research that showed that the Hunley had been hit by small arms fire that shattered the cast iron flange of the viewing port causing it to take on water, but theories are theories.  Everyone who knows the truth died at their stations.

scottfromgeorgia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 384
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #18 on: February 11, 2013, 03:10:14 AM »
But wouldn't the blast be a directed blast? It is hard to believe that the torpedo was designed to send an equal shock in all directions. 

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #19 on: February 11, 2013, 09:09:57 AM »
But shock waves do go in all directions with the majority leading towards a lessor p.s.i.  Does anyone know the amount of black powder in the torpedo?  I would certainly not want to be 20 feet from an underwater detonation.
Regards,
John
« Last Edit: February 11, 2013, 11:38:43 AM by John D. Bartleson Jr. »

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #20 on: February 11, 2013, 09:12:01 AM »
However, I should think with my last posting by eMike I would lose all credibility. :)
John

scottfromgeorgia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 384
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #21 on: February 11, 2013, 10:17:44 AM »
Being in Baghdad right now, we are anxious about directed or shaped charges. These are charges that blast most of the energy in one direction. Although the technology for shaped charges might not have existed in ACW, they certainly know how to shape projectiles to direct energy in certain directions. Wouldn't they have done the same to the torpedo?

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #22 on: February 11, 2013, 11:46:57 AM »
No,  black powder would make a poor shaped charge. Have you seen other applications of the Monroe Effect in ACW ordnance?
Besides the spar torpedo fuzing does not permit base detonation of the charge.?? a necessary element for shaped charges.
    Charles Edward Munroe didn't discover the effect until 1886.  Don't compare the base detonating, nose ejection of shrapnel to the shaped charge as they are two distinct types of projectiles.
John
« Last Edit: February 11, 2013, 12:26:29 PM by John D. Bartleson Jr. »

Selma Brooke Gunner

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 109
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #23 on: February 12, 2013, 01:18:34 PM »
     Ok, been doing some research on the question of how much powder was in the spar torpedo. I can not find anything definate but the common idea is that there was between 90 to 135 pounds of black powder in the torpedo. The over pressure alone from a explosion of that weight being that close to the boat could have caused some of the plates to spring enough to allow water to enter. Another consideration is the effects of the explosion on the men in the boat, could it have rendered them unconscious? I think possibly so.
     As noted in the article on the Hunley the spar was not detactable as first believed, so the boat was not able to plant the torpedo then back away to explode it. I am sure that in the future we will get the skinny on what happened but at the moment it is all speculative.
Gordon Thrasher
Selma Brooke Study
Kinston, Al
selmabrookestudy@yahoo.com

jonpatterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 267
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #24 on: February 12, 2013, 03:26:06 PM »
Hey Mike,

Is it true you have made an offer to buy the Hunley to add to your collection also? It would seem to be the appropriate addition to go with the spar torpedo fuse.   :)
It is history that teaches us to hope.

Robert E. Lee

emike123

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2348
    • Bullet and Shell
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #25 on: February 13, 2013, 02:05:35 PM »
Nah, Jon.  Looking instead to get a free CS sub out of the drink in Wilmington or Mobile!

http://www.civilwarwiki.net/wiki/CSS_Pioneer_II
« Last Edit: February 13, 2013, 05:47:23 PM by emike123 »

divedigger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #26 on: February 13, 2013, 05:54:32 PM »
huh? Wilmington? is that what you keep asking me about?

Dave the plumber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 604
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #27 on: February 13, 2013, 08:32:22 PM »
    DiverDiggerDave,              It's off Eagle's Island buried in the mud. It was under construction when Wilmington fell, almost complete. Fonville told me about it, he has the info......

emike123

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2348
    • Bullet and Shell
    • Email
Re: "Spar"ring partner
« Reply #28 on: February 17, 2013, 11:40:29 AM »
Today is Sunday, February 17, 2013

Today in U.S. Civil War History:

1864 - The Hunley sailed from Charleston Harbor and torpedoed the U.S.S. Housatanic. The Hunley became the first submarine to sink a ship in battle, but the Hunley herself sank before she returned to Charleston.