THE PORTABLE

IRONCLADS WARGAME

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)
 THE PORTABLE
IRONCLADS WARGAME
By David Crook
Edited and co-written by Bob Cordery

2022
Eglinton Books

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Copyright © 2022 by David Crook and Robert George Cordery.
David Crook and Robert George Cordery asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
to be identified as the authors of this work.
All rights reserved. No part of this book can be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without
permission from the publisher in writing except for the use of brief quotations in a book review or scholarly journal.
Please note that any images used in this book are either no longer in copyright and in the public domain or are
copyright David Crook and Robert George Cordery
Typeset in Arial and Arial Narrow fonts
Eglinton Books
84 Eglinton Hill
Shooters Hill
Plumstead
London
SE18 3DY
United Kingdom
Hardback: ISBN 979 8 3673 7158 1
Paperback: ISBN 979 8 3673 6389 0

iv

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 To David Manley for everything that he has done for Naval Wargaming
and to Eric Knowles for bringing the two writers together.

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Books in the same series

The Portable Wargame (2017)

Developing The Portable Wargame (2017)
Gridded Naval Wargames (2018)
The Portable Napoleonic Wargame (2018)
The Portable Colonial Wargame (2020)
The Portable Pike & Shot Wargame (With Antoine Bourguilleau, Alan Saunders, and Arthur Harman) (2020)
¡Arriba España! (Spain Arise!) including The Portable Spanish Civil War wargame rules (2021)
The Balkan League: A Matrix Game Campaign, including the Portable Balkan Wars Wargame Rules (2021)
The Portable Wargame Compendium (With David Barnes, Justin Barrett, Mark Cordone, Arthur Harman, Marc Pavone, Martin
Rapier, and Mike Taber) (2022)

vi

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 CONTENTS
Contents vii
Foreword ix
Introduction x
Acknowledgements xii
A short history of the development of the early ironclads 1
Wars in which ironclads saw action 10
American Civil War 10
The Second Schleswig War 21
The Chincha Islands War 21
The Third Italian War of Independence/Seven Weeks War 22
The War of the Triple Alliance/The Paraguayan War 22
The Boshin War 24
The Russo-Turkish War 25
The Peruvian Civil War 28
The War of the Pacific 29
Designer’s Notes – How I got to Where I got to and Why! 31
The Fundamental Rules of Wargaming 36
The First Rule of Wargaming 36
The Spirit of the Wargame 36
If in doubt ... 36
The Rules 37
Sequence of Play 37
Combat Resolution Overview 37
The Rule of 1 and 6 – Gunnery or Ramming Attacks 37
Firing 38
Movement 39
Ram Attacks 40
Mines and Spar Torpedoes 40
Damage and Sinking 41
Forts, Shore Batteries, and Offshore Defences 42
Ship Specifications 42
Examples of Ship Specifications: The American Civil War 45
Union Ships 45
Confederate Ships 47
Generic Vessels 49
vii

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Examples of the rules in action 51
Firing Arcs and Firing 51
Ramming 54
The Rules in Action – More Trouble along the Missenhitti 57
Introduction 57
Six months later … 57
Setting the Scene 57
Dramatis Naves 58
Blueberry Bend, at the Confluence of the Missenhitti and Yahoo Rivers …
November 1863 59
In conclusion 69
Modelling the warships of the American Civil War 70
A Review of the Fleets 75
The Union Fleet 75
The Confederate Fleet 77
Final Thoughts, Further Thoughts, Errors, and Omissions 80
Bibliography and sources of information 82
Other books in the Portable Wargame series 84

viii

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 FOREWORD
This is the first Portable Wargame book that has been mainly authored by someone other than myself … and I
hope that this will be the first of many!
When I wrote GRIDDED NAVAL WARGAMES back in 2018, I included set of Ironclad rules. These were simple,
easy to play, and aimed at wargamers who usually fought land-based battles and campaigns but who might want
to include a naval element in their games. I also included a section on how to make your own simple model
ironclads. What David Crook has done is to take my rules as a starting point and produced a more detailed set
that are slightly more complex, but which still retain the idea of simple mechanisms and fast play.
His rules are mainly aimed at the American Civil War, a war that saw both sides embrace the new concept of
armouring warships to make them less vulnerable to the more powerful guns that were being manufactured. The
fact that both sides were capable of building or extemporising such warships – sometimes in a very short time and
in very difficult and trying circumstances – is testament to their ingenuity and skill, and to the pioneer spirit exhibited
by so many Americans in those days.
The Americans were not – however – unique in having the capacity to both build and operate ironclad warships.
The French and British were more than capable of building sea-going ironclads – and the guns with which to arm
them – in large numbers in a relatively short time. They soon became the suppliers of ironclad warships to the
world, and many of the warships featured in the chapter about wars in which ironclads saw action were launched
in British or French shipyards.
I hope that this book will appeal to both the novice and experienced wargamer, and that the two chapters that I
have written will give them a better understanding about how the ironclad was developed and how widespread
their use became.
As I often say, read and enjoy!
Bob Cordery
Shooters Hill, December 2022

A view of the deck of the USS Monitor, one of the two ships that fought the first ever ironclad vs. ironclad battle. Some of the dents In
the turret’s armour show where the CSS Virginia’s gunfire hit the Monitor … and that if they had been a few feet to the right, they
might have destroyed one of the Monitor’s 11-inch Dahlgren guns.

ix

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 INTRODUCTION
My interest in the naval side of the American Civil War really began at the tail end of the 1970s when I was a
member of the now sadly defunct Newham Wargames Club, based in the cellar of Eric Knowles’s shop The New
Model Army Ltd in Manor Park, East London. Eric’s son, Bill, had acquired a board game produced by the
American company Yaquinto called IRONCLADS. This was a very detailed tactical ship to ship naval game with a
rule system that suited the trend at the time of evermore complex rule systems. I remember it being played many,
many times, usually with several people taking part and inevitably many heated discussions about the rules. For
all that it was great fun though, even more so when Yaquinto released an expansion that also covered the
European navies of the period.
I went through several naval phases at the time – mainly on the back of Eric Knowles’s WW1 based Southeast
Asia naval campaign, itself a follow on from the famous Madasahatta campaign and also including the age of sail
– but for some reason never got around to the American Civil War using models. Looking back, I think it may well
have been due to my disillusionment with the period as a whole, primarily from a land perspective – I took part in
a number of large-scale land battles that really put me off the period, burdened as they were with ever more
complex and argument inducing rules. As a result of several such oversized and fractious battles my interest in
the period as a whole withered away.
Time and life moved on and so by the turn of the century – some twenty years after my first introduction to the
period – my interest in the American Civil War had been rekindled, mainly as the result of another board game –
in this case BATTLE CRY by Richard Borg, the designer of the COMMAND AND COLOURS series. There then
followed a chance conversation with Bob Cordery about using elements of the COMMAND AND COLOURS
system for naval games which in turn led to much experimentation by both of us with Bob Cordery’s excellent
book: GRIDDED NAVAL WARGAMES emerging in time as the result. I should point out that rules featuring
elements of the COMMAND AND COLOURS system formed only a small part of Bob’s book as he included several
other rule sets as well. As an aside I should point out that it really is an excellent work and I heartily recommend it
– both for the experienced naval gamer or the newcomer.
Whilst Bob was working on what would become GRIDDED NAVAL WARGAMES, I took the decision to try the
American Civil War afloat once again and so set about building some models to use on a hex grid playing surface.
At the time I was temporarily unemployed following a redundancy and so spending was severely curtailed hence
the decision to make my own. For the rules I initially thought about revisiting Yaquinto IRONCLADS, but this was
no longer where my gaming head was at – I, then as now, preferred far simpler systems – and so I opted to use a
version of Bob’s rules with, inevitably, my own spin on them.
The games were fun, especially when fought alongside a land action and thus inspired my ship building output
was prodigious. In a very short space of time, I had built around sixty models. These early efforts were designed
to operate within a single 4” hex (4” between the flat sides) and so the largest was around 3½” long. I made a
simple mistake at the time in that whilst I happily built all manner of ships at some speed my painting of them did
not keep pace and so when the enthusiasm eventually waned, I was left with around 45 unpainted models – I had
only painted the ironclads. The entire collection was quietly disposed on via eBay as I was now in the position to
be able to buy the models I needed as I was once again back in work.
I purchased a whole pile of Peter Pig 1:600th scale warships with every intention of painting and using them but
there was a small snag. I am a reluctant painter at best and in retrospect I may have been better buying and
painting a few models at a time rather than getting everything in one fell swoop. The pile of resin sat forlornly in a
shoe box, unloved and unwanted.
Inevitably, they were disposed of – In fact, I gave them away – but with a twist. They actually came back to me
some time later but did not survive the second coming as I duly sold them on. I briefly flirted with 1:2400 th scale
models from Tumbling Dice but at the time the range was limited and scratch building the additional models I
would undoubtedly need in that scale was not something I relished so once again I was left pondering the thorny
question of what models to use.
After much deliberation and inspiration from Bob Cordery’s ‘cartoon style’ warship models I decided once again to
build my own but on a much larger scale than previously. I was going to go with models that would be around
double the size of those previously built and where the largest would be around 6” long. This would be an altogether
different undertaking than previously and originally the plan was to build around a dozen or so simple looking
models that would be quite generic in design. They say that no plan survives first contact with the enemy and so
this certainly proved to be the case as the ‘dozen or so simple looking models’ eventually turned into ‘SIX dozen
or so simple looking models! I freely admit that I got somewhat carried away, but it was tremendous fun building
them!

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 From the very start of this build I had in mind that I would use Bob’s ACW rules from GRIDDED NAVAL
WARGAMES with a few bespoke additions. That was the plan originally but once again I seem to have allowed
myself to move off into very different territory than merely adding a few bits and pieces here and there. It became
apparent quite early on in the process that to obtain the desired result of a set of rules with ease of playability and
the level of detail that would appeal to naval wargamers I would have to drastically rethink how I was going to do
this.
The answer came from another set of rules and the lightbulb moment was when I realised that the details I wanted
to use could be transplanted into what was essentially Bob’s original ACW system. I wanted to be able to tailor
specific ships for things like weapons fit, capabilities of such weapons, where these were located on a vessel,
varying degrees of and the type of protection carried – in short, all the things that a more ‘formal’ set of naval
wargame rules would feature. The rules I chose to use for this part of the process were DAHLGREN AND
COLOMBIAD written by that well respected naval wargamer and rules writer, David Manley.
By dint of ‘slicing and dicing’ and negotiating a fair few blind alleys, I was able to fuse two sets into one, the results
of which you have in your hands. After much experimentation they are now at the stage I am happy with and so I
am delighted to be able to add them to the PORTABLE WARGAME stable. The details of what sections of rules
were used and how they were ‘shoehorned’ into the current set are contained in the Designer’s Notes but for now
it is sufficient for me to say more about what they are rather than what they are not.
I do not profess to be an authority on the ships or naval campaigns of the American Civil War and so in a sense
these rules have ‘stood on the shoulders of giants’ in many ways. They are certainly at the simpler end of the
complexity scale but still manage to retain what I often refer to as the ‘feel’ of the period. Ships have an individual
identity in that details of their size, speed, armament, and protection level are all used in play. Six-sided dice are
used exclusively and for the most part the rules will not be unfamiliar in use to anyone with experience of the
PORTABLE WARGAME series.
It is my hope that users of the rules will feel the same way.
David Crook
Rayleigh, December 2022

xi

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This book would never have seen the light of day were it not for the ongoing and continued support and
encouragement from a vast array of people.
To begin with, I would like to extend my eternal thanks and gratitude to Bob Cordery and David Manley for
allowing me to make use of elements of their rule systems without reservation or caveat. Their inspirational
input at many points in the development of this set ensured that the end result sailed – more or less – a
straight course to its home port! Both of these gentlemen I consider an honour to count as friends. To Bob
especially my grateful thanks for turning a succession of emails and phone camera pictures into this splendid
publication – as an editor his patience knows no bounds!
To Simon Wilson and Alan Saunders, the dynamic duo that tested an earlier draft of these rules and so
helped me to progress to this published version I offer my thanks and appreciation for their efforts. Their
contribution was invaluable especially as at the time I was flailing about ineffectively with certain mechanics.
Any subsequent changes, for better or worse, following on from their input should therefore be laid squarely
at my feet!
To Neil Fox and Chris Hardman for helping me as a young gamer, new to naval wargaming, way back in
the late 1970s and early 1980s – their support and encouragement over the years has been invaluable,
unconditional, and generous.
To the regular followers or occasional readers of my blog – A Wargaming Odyssey – that have commented
or contacted me directly with suggestions, ideas, or sagacious words of advice, I extend my warmest
regards. The names are too many to mention but they will know who they are, and I hope this book has
been worth the wait!
To Arthur Harman for being such a thorough proofreader.
I should also acknowledge the debt I owe the late Eric Knowles for giving me my first ever naval command
during his famous Madasahatta campaign all those years ago and thereby sending me down a path of a
lifelong and enormously rewarding interest. For the record, the command was a pair of small German
gunboats, caught in a harbour under a capital ship sized naval bombardment….
It would also be remiss of me if I did not mention Martin and Diane Murray of Warbases – without their
inexhaustible patience and Indiana Jones/Sherlock Holmes like ability to translate my crude, hieroglyphic
like drawings into the building blocks of my scratch-built models the fleets could not have been built. Many
thanks and next time I will (try to) make the designs clearer!
Finally, I should also mention my family – especially my long-suffering wife, Laurel – who may not get what
all this is about but know that it is important to me and so smile blandly and usually with a glazed expression
as I extol the virtues of the particular ship model I have just completed! “If it keeps him happy….”
It does indeed.
Sincere thanks to all.

xii

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 A SHORT HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EARLY
IRONCLADS
by Bob Cordery
The coming of steam and iron
Until the beginning of the nineteenth century, warships were powered by sail and built of wood. By the middle of
the century, as the impact of the Industrial Revolution made itself felt, sail was already being replaced by steam
power, and iron was being used to construct ships.
The first warship propelled by steam power was the Demologos, which was designed and built by Robert Fulton 1.
He submitted his plans for this revolutionary ship to President James Madison in 1813, and Congress approved
funds for its construction in 1814. Construction was completed after Fulton’s death in 1815, and after her sea trials
she was described as ‘entirely successful’.

Robert Fulton’s Demologos.

The Demologos had two hulls that were fixed together by the decks and other structural members, between which
was a well or channel 15-feet wide in which a paddle wheel revolved. The paddle wheel was powered by a single-
cylinder steam engine that was installed in one of the two hulls, and steam was produced by a copper boiler in the
other hull. She mounted twenty 32-pounder smoothbore guns which were protected by 5-feet thick wooden sides,
and she could make just over 5 knots. Although she was referred to as being a steam frigate, she was – in reality
– a self-propelled floating battery.
From 1815 onwards, steam engines gradually began to be installed in both existing and newly-built wooden
warships. Progress was slow because the early steam engines and boilers were very inefficient and they – along
with the huge amounts of coal that had to be carried – took up a lot of the ship’s internal space, something that

The Demologos was also known as the Fulton the First and was designed to protect New York Harbour.
1

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 was at a premium on warships. As a result, on larger warships, steam power was regarded as being an auxiliary
form of propulsion that was only to be used when there was insufficient wind to propel the ship 2.
Another problem was the method of propulsion available to ship designers. The earliest designs used
paddlewheels; these were a reversal of the concept that was inherited from the water-powered mills found on land,
where the water drove the paddlewheel to provide power to the mill. On a ship, the engine turned the paddlewheel,
which powered the ship through the water. These paddlewheels were prone to damage, and if hit by cannon shot
during a battle, a paddle steamer could easily be rendered immobile. It was not until the screw propellor was
3
developed that this problem could be solved .
The use of iron as a construction material was also introduced slowly. Initially it was used to reinforce or replace
parts of a ship’s framework, with the result that longer and stronger hulls could be constructed. This had the
additional benefit of making the hulls more capable of bearing the weight of steam engines and boilers.
However, there was resistance from many engineers and naval officers to the replacement of wooden hulls with
iron ones. Firing trials were carried out in England between 1845 and 1850, during which cast-iron shot was fired
against ordinary iron ship plates. The plates fractured, causing iron splinters from both the ball and the iron plate
to fly off in all directions, and holes in iron plates that were under the waterline could not be plugged as effectively
as holes in wooden hulls could be.

Explosive shells and rifled guns

Traditionally, solid shot fired from long-barreled, smooth-bore guns was used aboard ships to smash holes in the
wooden sides of enemy ships. They were also used to bring down their masts, and the splinters generated by the
shot hitting the wood were a very effective anti-personnel weapon. The use of explosive shells – which on land
were fired from short-barreled howitzers or mortars – was almost unknown at sea except aboard specialist mortar-
carrying ships (‘bomb ketches’ in the Royal Navy) and mortar rafts.
By 1819, the French General Paixhans had begun to experiment with firing explosive shells for long-barreled guns,
and as a result, the French Navy gradually began to introduce their use at sea as a weapon to deploy alongside
solid shot.

Paixhans’ gun and shell. The shell is fitted with a wooden sabot to make it easier to load. The Dahlgren guns used during the
American Civil War were developments of Paixhans’ designs.

The problem of coal storage did not apply to smaller ships that operated close to harbour, such as steam tugs.
2

This screw vs. paddle question was resolved in the Royal Navy in December 1844, when the year-old, screw-driven HMS Rattler
3

(a slightly lengthened version of the Alecto-class of paddle steam sloops) began a series of comparative trials with HMS Alecto.
These included speed and manoeuvrability trials as well as a famous ‘tug of war’ where the two ships were connected stern to stern
by a stout cable. This latter trial took place on 5th April 1845, and after ten minutes – during which both ships tried to go forward at
maximum power – HMS Rattler had slowly begun to tow HMS Alecto astern at a speed of 2.5 knots, thus confirming the superiority
of the screw propellor over the paddlewheel. Similar trials were held during the summer of 1849 involving the screw sloop HMS
Niger and the paddle sloop HMS Basilisk. These confirmed the results of the earlier trials.
2

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Other navies began to follow suit, and in 1834 – after experiments at Metz and Gāvres – Paixhans suggested that
French line-of-battle ships should be razéed4 and protected by a layer of 7 or 8 inches of iron armour as defence
against the increasingly effective explosive shells.
Rifled guns were developed in parallel with the explosive shell. The use of rifling to improve the range and accuracy
of guns was already well-known during the Napoleonic Wars, and by 1840 various designers were experimenting
with ways to rifle gun barrels. In 1846, Major Giovani Cavelli in Italy and Baron Martin Wahrendorff in Sweden
independently produced rifled iron breech-loading guns. The Cavelli gun used two spiral grooves, into which 0.25-
inch projecting lugs on the gun’s projectiles fitted.

The Cavelli Rifling system.

These were followed by Charles Lanchester’s elliptical bore gun and Joseph Whitworth’s hexagonal spiral bore
design. The biggest development took place in 1855 when Sir William Armstrong designed a revolutionary rifled
breech-loading gun.

Sir William Armstrong’s revolutionary breech-loading, rifled gun design.

It used a multi-groove rifling as well as a much stronger barrel that was constructed using hoops that were shrunk
over the main barrel of the gun. This gave them great strength for less weight and meant that much large powder
charges could be used, hence increasing the range to which a projectile could be fired accurately. Other gun
designers adopted similar construction methods, the most notable being the American Robert Parrott in 1861.

Armoured ships
Paixhans’ ideas regarding the armouring of ships were not immediately taken up, but towards the middle of the
nineteenth century the use of armour aboard warships was being actively considered. For example, in 1841 the
American engineers Robert L and Edwin A Stevens submitted plans to the United States Government for an
armour-clad vessel, which is usually referred to as the ‘Stevens Battery’. It was going to weigh 1,500 tons and be
powered by four steam engines driving two propellors that would give her a speed of 18 knots. The hull was to be
constructed of iron, and the engines were placed below the waterline and under an armoured deck. Her armament
– six large-calibre muzzle-loading guns – was housed in open casemates on top of the armoured deck. The guns

Razée is a term used to describe the process of reducing the number of decks of a warship by removing the uppermost deck. Any
4

wooden warship that was razéed ended up with less freeboard but could carry fewer but heavier guns and generally required a
smaller crew.
3

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 were to be loaded from below by gun crews who were protected by sloping armoured casemates. These armoured
casemates were protected by a layer of 4.5-inches thick iron backed by 14-inches of wood.
The ‘Stevens Battery’ was never completed, and neither was the heavily revised 1854 version of the design. After
the Civil War broke out, the Stevens brothers did manage to persuade the United States Government to build a
ship based on their ideas – the Naugatuck, later the E A Stevens – which was used by the Revenue Service and
the Navy. However, by the time she came into service, the concepts behind her design had been replaced by
newer ones.
Not long after the initial design of the ‘Stevens Battery’ had been accepted by the United States Government, the
eminent French naval architect – Dupuy de Lôme – presented his government with plans for an armour-clad
warship. These plans had evolved after trials held at Gāvres between 1843 and 1845 to determine the best way
to protect warships and their steam-powered machinery from damage.
The need for armour became more pressing in the light of both the destruction of a Danish line-of-battleship (the
Christian VIII) and capture of a frigate (the Gefion) as a result of shellfire from some small coastal batteries in the
5
fiord of Eckernförde during the Schleswig-Holstein War of 1849 and the annihilation of the Turkish fleet by the
6
shell-firing guns of the Russian fleet at the Battle of Sinope in 1851 .
The outbreak of the Crimean War finally persuaded both the French and British navies that they needed armoured
ships, especially after some of their wooden line-of-battle ships had been roughly handled by some Russian shell-
firing coastal batteries. Initially, these were steam-powered floating batteries7, but they were soon followed by
designs for sea-going armoured battleships.
The first of these was Dupuy de Lôme’s Gloire. She was built in 1859 and was soon followed by several near-
sisterships. Gloire was built of wood and armoured from end to end with 4.7-inch-thick iron plates with 17-inches
of heavy wood backing. These completely covered the sides of the ship and extended from the main deck to some
feet below the waterline.

A model of Gloire. It can be found in the Toulon Naval Museum.

The two Danish warships carried a total of 132 guns between them whilst the Schleswig-Holstein coastal batteries had 10 guns.
5

The casualties and losses were equally disproportionate. The Danes lost 231 killed, 89 wounded, and 936 captured and the
Schleswig-Holstein defenders lost 4 killed and 14 wounded.
The Russian fleet consisted of six ships-of-the-line, two frigates, and three armed steamers – all equipped with shell-firing guns –
6

whilst the Turks had seven frigates, three corvettes, and two armed steamers. Only one of the Turkish armed steamers escaped
destruction.
The French and British designs were very similar and were about 1,500 tons and carried sixteen heavy guns. The hulls were
7

constructed of wood which were protected by wood-backed iron armour plates.

4

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 In response, the British built HMS Warrior and her sistership, HMS Black Prince. Unlike the French ships, the two
British vessels had iron hulls that were armoured with interlocking sheets of 4.5-inch-thick iron, backed by 18-
inches of teak8.

HMS Warrior. She is preserved in Portsmouth Naval Dockyard.

It is worth noting that although both the Gloire and the Warrior were steam-powered, their main propulsion was
still wind power. They set the pattern for the next generation of ironclads built by Britain and France, whilst across
the Atlantic different designs that met the very specific requirements of the American Civil War were coming to the
fore.

Turrets
The idea of placing heavy guns in armoured turrets can be traced back to two men, the Royal Navy’s Captain
Cowper Phipps Coles and the Swedish engineer, John Ericsson. During the Crimean War, Cowper Coles had
constructed a raft named Lady Nancy, armed with guns that were protected by an armoured 'cupola'. He
successfully used her to shell the Russian town of Taganrog on the Black Sea coast, and on his return to the UK
he began designing a rotating armoured gunhouse (or turret) that could be fitted to low freeboard armoured
vessels. He argued that such ships would be very difficult to hit due to the small silhouette they presented to enemy
ships. At the same time – and completely independently – Ericsson also developed a revolving armoured
gunhouse that was designed to be used on the ship he designed in 1861 for the US Navy, the USS Monitor.
The Coles turret was more technologically advanced than Ericsson’s turret. The former rested on a roller path that
was situated below the waterline on the gun deck whereas Ericsson’s design revolved around a central spindle
and required jacking up before it could turn and was prone to jamming. Furthermore, the Coles turret was protected
with solid, not laminated, armour plating. Despite these differences, the two turret designs were both extensively
used on early ironclads, especially those designed for inshore work.

A comparison between the Coles turret as fitted to the Danish ironclad Gorm (on the left) and the Ericsson turret as fitted to the USS
Monitor (on the right).

The iron plates interlocked using a tongue and groove joint, and the teak was made up of two 9-inch-thick layers that were laid at
8

right angles to each other.

5

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Broadsides and Casemates
The casemate was an alternative way to mount larger guns behind armour. Whereas the Gloire and Warrior – and
their immediate successors – still retained the broadside method of gun arrangement, some ship designers opted
to shorten the length of the ship’s gun battery (i.e., the length of the deck occupied by the ship’s armament) so
that the guns could be protected by a heavily armoured box or casemate. They still carried the same weight of
guns as the broadside ships, but they had fewer and heavier ones. In some ships this casemate formed part of
the ship’s hull9, but in many – especially those used by the Confederate Navy during the American Civil War –
they were separate structures built atop the ship’s hull.

An example of a casemate ironclad. The is the French-designed Tamandare, which was built for the Brazilian Navy in 1865 and used
by them against the Paraguayan Navy during the War of the Triple Alliance.

Barbettes
Towards the end of the ironclad era, the main armament fitted to ships became bigger and more powerful and
could no longer be mounted along a ship’s broadside. To cope with this, casemates became shorter and eventually
developed into the central or box battery.

A contemporary plan of HMS Penelope showing her central or box battery. Her battery and waterline were armoured with 6 inches of
iron armour, and she carried eight 8-inch rifled muzzle-loading guns. The two guns at either end of the battery were capable of being
swiveled so that they could fire through inset gunports that faced forwards and aft, thus enabling her to fire at ships that were not
abeam of her.
To mount heavy guns that could train over wide arcs, warship designers persisted with the development of turrets,
but because of their weight, ships equipped with turrets tended to have lower freeboard. Whilst this was not a
problem for ships that were designed to operate in coastal or calm waters, when fitted to sea-going warships they
made them vulnerable in heavy seas. The loss of HMS Captain – along with her designer and commander Captain
Cowper Coles – during a Channel storm on 7th September 1870 forced designers to look for alternatives. The
result was the barbette.
Barbettes were already a feature of land fortifications and were basically a raised platform on a rampart that
enabled a gun to be fired over a parapet. When applied to a ship, the barbette became a fixed armoured enclosure
– usually in the form of a circular or elongated ring of armour – around a rotating or turntable gun mount, over

This later developed into the even shorter central battery.

9

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 10
which the gun (which might have some sort of armoured shield ) fired. This was much lighter than a turret and
enabled guns to be mounted much higher up.

The French ironclad barbette battleship Vauban. Her main armament of four 9.4-inch guns was mounted in four barbettes and her
secondary armament (six 5.5-inch guns) was mounted in a central battery. She also carried a 7.6-inch gun in her bows, where it was
intended to act as a bow-chaser.

The Vauban undertaking a battle [Link] of the 9.4-inch guns can clearly be seen – behind its armoured shield – on the left of the
painting.

These armoured shields eventually developed into armoured gun houses that completely covered the barbette mounting.
10

Confusingly, these are often referred to as turrets … but they aren’t.

7

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Infernal machines: Sea mines and torpedoes
It is very difficult to sink a warship – even an unarmoured one – by gunfire alone. Unless you can pierce an enemy
ship’s hull below the waterline so that water pours in at such a rate that the crew cannot pump it out as fast as it
is coming in, a ship will stay afloat even if its upperworks are smashed beyond recognition and its armament no
longer functions. As a result, for many years warship designers and naval officers have sought to find the most
effective way of doing this.
In the Ancient world, the answer was simple; equip your warships with a metal ram that you drive into the hulls of
the enemy ships. The only problem was that until the advent of steam power, nations that operated outside areas
like the Mediterranean and Baltic Sea tended to build ships that were powered by sail rather than manpower …
and the vagaries of the wind were such that there was no guarantee that one ship could manoeuvre into a position
where it could ram another and then withdraw so that the sea could pour into the ship it had rammed. Steam power
changed all that, and use of the ram as a weapon enjoyed a resurgence during the ironclad era.
Early in the nineteenth century a Russian engineer had shown that an explosive sea mine could be detonated
remotely by electricity, and in 1842 Samuel Colt demonstrated one that he had designed to the US Navy11. It was
the Russians who – during the Crimean War – laid the first successful minefield. They laid over 1,500 mines that
had been designed by Moritz von Jacobi and by Immanuel Nobel because of which three Royal Navy warships –
HMS Merlin, HMS Vulture, and HMS Firefly – suffered hull damage. During the American Civil War, several types
of sea mine were developed and deployed, and on 12th December 1862 the USS Cairo was the first warship to be
sunk by one.
The biggest drawback of sea mines – which were also known as torpedoes – was that they were stationary. Ships
had to come to the sea mines to risk being sunk by them, and naval officers and engineers began to experiment
with making them mobile. The result was the spar torpedo.
The spar torpedo is basically a sea mine attached to the end of a long spar of wood, which is usually mounted in
the bows of a small launch and pushed up against an enemy vessel. It is then exploded whilst in contact with the
target … and hopefully the launch will not be sunk by the explosion!

A typical spar torpedo launch. The spar torpedo would be carried on board the launch and only deployed during the launch’s
approach run to the target.
The spar torpedo was a temporary answer to the problem, and engineers strove to develop other methods to
making the torpedo self-propelled. In 1866, Robert Whitehead – a British engineer working in Fiume – developed
Giovanni Luppis’s earlier design for a locomotive torpedo into one that would accurately move at a preset depth
on a preset course and at a preset speed. By 1871 a licensed version was being manufactured at the Royal
Laboratories, Woolwich Arsenal, and soon afterwards Whitehead locomotive torpedoes were in service with navies
across the world.

The internal workings of a Whitehead torpedo.

Colt’s mine was looked on favourably by President John Tyler, but his predecessor – John Quincy Adams – described it as being
11

‘not fair and honest warfare’ so the idea was dropped.

8

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Two early Whitehead torpedoes (including one that has been cut in half to show its internal workings) on display in the Italian Naval
Museum in La Spezia.

The impact of the American Civil War

Although the various elements that went into creating the ironclad were coming together when the American Civil
War broke out, that conflict marked the first widespread use of steam-powered, armoured warships. The more
industrialised Union side was quickly able to turn its resources over to building classes of ironclad vessels whereas
the less industrialised Confederates improvised and extemporised a wide variety of ironclad ships, many of which
followed the pattern set by the CSS Virginia.
Other nations saw what the Americans were doing, and there is little doubt that it spurred many of them to follow
the examples set. For example, the Imperial Russian Navy’s Uragan-class (which was also known as the
Bronenosetz-class) monitors were copies of the U S Navy’s Passaic-class monitors, and the Swedes built five
12
John Ericsson-class monitors to a design prepared by Lieutenant John Christian d'Ailly, who had worked
alongside Ericsson in the United States. The Dutch followed the lead set by the Confederates and in early 1862
13
they began to convert the incomplete steam frigate HNLMS De Ruyter into a Virginia-like casemate ironclad .

A half-hull model of HNLMS De Ruyter as she would have looked after her conversion into a casemate ironclad.

Four for the Swedish Navy and one for the Norwegian Navy.
12

The De Ruyter was originally laid down in 1831 as a 74-gun ship-of-the-line, launched as a 54-gun sailing frigate in 1853. and was
13

taken in hand for conversion into a steam frigate in 1859. That conversion was never completed.
9

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 WARS IN WHICH IRONCLADS SAW ACTION
By Bob Cordery
The following chapter lists the wars in which ironclads took part. As can be seen, they played a significant role in
the American Civil War, but also in other less well-known ones of the mid to late nineteenth century.

American Civil War

Battle of the Head of A small Confederate force that included the ironclad ram CSS Manassas attempted
Passes (12th October to attack the US Navy squadron moored off Head of the Passes on the Mississippi
1861) river delta. The attack took place at nighttime, and the US Navy ships withdrew in
total confusion.

The CSS Manassas. She was originally an icebreaking steam tug owned by the Boston Steam Tow-Boat Company. She was
taken as a prize by the Confederate privateer/gunboat CSS Ivy and rebuilt as an ironclad ram.

Battle of Lucas Bend The Union ironclads USS Essex and USS St Louis were transporting troops down the
(11th January 1862) Mississippi in fog when they were engaged by three Confederate warships and a
floating gun platform. After an hour of inconsequential skirmishing, the Confederate
ships withdrew to safety under the Confederate battery at Columbus.

USS St Louis. She was later renamed USS Baron De Kalb.

10

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Battle of Hampton The first naval battle between two opposing ironclads (CSS Virginia and USS
Roads (8th and 9th Monitor).
March 186
On the first day of the battle, the CSS Virginia – supported by several smaller
warships – sank the USS Congress and USS Cumberland. The USS Monitor arrived
early the next morning and for three hours the two ships fought. Both suffered
substantial damage and eventually had to withdraw.

The Battle of Hampton Roads.

Battle of Island The US Navy’s Western Flotilla of armoured gunboats (USS Benton, USS Mound
Number Ten (28th City, USS Cincinnati, USS Carondelet, USS St Louis, and USS Pittsburg) supported
February to 8th April operations by the US Army on the Mississippi River.
1862)

US Navy ironclads bombarding Confederate defences on Island Number Ten on the Mississippi.

Battle of Plum Point Two of the US Navy’s Western Flotilla of armoured gunboats (USS Mound City and
Bend (10th May 1862) USS Cincinnati) were sunk by vessels of the Confederate River Defense Fleet. They
were later raised and returned to service.

11

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The USS Mound City. She was sunk at the Battle of Plum Point Bend but later raised and repaired. She suffered serious damage
on 17th June 1862 at the Battle of Saint Charles, when her boiler was hit.
The addition of a wooden bridge or wheelhouse on top of the armoured conning tower is of interest.

Battle of Drewry's US warships, including the ironclads USS Monitor, USS Galena, and USRC
Bluff (15th May 1862) Naugatuck, sailed up the James River to test the defences of Richmond. They
encountered underwater obstacles and very accurate fire from Fort Darling. As a
result, the USS Galena was damaged, and the US warships withdrew.

USS Galena cleared for action.

Battle of Memphis The US Navy’s Western Flotilla of armoured gunboats (USS Benton, USS Louisville,
(6th June 1862) USS Carondelet, USS St Louis, and USS Cairo) destroyed the Confederate River
Defense Fleet.

12

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 One of the Confederate River Defence Fleet’s rams begins to sink during the Battle of Memphis.

Battle of Saint Two ironclad gunboats of the US Navy’s Western Flotilla (USS Mound City and USS
Charles (17th June St Louis), acting in support of US Army forces advancing towards Little Rock,
1862) Arkansas, were in action against Confederate gun batteries. The boilers of the USS
Mound City were hit by shellfire and filled the ship with scalding steam. Only 25 of the
175 crew members escaped death or serious injury.

Battle of Fort Armoured gunboats US Navy’s Mississippi River Squadron – formerly the Western
Hindman (9th to 11th Flotilla – (USS Cincinnati, USS Louisville, and USS Baron De Kalb (ex-USS St Louis))
January 1863) assisted the US Army in the capture of the largest number of Confederate troops west
of the Mississippi River to surrender during the war.

US Navy ironclads bombarding Fort Hindman.

Battle of Fort Four monitors of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron (USS Patapsco, USS
McAllister (3rd March Passaic, USS Nahant, and USS Montauk) attacked Fort McAllister, Georgia.
1863)

13

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 USS Montauk in action off Fort McAllister. She has cleared her decks for action and is towing her empty ship’s boat behind her.

Battle of Fort Ships of US Navy’s Mississippi River Squadron (including the USS Baron De Kalb
Pemberton (11th and armoured river gunboat USS Chillicothe) assisted the US Army of the
March 1863) Tennessee’s attack on Fort Pemberton.

The USS Chillicothe. She is an interesting exampl,e of the smaller type of ironclad built for the US Navy.

First Battle of The biggest clash between opposing ironclads in the war so far. Seven Passaic-class
Charleston Harbour monitors, and two ironclads (the USS New Ironsides and USS Keokuk)
(7th April 1863) unsuccessfully took on the defences of Charleston Harbor, which included two small
Confederate ironclads, the CSS Chicora and CSS Palmetto State.

Sailing in line ahead formation, the monitors of the US Navy approach the defences of Charleston Harbour.

14

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The USS Keokuk. She was an experimental design that had a whaleback deck and fixed ‘turrets’ that were actually small
casemates. She sank on 8th April 1863 as a result of damage suffered during the attack on Charleston Habour. Her armament (two
11-inch Dahlgren guns) was salvaged by the Confederates, and one of them is preserved on Charleston waterfront at White Point
Garden.

Battle of Grand Gulf Seven US Navy ironclads of the Navy’s Mississippi River Squadron (USS Pittsburg,
(29th April 1863) USS Louisville, USS Carondelet, USS Mound City, followed by USS Benton, USS
Tuscubia, and USS Lafayette) bombarded the Confederate fortification at Grand Gulf
in as part of Major General US Grant’s Vicksburg campaign.

US Navy ironclads in action at Grand Gulf. They are (left to right) USS Benton, USS Tuscubia, USS Louisville, USS Carondelet,
USS Pittsburgh, USS Mound City, and USS Lafayette.

Battle of Wassaw The US Navy monitors USS Weehawken and USS Nahant (assisted by the gunboat
Sound (17th June USS Cimmerone) fought and captured the Confederate ironclad ram CSS Atlanta.
1863)

USS Weehawken firing at the Confederate ironclad ram CSS Atlanta during the Battle of Wassaw Sound.

15

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 First Battle of Fort An ironclad (USS New Ironsides) and five monitors (USS Montauk, USS Patapsco,
Wagner (10th and 11th USS Passaic, USS Nahant, and USS Catskill) of the South Atlantic Blockading
July 1863) Squadron supported a landing by US Army forces of the Department of the South by
bombarding Confederate coastal defences protecting the southern end of Morris
Island.

Officers of USS Catskill relaxing on deck at the end of the war. The two different calibre main guns (a 15-inch smoothbore and 11-
inch Dahlgren) can clearly be seen in this photograph.

Second Battle of Fort Warships of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron supported the US Army’s
Wagner (18th July second unsuccessful attempt to capture Fort Wagner.
1863)

The USS Passaic, one of the monitors of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron.

Second Battle of Warships of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron supported the US Army’s third
Charleston Harbour – and this time successful – attempt to capture Fort Wagner.
(17th August to 8th
September 1863)

Second Battle of Fort An ironclad (USS New Ironsides) and seven monitors (USS Montauk, USS Patapsco,
Sumter (9th USS Passaic, USS Nahant, USS Weehawken, USS Nantucket, and USS Catskill) of
September 1863) the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron unsuccessfully attacked Fort Sumter.

16

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 USS New Ironsides on blockading duty.

The attack on USS The Confederate semi-submersible torpedo boat CSS David successfully attacked
New Ironsides (5th the USS New Ironsides with a spar torpedo. The CSS David sank, but was later raised
October 1863) and repaired, and the USS New Ironsides suffered only minor damage.

The CSS David alongside the dock in Charleston.

A contemporary plan of the CSS David.

17

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Sinking of USS The Confederate submersible spar torpedo boat CSS H L Hunley sank the USS
14
Housatonic (17th Housatonic with a spar torpedo. Both vessels subsequently sank.
February 1864)

The USS Housatanic, the first ship ever to be sunk by a submersible.

The submersible spar torpedo boat CSS H L Hunley.

Battle of Plymouth On the 19th April, the ironclad ram CSS Albemarle assisted Confederate land forces
(17th to 20th April 1864) to successfully attack the US Army garrisons occupying Fort Comfort and Fort
Williams at Plymouth, Georgia. In the face of overwhelming odds, the US Army troops
surrendered on 20th April. During the attack, the CSS Albemarle sank one US Navy
gunboat (USS Southfield) and damaged another (USS Miami).

Although no ironclads were involved in this incident, it is included in this list because of its historical importance.
14

18

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The CSS Albemarle sinking the USS Southfield during the Battle of Plymouth.

Battle of Albemarle After her successful support of the Confederate attacks on Fort Comfort and Fort
Sound (5th May 1864) Williams, the CSS Albemarle was involved in an unsuccessful attempt by the
Confederate Army to capture New Bern. The CSS Albemarle was opposed by eight
US Navy gunboats, and the fighting lasted until sunset. The CSS Albemarle was
damaged and withdrew overnight. She was subsequently sunk on 27th October when
a spar torpedo was detonated against her side by a raiding party led by Lieutenant
William Cushing. The Albemarle‘s hull was subsequently raised and sold.

The CSS Albemarle. She was damaged during the Battle of Albemarle Sound and later sunk by a spar torpedo.

15
Battle of Cherbourg The USS Kearsarge sank the Confederate raider CSS Alabama off the coast of
(19th June 1864) Cherbourg, France.

The USS Kearsarge sinking the Confederate raider CSS Alabama of the French port of Cherbourg.

Although no ironclads were involved in this incident, it is included in this list because of its historical importance. It is of interest to
15

note that the CSS Alabama was escorted out of French territorial waters by the French ironclad Couronne, the first iron-hulled
ironclad to be built for the French Navy.
19

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Battle of Mobile Bay A US Navy fleet that included four monitors (USS Manhattan, USS Tecumseh, USS
(2nd to 23rd August Chickasaw, and USS Winnebago) attacked the entrance of Mobile Bay, which was
1864) defended by three forts and a Confederate ironclad (CSS Tennessee). During the
battle, the USS Tecumseh was sunk, and the CSS Tennessee was rendered
inoperable, although she was later captured, repaired, and commissioned into the US
Navy as the USS Tennessee on 5th August. She then took part in the capture of Fort
Morgan on 23rd August.

The Battle of Mobile Bay. The USS Hartford can be seen on the left of the picture, with the CSS Tennessee in the centre. Two of
the US Navy’s monitors can be seen on the right of the picture.

Second Battle of Fort Ships of the North Atlantic Blockading Squadron – which included numerous
Fisher (13th to 15th ironclads and monitors – assisted troops of the US Army and US Marines to capture
January 1865) Fort Fisher, North Carolina. This was the biggest combined operation of the Civil War.

The USS Canonicus was one of the US Nay monitors that took part in the Second Battle of Fort Fisher.

Battle of Trent's A strong flotilla of Confederate warships that was led by the ironclad CSS
Reach (23rd to 25th Fredericksburg and that included two ironclad rams (the CSS Richmond and CSS
January 1865) Virginia II), five gunboats and three torpedo boats bombarded Fort Brady on the
James River and engaged four US Navy ships, including the monitor, USS
Onondaga. The attack was unsuccessful

The CSS Fredericksburg. She was subsequently scuttled by the Confederates when Richmond was abandoned.

20

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The Second Schleswig War
Battle of Dybbøl (7th The Danish turret ship Rolf Krake assisted the Danish defenders by mounting several
to 18th April 1864) shore bombardments, particularly of the Prussian siege batteries The Prussians who
were attacking the Danish defences were unable to counter her as their own navy
lacked any armoured ships.

A contemporary etching of the Rolf Krake.

A model of the Rolf Krake in the Royal Arsenal Museum (or Tøjhusmuseet) in Copenhagen.

The Chincha Islands War

Battle of Callao (2nd A Spanish fleet of seven warships (the ironclad Numancia, the steam frigates Reina
May 1866) Blanca, Resolución, Berenguela, Villa de Madrid, and Almansa, and the corvette
Vencedora) engaged the coastal defences of Callao, Peru, for approximately five
hours. They did considerable damage to the coastal defences but broke off action not
long after the Spanish admiral in command was wounded.

21

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 A model of the Numancia in the Cartagena Naval Museum.

The Third Italian War of Independence/Seven Weeks War

Battle of Lissa (20th This was the largest naval battle fought between fleets of mainly ironclad ships. An
July 1866) Austrian fleet that included seven broadside ironclads (Erzherzog Ferdinand Max,
Habsburg, Kaiser Max, Don Juan d’Austria, Prinz Eugene, Drache, and Salamander)
decisively beat an Italian fleet that included eleven broadside ironclads (Re d’Italia,
Re di Portogallo, Regina Maria Pia, San Martino, Castelfidardo, Ancona, Principe di
Carignano, Formidabile, Terribile, Palestro, and Varese) and a turret ram
(Affondatore).

The Battle of Lissa.

A contemporary plan of the Italian turret ship Affondatore, showing the layput of her turrets and armour.

The War of the Triple Alliance/The Paraguayan War

The loss of the Rio Whilst taking part in the bombardment of the Paraguayan defences at Curuzú on 1st
de Janeiro (2nd September, she was hit and damaged by a 68-pounder shell. She was repaired
September 1866) overnight, and on her way to rejoin the rest of the Brazilian flotilla, she was hit and
sunk by two floating mines.

22

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The Rio de Janeiro sinking after hitting a floating mine.

The Passage of A Brazilian flotilla of armoured ships – seven ironclads (Brazil, Mariz e Barros,
Humaitá (10th Tamandaré, Colombo, Cabral, Barroso, and Herval) and three monitors (Bahia,
February 1868) Silvado, and Lima Barros) – forced their way past the heavily-armed Paraguayan
fortress of Humaitá on the River Paraguay.

A contemporary illustration of the Brazilian ironclad Mariz e Barros after the Passage of Humaitá.

The attack on the Several canoes filled with soldiers attempted to capture several Brazilian warships
Lima Barros and during the night, including the Lima Barros and Cabral. After hand-to-hand fighting on
Cabral (2nd March the decks of the Brazilian warships, the Paraguayan attackers were driven off.
1869)

The nighttime attack on the Brazilian fleet.

23

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The Boshin War
Battle of Miyako Bay The eight ships of the newly-formed Japanese Imperial fleet – including the Kotetsu
(6th May 1869) (formerly the CSS Stonewall) – were at anchor in Miyako Bay when ships of the so-
called Ezo Republic mounted a surprise attack. The crew of one of the attacking ships
– the Kaiten – attempted to board the Kotetsu, but they were driven off by the fire
from Kotetsu’s Gatling gun. The attack failed, and the Ezo ships broke off the action
and fled, pursued by the Imperial ships. One of the Ezo Republic’s ships – the
16
Chiyoda – ran aground and was captured .

The CSS Stonewall. She was built in France for the Confederate Navy (with the covername Sphinx to give the impression that she
was being buit for the Egyptian Navy) but when the deception was discovered, she was sold to Denmark on 31st March 1864 and
became the Stæ[Link] she had been delivered to the Danish Royal Dockyard in Copenhagen, the Danes sold her to the
Confederacy on 6th January 1865. She the set sail for North America, and after diversions via Ferrol in Spain to fix a damaged
rudder and Lisbon in Portugal to take on more coal, she eventually reached Havana in Cuba … by which time the American Civil
War had ended. CSS Stonewall was blockaded in Havana by US Navy ships, and her captain finally surrendered her to the
Spanish, who handed her over to the United States on 2nd November 1865. She was then taken to Washington Navy Yard, where
she was laid up. As the US Navy did not want her, she sold on 5th August 1867 to the Imperial Japanese government, who
renamed her Kotetsu.
Her sistership – who was built with the covername Cheops – was sold to the Prussian government on 25th May 1864. She was
renamed Prinz Adalbert and served in the Prussian Navy until 28th May 1878, by which time her wooden hull was rotten and she
was no longer seaworthy.

Battle of Hakodate In the immediate aftermath of the Battle of Miyako Bay, the Imperial Japanese fleet –
(7th May 1869) which was supporting the landing of Imperial troops on Hokkaido – attacked the ships
of the Ezo Republic, and after putting the Kaiten out of action, they sank the remaining
Ezo ship – the Banryū – for the loss of the Chōyō.

It is on interest to note that Tōgō Heihachirō – who later commanded the Imperial Japanese fleet at the Battle of Tsushima – served
16

as a junior officer aboard one of the Imperial ships.

24

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The Kotetsu (ex-CSS Stonewall) can be seen leading the Imperial Japanese fleet’s battle line.

The Russo-Turkish War

Sinking of the Lüft-ü The Lüft-ü Celil was part of the Turkish force patrolling the Danube Delta when she
Celil (11th May 1877) engaged a Russian artillery battery. A Russian shell struck her – probably in the boiler
room – and caused a large explosion that destroyed the ship, killing most of her crew.

The Lüft-ü Celil.

Assault on Sokhumi An Ottoman squadron consisting of the ironclads Iclaliye, Avnillah, Muin-i Zafer, Feth-
(14th May 1877) i Bülend, Mukaddeme-i Hayir, and Necm-i Şevket bombarded Russian positions
around the Black Sea port of Sokhumi in preparation for a landing by Turkish infantry.
The Ottomans captured Sokhumi two days later.

A contemporary plan of the Feth-i Bülend and Mukaddeme-i Hayir showing the layout of their guns and armour.

25

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Action off Mačin Three Russian and one Romanian spar torpedo boats attacked the Turkish monitors
24th/25th May 1877) Seyfi, and Feth-ül Islam, which were moored off the Romanian coast near Mačin. In
the first successful attack of its kind, the Romanian spar torpedo boat hit the Seyfi
with its spar torpedo, which exploded. As a result of the damage it suffered, the Seyfi
sank.

A Romanian painting that depicts the sinking of the Seyfi by a Romanian spar torpedo boat.

The attack on the The Iclaliye, Feth-i Bülend, and Mukaddeme-i Hayir were anchored in the port of
Iclaliye (10th June Sulina at the mouth of the Danube. Six Russian spar torpedo boats targeted the
1877) Iclaliye, which was protected by defensive nets. The Iclaliye was undamaged but one
of the torpedo boats was sunk by the explosion of its own torpedo.

The Iclaliye at anchor.

Battle off Constanta The Feth-i Bülend engaged the Russian armed steamer Vesta – which was acting as
(23rd July 1877) a mothership for several spar torpedo boats – in an inconclusive action that left both
17
vessels lightly damaged .

One of the officers serving aboard the Vesta was Zinovy Petrovitch Rozhestvensky, who commanded the Russian fleet at the Battle
17

of Tsushima. He had commanded one of the spar torpedo boats that attacked the Iclaliye on 10th June 1877.
26

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The Feth-i Bülend in pursuit of the Vesta.

Attack on the Asar-I During the night, three Russian spar torpedo boats attempted to sink the Asar-I
Tevfik (23rd/24th Tevfik. One spar torpedo was exploded against a boat that was protecting the target,
August 1877) and the Asar-I Tevfik only suffered minor damage.

A contemporary plan of the Asar-I Tevik showing the layout of her guns and armour.

The Asar-I Tevik as originally built.

Attack on the Asar-I A Russian spar torpedo boat unsuccessfully attacked the Asar-I Sevket.
Sevket (24th August
1877)

27

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 A Russian painting depicting the attack on the Asar-I Sevket.

The defence of The Hifz-ur Rahman engaged Russian minelayers trying to lay mines in the mouth of
Suling (9th November the Danube. She was lightly damaged
1877)

The Hifz-ur Rahman at anchor.

The Peruvian Civil War

Battle of Pacocha The Peruvian ironclad turret ship/monitor Huáscar supported the rebels and began
(29th May 1877) harassing commercial shipping. British authorities sent two unarmoured warships –
the frigate HMS Shah and corvette HMS Amethyst – to capture the Huáscar, and on
29th May the British ships intercepted Huáscar off the coast of Yio in southern Peru.
The Huáscar was hit sixty times by shells fired by the Royal Navy ships, but was not
severely damaged, and made her way inshore, where the British ships could not
follow her. During the night, two steam launches carried by HMS Shah attempted to
torpedo Huáscar, but they were unsuccessful. This was the first instance of a
locomotive torpedo being used in action.

28

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The Huáscar and HMS Shah during the Battle of Pacocha.

The War of the Pacific

Battle of Iquique (21st The Peruvian ironclad turret ship/monitor Huáscar sank the unarmoured Chilian
May 1879) corvette Esmeralda off the Peruvian port of Iquique.

The Huáscar sinking the unarmoured Chilian corvette Esmeralda at the Battle of Iquique.

Battle of Punta The Peruvian armoured frigate Independencia attempted to sink the unarmoured
Gruesa (21st May Chilian schooner Covadonga near the Peruvian port of Iquique. The Covadonga ran
1879) inshore and into the cove at Punta Gruesa, followed by the deeper-drafted
Independencia. The latter hit an underwater obstacle and began to sink. She was
later set on fire by her crew after they had been rescued by the Huáscar.

29

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The Independencia begins to sink whilst the Covadonga escapes.

Battle of Angamos Two armoured frigates of the Chilian Navy – the Blanco Encalada and the Almirante
(8th October 1879) Cochrane – supported by four small unarmoured warships, engaged the Peruvian
ironclad turret ship/monitor Huáscar. After a battle that lasted nearly four hours, the
Huáscar surrendered. After she had been repaired, she was commissioned into the
Chilian Navy, and is now preserved as a museum ship.

Huáscar in action during the Battle of Angamos.

30

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 DESIGNER’S NOTES – HOW I GOT TO WHERE I GOT TO AND WHY!
These rules came about as the result of wanting to develop the original version of Bob Cordery’s American Civil
War rules published in his excellent book, GRIDDED NAVAL WARGAMES (hereafter referred to as GNW) so as
to allow for a more granular approach in respect of the types of ship used. Initially then, my plan was to merely
expand upon the ship types included therein but it soon became obvious that whilst I could use the core elements
of Bob’s system the rules would need some fairly substantial amending to get them where I wanted to them to be.
The solution came, for the most part, from David Manley’s equally excellent set of ironclad era rules, DAHLGREN
AND COLUMBIAD (hereafter referred to as D&C). This set of rules contained all the extra detail I required in
respect of individual ship detail and so I decided to hack elements away from both sets of rules, bolt them together
Frankenstein-like, and then to hone and polish the end result into something recognisable as a set of naval
wargame rules. After much experimentation and not a few blind alleys, the end result resides within these pages.
I should point out that it is a tribute to the rule writing skill of both authors that in either case the core details
appeared to be able to withstand any amount of my well-intentioned butchery.

Gridded Naval Wargames by Bob Cordery. Dahlgren and Columbiad by David Manley.

Both sets of rules are eminently playable in their own right and accord the ironclad enthusiast a great contrast in
styles and complexity. GNW are by far and away the simpler of the two sets, but one should not equate simplicity
with a lack of ‘realism’. A lot of thought and study of the period has gone into them, and the gaming results are
broadly similar in effect and outcome to much more complex sets. They are ideal for the gamer that wants a quick
naval diversion – perhaps as a way to introduce new players to the genre – or as the waterborne element of a
traditional land-based campaign, shades of Grant’s operations along the Mississippi, culminating in the fall of
Vicksburg in 1863.
D&C are equally playable but with a rather different approach and are what I would regard as being a more ‘formal’
set of naval wargame rules. As one might expect, with more detail comes added complexity but that should
certainly not deter the gamer from using these very popular and eminently playable rules. For me, their biggest
single advantage is the fact that individual ships and weapons are more effectively modelled in respect of their
capabilities than in GNW.
The following is a brief overview of how elements from the two sets work and how I came to the resulting design
decisions used in the rules.
The Ships
In GNW ships are one of four types with each type having a number of damage points, a number of gun dice and
a movement factor. These can be adjusted up and down as required as the result of one’s own research or
thoughts on the subject. In D&C ships are rated for the level of protection, the overall size of the ship, its perceived
manoeuvrability, speed and the type and location of the artillery carried. In short, D&C gives a far more detailed
depiction of specific ships rather than using generic types.

31

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 For these rules I was able to make use of pretty much all of the detail from D&C with the notable exception of the
manoeuvrability factor as the relatively low speeds of the ships on a hex grid made the use of turning arcs largely
redundant. As a crude rule of thumb in these rules the faster a ship can go the more turns it can perform although
one may be able to factor in examples of historical ships that were better or worse at manoeuvring – I did not
bother although factoring in such additional detail should not be too difficult. In effect ship movement and turning
is pretty much as per GNW.
D&C assigns a Defence Factor to a ship based on the size of a hull. All I did was to take this figure and multiply it
by 3 to generate the number of damage points a vessel could sustain. The Defence Factor became the Hull Factor
in these rules and is used when conducting ramming attacks and also for calculating potential Critical Hits.
Armour is rated as being from zero for wooden ships up to 5 for large, ocean-going ironclads. In common with
D&C I opted to use the firing weapon’s penetration factor compared against the target ship’s armour factor to give
a modifier to any damage rolls. Simple in execution and effective as a game mechanic.
GNW uses a system of D6 die rolls for firing where the number of dice rolled decreases with range. Each ship type
is assigned several D6 dice based on the type and quantity of artillery represented. This loss of firing dice due to
range captures the reduction in accuracy and effectiveness very neatly.
D&C uses a gun factor (depending on the number and type carried) and the relative penetrative power (greater
with rifled weapons) together with a D6 die roll against which the target vessel rolls a D6 die with modifiers for the
defence value and armour carried. Damage is inflicted based on by how much the firing ship’s total exceeds the
target ship’s score and rather than using damage points the damage is instead graded as light, medium, heavy,
or wrecked. In GNW if you hit the target then damage points are recorded on a simple ship damage chart.
An early version of the rules included the provision for rolling for hit location, but I found that this tended to slow
the game down and would need rather more detailed hit locations to be effective. The main areas required for a
ship to function are captured within the Critical Hit results which have provision for specific hit locations.
To summarise the above: in these rules a ship has damage points based on the size of the hull and then a separate
rating for the overall level of armour protection. The movement allowance is calculated by taking the ship’s speed
in knots and dividing this by three to give the movement points available. Any artillery carried is rated for calibre,
the number of guns available, the impact effect on a target and considers the whereabouts on the firing ship such
weapons are located. Damage is recorded against the target’s damage points and provision is made for the effects
of Critical Hits on various parts of the target ship.
To understand in more detail how I got to where I am, I have described the rationale behind the relevant parts of
the rules below. The sections mostly follow the sequence of play used in the ACW rules in GNW. It works very
nicely and so I could see little reason to change it although it does of necessity include features not present in the
original version.
Firing
Rather than use graded damage levels I opted to use damage points, basically because it is a simple and easily
managed method and so to facilitate this, I took the D&C defence values and multiplied them by three to give me
the number of damage points available.
The system I settled on for firing was to take the Gunnery Factor from D&C and use this as the number of D6 dice
to be rolled to hit an opposing target. For example, a D&C gunnery factor of 3 would require the firing player to roll
3D6 dice to hit a target. The number of D6 dice (subject to a minimum of one D6 die) rolled is reduced by one D6
die per hex range with larger rifles and heavier smoothbore weapons having a maximum range of 6 hexes and
everything else is 4. The range ratio is consistent with that used in D&C.
To score a hit or hits I used the convention from GNW of 1, 2 and 3 being a miss, 4 and 5 a single potential hit
and a 6 being two potential hits. For each potential hit scored a further D6 die is rolled, modified by the net result
of comparing the penetration value of the firing weapon to the armour value of the target ship. It is entirely possible
that an armoured ship could get peppered with enemy shot – potential hits – only to have them bouncing off
ineffectively. I am perfectly satisfied with the historical ‘feel’ of this mechanic however frustrating for the firing player
it may be!
D&C makes use of Critical Hits, and this is something I think is important for the period flavour given the relatively
new technology being used. I settled on the very simple system whereby if a target ship sustains damaging hits
greater than the target ship’s Hull Factor then a simple D6 die roll is made and the effect noted from the Critical
Hit table. I retained the concept of the Critical Point from GNW, but it is set quite low and so when a ship reaches
its penultimate damage point not only is it required to roll for a Critical Hit but must also break off the action if able
to do so. As with Initiative the Critical Point can be adjusted as required to suit scenario specific instructions.

32

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Initiative
GNW has an effective system for initiative and so there was little reason for me to change it – basically each side
rolls a D6 die, and the higher score has the choice of moving first or second. This could readily be adjusted if
required to suit specific scenario requirements.
Movement
In D&C a ship’s speed is calculated at one movement point per two knots and is measured in inches or centimetres.
This meant that, for example, a ship with a speed of 10 knots would move 5 inches. For a grid-based game this
would work as a straight translation i.e., 5 hexes. That is fine up to a point and in my case the point was determined
by the size of the models I use and that of my available playing area.
The scratch-built models in my own collection for the period are roughly 1:500th to 1:700th meaning that the larger
types are some 5 ½” long. As I am limited for table space at home – a 6ft by 4ft table is the absolute maximum
size of playing area I can deploy – I opted to use hexes measuring 4” between the flat sides with the models
occupying not one but two grid areas. This gives me a playing area with a reasonable number of hexes to fight
over – roughly 18 by 12 – which, when you take into consideration the two-hex deployment of models, equates to
roughly 9 by 6. To make this viable as a playing area the next step was to adjust the conversion scale for
movement. I opted to use the notional scale of one movement point equalling 3 knots with odd amounts rounded
up or down as required. This would give our previously mentioned 10 knots ship a speed of 3 – remember this is
individual hexes and not pairs. As a result of this adjustment most ships in these rules have a movement allowance
of from 1 to 4 hexes which fits in nicely with the space that I have available whilst allowing for a reasonable amount
of ‘sea room’ for manoeuvring.
To change direction, I have adopted the simple expedient of costing a single 60 degree turn at one movement
point. Ships may turn as many points as their movement allowance, but each is at a cost of one movement point.
Usually, a ship must enter a new hex in order to make a turn although there are some exceptions to this. Overall,
this is broadly similar to the system that Bob Cordery used in GNW. D&C allows for different turning rates for ships
based on their size and known historical performance. It works really well on a free table (i.e., non-gridded) but
does not easily translate onto a grid due to the use of varied turning angles and more granular ship speed so
instead I opted to stick with Bob’s tried and trusted approach. All I needed to do was to make an adjustment for
models occupying two hexes and so I adopted the technique used in the famous Avalon Hill board game Wooden
Ships and Iron Men. Basically, a model turns by moving its bow to face a new hex side whilst swinging its stern in
the opposite direction – for example the bow turns one hex side to starboard meaning that the stern swings one
hex to port – and into a new hex.
I have made no allowance for ships under sail or using steam and sail. It is my belief that sail was becoming more
and more an auxiliary to steam power and so only really came into its own on long voyages when fuel was restricted
and supply uncertain. Certainly, relying on steam power whilst operating along the rivers or close inshore was
preferable to relying on the vagaries of the wind. Many fully rigged ships when operating inshore or along the rivers
often reduced their sailing rig to bare poles when under steam power – certainly at the very least this would reduce
a potential fire hazard!
Ramming
The system in GNW is simple and effective, as is that of D&C. My own take on this is probably closer to the former
but with an added level of detail. This is essentially using the ramming ship’s size, whether it is ram equipped, the
speed at the point of impact and the angle of strike. After the attacking ship has resolved its ram and assuming it
has inflicted any damage then the target ship gets to do the same in return. Although accorded a separate section
in this description for convenience, ramming attacks are simply a part of the movement phase.
Mines, Obstacles, Shore Batteries, and Forts
Rules for mines, obstacles, shore batteries and forts etc., were for the most part based on D&C but with my own
grid-based take on things.
The Historical Take – Feel and Flavour
I do not profess to be an expert on naval warfare during the American Civil War, but my research has revealed a
number of things that I felt should be reflected in some way in the rules. We are very much in uncharted territory
here as much of the available information on the period can be vague or contradictory. What I wanted to achieve
though, was to ensure that the overall ‘feel’ of naval combat in the period captured the ‘flavour’ of the age – these
rules are more ‘based upon’ rather than being a detailed simulation. With this in mind the following assumptions,
rightly or wrongly, influenced the final version of the rules.

33

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Bigger guns – Bigger problems
As the size of naval guns grew so the amount of time taken to load increased. It also meant that invariably fewer
were carried, so the gunners needed to be sure that every shot counted. This had the effect of bringing the
engagement ranges down as it was easier to hit a target close in. In game turns this is built in by using relatively
short ranges and with the reduction of firing dice as the range increases lessening the chance of a hit or hits. It
also means that long range artillery duels are not particularly effective although there is always the chance of a
lucky hit or two.
Armour
I have used an overall value of armour protection based on the type of vessel used rather than taking actual data
around thicknesses or types. Protection above and beyond timber came in a multitude of types and it would be
incredibly challenging to cater for every combination of material used and the relative value the protection accorded
– not to mention where on the ship such protection existed. Using a generic value based on the type of ship being
represented greatly simplifies matters but should players want to adjust the armour value based on their own
research into the subject then by all means do so – as long as the opposition are made aware of any such
adjustment, preferably in the calm before the action commences!
Speed, Sails and Turning
Although this was a period of transition from sail to steam power with many ships continuing to carry a full sailing
rig the writing was very much on the wall as far as relying on the vagaries of the wind for a means of propulsion.
There are many commercially available rules that use methods for calculating combined sail/steam movement –
this is NOT one of them! The rationale is simple. Steam power accorded a dependable method of propulsion,
which is hugely important when a ship is manoeuvring in a confined space – like in a river or inshore. For long
journeys on the high seas the use of sails would come into its own – mainly due to the reduced bunker capacity
many of these steam/sail hybrid ships possessed. Historically many ships with a full sailing rig would often take
upper masts and spars down when operating inshore or along the rivers and rely solely on steam for propulsion –
the USS New Ironsides being a good example. With this in mind, I have dispensed entirely with the use of sails
and so all movement is steam based.
One of the disadvantages of using a hex grid-based playing area is that turning is limited to increments of 60
degrees. As a game mechanic I have no problem with this, but it does make for some rather abstracted turning –
especially when one is using quite low speeds. Many ‘open table’ style naval wargames use a variety of turning
devices often with assorted angles of turn. These rules have no such refinements and so I have opted to use the
‘move one hex and turn one hex side at a cost of a movement point’ as a simple catch-all technique. In many ways
this is probably the least satisfactory amendment but sometimes one has to bite the bullet and use a mechanic
that appears to be very ‘gamey’ rather than accurate. I have no problem with this and as the same system helps
or hinders all equally it does not really matter. Should players want to use something a little more complex for their
manoeuvring then by all means they should do so – as far as I got in this respect was to think about how best to
tackle it and even then, I abandoned the attempt as being more effort than it was worth! Under steam propulsion
most ships, especially heavily laden ironclads, moved and manoeuvred in a rather ponderous fashion so the
system I opted for, which is more or less identical to that in GNW, works well enough.
What’s Missing?
At this stage I have not made any provision for boarding or infantry shooting from ships. Submarines have not
featured, and I have chosen to ignore the effects of river currents and tides. All of these topics would be easy
enough to factor in in some way but for a variety of reasons I never got around to it although early versions of the
rules did feature rules for currents. In retrospect these were not particularly well thought out so I may yet revisit
the topic in due course.
In Conclusion
The rules that have resulted from the fusion of the two sets mentioned, along with my somewhat haphazard
additions and adaptations, appear to work reasonably well. I am not a professional rule writer by any means but
am firmly of the school of thought that if it feels right then it must be so – and to me these do feel right. Having
said that I am as fallible as the next man and so there will undoubtedly be occasions when a situation occurs
during a game that the rules either fail to address or throw up some anomaly. In such cases I suggest having a
reasonable debate after the game has concluded may resolve the situation for future reference, or resort to the
simple and time saving expedient of deciding the outcome using an opposed dice roll so as to avoid delaying the
action unduly.
Along with the rest of the PORTABLE WARGAME series I believe that these rules should be viewed first and
foremost as a toolkit for naval enthusiasts to use in such a way as their own ideas and research dictate. There are
many rules commercially available covering this fascinating period of naval warfare at all levels of complexity and

34

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 detail. As mentioned previously, this set of rules is pitched firmly at the easier and hopefully more playable end of
the scale and so it is hoped that existing naval gamers will find them to be a pleasant diversion and a good way to
introduce ‘landlubbers’ to the joys of warfare along the rivers, coasts, and high seas during the period of the
American Civil War.
I sincerely hope so.

35

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 THE FUNDAMENTAL RULES OF WARGAMING
The First Rule of Wargaming
‘Nothing can be done contrary to what could or would be done in actual war.'
From THE RULES OF THE NAVAL WAR GAME
by Fred T Jane

The Spirit of the Wargame

‘Wargames are played, for the most part, without the supervision of an umpire. The game relies on the integrity of
the individual players to show consideration for other players and to abide by the rules. All players should conduct
themselves in a disciplined manner, demonstrating courtesy and sportsmanship at all times, irrespective of how
competitive they may be. This is the spirit of the wargame.’
Adapted from THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME in THE RULES OF GOLF
as published by the R&A Ltd.

If in doubt ...
'Let the dice decide!'
From HOW TO PLAY WAR GAMES IN MINIATURE
by Joseph Morschauser (1962)

36

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 THE RULES
Sequence of Play
1. Each turn is divided into the following phases:
1.1. Both sides roll to free from Grounding, to free any ships locked together following a ram attack,
remove markers from sinking ships or adjudicate Fire or Flood effects.
1.2. Firing: Both sides may carry out gunfire from any appropriate ship, fortification, or shore
battery. Gunnery is deemed to be simultaneous with effects applied at the end of the phase.
1.3. Initiative: Both sides roll a D6 die for initiative – the side rolling the higher score has the choice
of moving first or second.
1.4. Movement: Player 1 (designated by the winner of the initiative die roll – see 3 above) moves
any or all of their ships, resolving grounding, ram, spar torpedo or mine attacks at the point at
which they occur and with immediate effect. Player 2 then does the same.
1.5. End of turn: Check victory conditions and or any scenario specific outcomes.

Combat Resolution Overview

2. Firing is a two-step process – the firing player rolls a number of D6 dice to hit the target and then,
assuming any hits are scored, rolls to potentially inflict damage. Ramming attacks merely roll to
potentially inflict damage whilst Mine and Spar Torpedo attacks use a separate two-step process.
3. The D6 die scores required to hit a target when firing are as follows:
Dice Score Result
1, 2, or 3 Miss.
4 or 5 1 potential Hit.
6 2 potential Hits.
4. The D6 die scores required to inflict damage points as a result of gunnery or a ram attack are as
follows:
Dice Score Result
1, 2, or 3 No damage
4 or 5 1 point of damage.
6 2 points of damage.
5. If – after the penetration/armour modifier has been applied – a damage D6 die roll totals more than 6
then there is a chance of further damage being inflicted.
18
6. The chance of scoring a further damage point is equal to any excess scored .
7. In either case damage points are recorded on the target ship damage record chart.

The Rule of 1 and 6 – Gunnery or Ramming Attacks

8. A D6 die roll of a 1 is always a failure, regardless of modifiers, whilst a natural D6 die roll of a 6 entitles
the player to another roll of the die with the same modifiers as the original roll.
9. This is regardless of any applicable modifiers to the D6 die roll.
10. The number of additional D6 die rolls is limited to the number of D6 dice originally rolled – either to
score potential hits or damage points.

For example, an adjusted D6 die roll score of 8 means that as well as the 2 damage points inflicted for reaching a total of 6, the
18

remaining score of 2 (8 - 6 = 2) means that should the attacking player roll a 1 or a 2 on a second D6 die roll, then a further damage
point is scored.
37

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Firing
11. The firing ship checks the range to the target – not counting the hexes the firing ship occupies – via
the appropriate firing arc.
12. Weapons with a Penetration Factor of 2 or less have a maximum range of 4 hexes; those with a
Penetration Factor of 3 or greater have a maximum range of 6 hexes.
13. The number of gun dice available to a firing ship in a given arc is reduced by one for each hex of
range after the first hex. This reduction continues up to the maximum range of the gun type firing and
may never be less than 1D6 die.
14. A ship may only fire at a single target during each game turn but may also be able to engage a target
from more than one firing arc (see firing arc diagram). The number of D6 dice rolled may be combined
and the firing player must use the lowest penetration factor if it is different for each arc.
15. A target ship may only be fired upon at full effect if both of the hexes it currently occupies – or if one
19
if it straddles a hex – are fully within the designated arc(s) of fire of the firing ship.
16. A target ship that only occupies a single hex – or a single ‘straddled’ hex – within the designated arc
of fire of the firing ship can only be engaged by half the available number of D6 gun dice, rounded
up.
17. The firing ship rolls a D6 die for each point of its gun factor (‘To Hit Dice’) to score a ‘hit’ or ‘hits’ whilst
applying any modifiers from the ‘To Hit’ table shown below.
18. For each successful ‘hit’ D6 die roll made the firing ship then rolls a further D6 die to determine if
damage points are inflicted as per Combat Resolution Overview above and taking into account any
applicable modifiers – see the ‘Damage Modifiers’ table shown below.
19. If a target ship sustains damage points that are in excess of its Hull Factor (HF) or any applicable
Armour Factor (AF) – whichever is greater – then a further D6 die roll is made on the Critical Hit table
with the results applied immediately.
20. When a ship has reached its Critical Point – the penultimate damage point – the ship must make a
D6 die roll on the Critical Hit Table with the effects applied immediately.
To Hit Modifiers
Situation Modifier per To Hit Dice
Firing ship adjacent to target ship (range 1) +1
Target ship drifting, at anchor or aground +1
Fort or shore battery firing +1
Target ship is classed as Small -1
Target ship is classed as Large or Very Large +1
Damage Modifiers
Situation Modifier per Damage Dice
Add Firing ship applicable Penetration Factor (PF) See Ship Specification
Subtract Target ship Armour Factor (AF) See Ship Specification

Straddling is defined as being partially in a hex that is bisected by arcs of fire of the firing ship.
19

38

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Critical Hit Table
Dice Roll Effect
1 Armour Damaged – reduce Armour Factor (AF) or Damage Points (DP) by 1
2 Hull Damaged – reduce Hull Factor (HF) or Damage Points (DP) by 1
3 Engine/Steering Damaged – Roll a D6 die:
1 or 2: Engine: Ship may only move at half its maximum speed (rounded up) for the current
turn.
3 or 4: Steering: Ship must use two movement points to turn 60 degrees for the current turn
5 or 6: Ship’s maximum speed is reduced by one or it must use two movement points to turn
60 degrees – for the remainder for the action
4 Gun Damaged – reduce Gun Factor (GF) or Damage Points (DP) by 1. The Gun Factor
reduction should be from the arc closest to the direction of the incoming enemy fire. If there is
no Gun Factor in that arc, then take a Damage Point (DP).
5 Flood – reduce Damage Points (DP) by 1. Roll a D6 die at the start of the turn:
1: Flood secured
2 to 5: No change; flood continues, reduce Damage Points (DP) by 1
6: Flood uncontrollable – ship will sink in 1D6 die game turns
6 Fire – reduce any Gun Factor (GF) by 1. Roll a D6 die at the start of the turn:
1: Fire extinguished
2 to 5: No change; fire continues, reduce Damage Points by 1
6: Fire uncontrollable – ship will sink in 1D6 die game turns. Roll a D6 die at the start of each
turn until the ship sinks; on a D6 die roll score of 6 the ship explodes. If this happens, any
ship in an adjacent hex rolls 3D6 dice for potential blast damage; any ship within two hexes
rolls a single D6 die. Damage rolls are as per the Combat Resolution Overview.

Movement
21. A ship model must be located as centrally as possible across two hexes and facing a flat hex side.
22. Only a single ship model may occupy any given pair of hexes unless subject to a ramming or spar
torpedo attack.
23. Turning is conducted in 60-degree increments and to make one 60 degree turn costs the turning ship
one movement point.
24. To enter a new hex costs one movement point whilst moving forward and two movement points whilst
moving in reverse. Note that the additional reverse movement cost does not apply to those ships
designed to operate in either direction normally, typically such craft as double-ended ferry boats.
25. A ship must enter a new hex to turn 60 degrees; however, at the start of its move it may turn 60
degrees at no cost provided it did not execute a turn in that hex at the end of the previous turn.
26. A ship turns by changing the heading of the bow in the forward hex and in doing so pivots the stern
in the aft hex in the opposite direction and into the adjacent hex. Note that a ship executing a turn
that has pivoted its stern into a hex occupied by an enemy ship does not count as initiating a ramming
attack and it may only do so if able to move away from the enemy ship.
27. A ship may turn whilst reversing at the usual cost of one movement point. It does so by pivoting from
the stern rather than the bow so that the bow section moves into a new hex, in effect, the reverse of
a forward turn.
28. During the movement phase the moving ship may attempt a ramming attack, may run aground, or
may trigger a mine attack. In each case, these events should be resolved at the point of first contact
and with the outcomes being applied immediately. The rules governing these events are explained
separately.
Shallows and grounding
29. Areas of shallows should be identified on a sketch map of the playing area.

39

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 30. When a ship enters an area designated as being shallow the owning player rolls a D6 die:
30.1. A score of 1, 2 or 3 means that the ship has passed over the shallows successfully.
30.2. A score of 4 or 5 means that the ship has run aground but may be able to be floated off by
rolling a D6 die roll of 6 during Sequence of Play.
30.3. A score of 6 or more means that the ship has run aground and is stuck fast for the duration of
the action.
31. In either of the latter two cases, a D6 die is rolled to determine if the ship is able to fire or if it is heeled
over at too steep an angle for its guns to bear:
31.1. A D6 die roll score of 1, 2 or 3 means that the ship is unable to fire.
31.2. A D6 die roll score of 4, 5 or 6 means that the ship is able to fire normally.

Ram Attacks
32. To conduct a ram attack, the attacking ship must first move into contact with an enemy ship.
33. A ram attack is initiated when an attacking ship’s bow moves into contact with an enemy ship.
34. The ramming ship rolls a number of D6 dice equal to its Hull Factor and applies any applicable
modifiers from the table below.
35. Any damage points scored (see Combat Resolution Overview) are recorded on the target ship’s
damage record chart.
36. If the ramming ship fails to damage its intended target, then the ram attack is deemed to have failed
and so either ship, if able, is free to manoeuvre as normal for the rest of the turn.
37. The ramming ship stops in the hex at the point of contact whilst the target ship then pivots away –
either from the fore or aft hex, depending upon where the ram attack was intended – from the
attacking ship into an adjacent hex.
38. If the ramming ship has inflicted damage, then the target ship then rolls a number of D6 dice equal to
its Hull Factor only and a note of any damage points scored (see Combat Resolution Overview) on
the ramming ship’s damage record chart.
39. If both ships sustain damage, then each player rolls a D6 die. If either player rolls a 6 then the ships
are locked together in the rammed hex and must roll to free themselves during Sequence of Play,
requiring either player to roll a 6 for the ships to be freed from one another.
40. Assuming that after a ram attack the two ships are not locked together, both ships are allowed a free
60-degree turn after the target ship has pivoted into an adjacent hex (see above) which must be
executed immediately or the opportunity to make such a turn is lost.
41. After a ram attack, if both ships are locked together, then no movement is permissible by either ship
until such a time as they become unlocked (see above).
Ram Attack Modifier per D6 die rolled
Ramming ship has a Ram Bow +1
Each movement point greater than the target ship’s last move +1
Ram attack directly against target ship’s stern +1
Ram attack directly against target ship’s bow -1
Target at anchor, adrift or aground +1

Mines and Spar Torpedoes

42. Minefields should be secretly noted on a sketch map of the playing area before the action
commences.
43. A hex may contain up to 3 mines, each attacking with a D6 dice, and these are either contact or
command detonated. If the latter, then the mine ‘controller’ must be located onshore within three
hexes in order to trigger them. Mines should be identified as to their type on the sketch map.
44. When a ship enters a mined hex then a command detonated mine may be set off whilst a contact
mine must be set off.

40

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 45. A ship is eligible to be attacked by either mine type when:
45.1. It first enters a hex
45.2. For each 60 degrees turn it makes in the hex
45.3. When it leaves a hex.
46. A Spar Torpedo attack, consisting of a D6 die per Spar Torpedo used in the attack, is made when a
vessel so equipped moves into contact with an enemy ship. (N.B. This is not classed as a ram attack.)
47. A Spar Torpedo equipped vessel, after resolving the attack should then observe the movement
restrictions contained in the relevant sections of the Ram Attack rules.
48. Mine and Spar Torpedo attacks are resolved as per the tables below.
Mine and Spar Torpedo Attack Effects
Dice Roll Effect
1 “Phut!” Mine or Spar Torpedo misfires and is removed from play
2
3 Mine or Spar Torpedo has failed to detonate but remains in play
4
5 “Boom!” Mine or Spar Torpedo explodes, consult the Mine and Spar Torpedo Effects table, and
6 remove the mine from play

Mine and Spar Torpedo Damage Effects

Dice Roll Effect
1
Target ship is rocked by the explosion but suffers no significant damage other than a thorough
2
soaking.
3
4 Target ship suffers flooding – roll a D6 die against the Flood Critical Hit (Number 5 on the Critical
5 Hit Table)
6 Target ship suffers uncontrollable flooding and is sinking – refer to Flood Critical Hit (Number 5
on the Critical Hit Table)

Damage and Sinking

49. When a ship loses its last Damage Point (DP), it sinks.
50. At this point the owning player rolls a D6 die, and this is the number of turns the ship will take to slip
beneath the waves.
51. Until it disappears from play the ship is still visible and so still occupies two hexes.
52. A sinking ship should have a number of suitable markers placed alongside the model equal to the
number of game turns it has remaining afloat.
53. In each subsequent game turn during the first phase of the turn sequence, a marker is removed.
54. When the final marker has been removed, the model is removed from play unless sinking in shallow
20
water, as defined by the scenario, where it is treated as an obstacle .
55. When a ship reaches the penultimate damage point it must roll a D6 die against the Critical Hit Table.
56. In addition, the ship must attempt to disengage from the action by exiting the playing area in any
permitted direction.
57. When doing so:
57.1. It may only fire against enemy ships that are adjacent.

See the rules for offshore defences with the number of hit points the obstacle has, being equal to the original Damage Point (DP)
20

total of the sunken ship.

41

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 57.2. it may not attempt any ram attacks.
58. If it is unable to enter a hex that has no enemy ships present, it must then surrender to the nearest
enemy ship.

Forts, Shore Batteries, and Offshore Defences

59. During the American Civil War both sides made extensive use of fortifications and assorted obstacles
to defend key ports and harbours. These included such things as block ships, booms, pilings, and
minefields. For the Confederates, the use of such devices made for an effective force multiplier given
that they were always outnumbered compared to the Union forces arrayed against them. Minefields
are covered in the relevant section above, along with Spar Torpedoes.
Forts and Shore Batteries
Gunnery Factors
Damage Armour Firing Arc: (Gun
Type Notes
Points Factor Factor/Penetration
Factor)
Field Battery 6 0 FW:(2/0) Deployed artillery in the open
Earthwork Battery
9 2 FW: (2/1)
(Smoothbores) Shore or artillery battery in
Earthwork Battery prepared positions
9 2 FW: (2/3)
(Rifles)
Small Fort 9 3 FW: (3/3)
Masonry or stone forts
Large Fort 12 3 FW: (4/4)
60. The forts and shore batteries featured above are very generic in nature, but more specific examples
can be factored in as required by reference to the above table.
61. Within the rules they function for all intents and purposes in the same way as ships except that they
do not move! Forts and Shore Batteries ignore Critical Hits for D6 die rolls of 3 and 5. If these D6 die
rolls are rolled, then roll the D6 die again until a more suitable result occurs.
Offshore Defences
62. These include chain and log booms, block ships and log pilings. Typically, any of these will have
between 6 and 12 damage points. Booms do not cause any damage to the ramming ship but block
ships and log pilings ‘attack’ when contacted by a ship using a hull factor and the associated number
of D6 dice based on their notional size i.e., small, medium, large, or very large. Damage is determined
as per the Combat Resolution Overview.
63. Chain and log booms can be removed by being cut or rammed. A ram attack is conducted when the
ramming ship moves into contact with the boom. The ram attack is conducted in the usual way but at
no risk to the attacking ship. Should the boom not be breached by the ram attack then the ramming
ship is halted at the boom but may move off next turn. A boom may also be cut by crew members
grappling with it. A ship moves into contact with the boom. The next turn, in Sequence of Play 1, a
D6 die is rolled, and the score noted. When the accumulated score exceeds the damage point value
of the boom then it has been cut and is removed from play.
64. Block ships and log pilings can only be removed by ramming. A ram attack against log pilings or block
ships is conducted in the same way as for ramming a ship. When the number of damage points has
been reached then the obstacle is removed. Note that a ship that has sunk in shallow water is classed
as an obstacle and has the same number of hit points as its original damage point total.

Ship Specifications
65. The following tables show the factors required to be able to design a warship of the period for use
with these rules. There is also a representative selection of Union and Confederate vessels from the
American Civil War in the following chapter.

42

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Ship Factors General
Ship Length Size Hull Factor Damage Points
<150’ Small 2 6
150’ – 300’ Medium 3 9
300’ – 400’ Large 4 12
>400’ Very Large 5 15
Speed Factor
66. The maximum number of hexes a ship may move in a game turn is equal to the ship’s speed in knots
divided by 3. An odd number of knots should be rounded up or down as appropriate.
Armour Factor
Ship Type Armour Factor
Wooden 0
Tin, Timber, Cotton-clad or Iron hulled ships 1
Small Casemate Ironclads 2
Casemate Ironclads, small seagoing Ironclads 3
Early Monitors, large Casemate Ironclads, medium seagoing Ironclads 4
Later Monitors, large seagoing Ironclads 5
Gun Factor
Size Smoothbore GF PF Range Rifle GF PF Range
20 pdr, 3.6” or
Very Light 24 pdr or smaller 1 0 1 1
smaller 4
Light 32 – 40 pdr 1 1 4 4.2”, 30 pdr 1 2
7” – 10”, 64 – 100
Medium 2 2 5” – 7”, 80 – 120 pdr 2 3
pdr
11” – 14”, 130 – 300 8” – 11”, 150 – 350
Heavy 3 3 3 4 6
pdr pdr
6
15”, 300 pdr or 12”, 400 pdr or
Very Heavy 4 4 4 5
larger larger
67. Gun Factors (GF) are modified by the number of guns deployed to fire within a given firing arc on the
ship as follows:
Number of guns Gun Factor Modifier
4 guns or fewer +0
5 to 8 guns +1
9 to 16 guns +2
17 guns or more +3
Firing Arcs
68. These are categorized as follows:
68.1. Forward (F)
68.2. Forward Wide (FW)
68.3. Port (P)
68.4. Starboard (S)
68.5. Aft (A)
68.6. Aft Wide (AW)
43

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 21
68.7. Turret (T)

An example of a ship’s firing arcs. In this instance, the CSS Virginia.

69. Guns marked as F (Forward), or A (Aft) may only fire along the single row of hexes from the bow or
stern, respectively.
70. Guns marked as P (Port), or S (Starboard) may only fire at targets between the red and the blue
markers.
71. Guns marked FW (Forward Wide), or AW (Aft wide) may only fire at targets above the horizontal blue
line if FW or below the horizontal red line if AW.
72. A firing ship uses its full gunnery factor against a target ship (after adjustments for range) only if the
22
target ship occupies two full hexes or a full hex and a straddled hex within the arc of fire of the firing
ship. Should a target ship only occupy a single or straddled hex then the firing ship can only use half
of its gunnery factor (rounded up)
73. The arcs extend out to the maximum range of the firing weapon:
73.1. 4 hexes for guns with a penetration factor of 2 or less.
73.2. 6 hexes for larger, heavier calibres.

Turrets (T) usually have a 360-degree arc of fire unless restricted by the structure of the vessel. This should be noted on the ship
21

specification charts.
A ship is in a straddled hex if it is partially in a hex that is bisected by arc of fire of the firing ship.
22

44

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 EXAMPLES OF SHIP SPECIFICATIONS: THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR
Union Ships
Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

USS Monitor 2 Medium 3 4 9 T: (3/3)

USS New P, S: (4/3)

2 Medium 3 3 9
Ironsides F: (2/3)

USS Passaic 3 Medium 3 4 9 T: (4/4)

FW: (3/3)
USS Keokuk 3 Medium 3 2 9
AW: (3/3)

USS
2 Medium 3 4 9 T: (4/4)
Canonicus

F: (3/4)
USS Essex 3 Large 4 2 12
P, S: (2/2)

F: (2/3)
USS Cairo 3 Medium 3 2 9 P, S: (1/2)
A: (2/3)

F: (2/3)
USS Benton 2 Medium 3 2 9 P, S: (3/3)
A: (2/3)

FW: (3/3)
USS Choctaw 2 Large 4 2 12 P, S: (1/2)
AW: (3/3)

USS FW: (2/3)

Kearsarge, 4 Medium 3 0 9
Mohican P, S: (3/3)

45

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

FW: (2/2)
USS
4 Medium 3 0 9 P, S: (3/2)
Mississippi
AW: (2/2)

F: (1/1)
USS Hartford 3 Medium 3 0 9
P, S: (4/2)

USS Brooklyn 4 Medium 3 0 9 P, S: (4/2)

F: (2/2)
USS
3 Medium 3 0 9 P, S: (4/2)
Cumberland
A: (2/3)

USS
3 Large 4 0 12 P, S: (5/2)
Minnesota

F: (2/3)
USS Miami 3 Medium 3 0 9 P, S: (1/0)
A: (2/3)

USS Black F: (1/1)

2 Large 4 0 12
Hawk P, S: (1/2)

USS P, S: (1/0)
2 Medium 3 1 9
Switzerland Ram Bow

FW: (2/3)
USS
5 Medium 3 0 9 P, S: (2/2)
Metacomet
AW: (2/3)

FW: (1/1)
USS Sciota 4 Medium 3 0 9
PS: (3/3)

FW: (1/1)
USS Tyler 3 Medium 3 0 9
P, S: (2/2)

46

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

USS Queen of
3 Medium 3 1 9 Ram Bow
the West

USS Harriet FW: (3/4)

4 Medium 3 0 9
Lane P, S: (1/1)

Confederate Ships
Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)
FW: (2/3)
P, S: (2/2)
CSS Virginia 2 Medium 3 3 9
AW: (2/3)
Ram Bow

FW: (2/3)
CSS
2 Small 2 3 6 AW: (2/3)
Albemarle
Ram Bow

FW: (2/2)
CSS P, S: (1/1)
2 Medium 3 3 9
Charleston AW: (2/2)
Ram Bow
FW: (2/3)
P, S: (2/2)
CSS Atlanta 3 Medium 3 3 9 AW: (2/3)
Spar Torpedo
Ram Bow
FW: (2/3)
CSS P, S: (2/3)
2 Medium 3 4 9
Tennessee AW: (2/3)
Ram Bow

CSS FW: (2/2)

3 Small 2 3 6
Manassas Ram Bow

47

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

FW:(2/2)
CSS
3 Medium 3 3 9 P, S: (2/3)
Arkansas
Ram Bow

CSS Beaufort 3 Small 2 0 6 FW: (1/0)

FW: (2/1)
CSS Patrick
3 Medium 3 0 9 P, S: (2/1)
Henry
AW: (2/1)

FW: (1/1)
CSS Caroline, P, S: (1/1)
4 Medium 3 0 9
Austin AW: (1/1)
Ram Bow

CSS General FW: (1/1)

4 Medium 3 0 9
Sterling Price Ram Bow

FW: (1/1)
CSS Little
3 Small 2 0 6 P, S: (1/1)
Rebel
Ram Bow

FW: (1/2)
P, S: (1/1)
CSS Selma 3 Medium 3 1 9
AW: (1/1)
Ram Bow
FW: (2/3)
P, S: (2/1)
CSS Gaines 3 Medium 3 1 9
AW: (2/3)
Ram Bow

FW: (3/4)
CSS Sumpter 3 Medium 3 0 9
P, S: (1/1)

FW: (1/1)
CSS Queen P, S: (1/1)
3 Medium 3 1 9
of the West AW: (1/1)
Ram Bow

48

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

P, S: (1/1)
CSS Alabama 3 Medium 3 0 9
P, S: (2/3)

23 Unarmed Blockade
A D Vance 5 Medium 3 0 9
Runner

24 Unarmed Blockade
Banshee 4 Medium 3 0 9
Runner

Generic Vessels
Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

Small
2 Small 2 0 6 Unarmed
Transport

Medium
2 Medium 3 0 9 Unarmed
Transport

Large
2 Large 4 0 12 Unarmed
Transport

FW: (1/1)
Gunboat 2 Small 2 0 6
AW: (1/0)

FW: (1/2)
Heavy
2 Medium 3 1 9 P, S: (1/0)
Gunboat
AW: (1/1)

She was captured on 19th September 1864 and incorporated into the US Navy as a gunboat named the USS Advance. She was
23

later renamed USS Frolic.

She was captured on 21st November 1863 and incorporated into the US Navy as a gunboat named the USS Banshee.
24

49

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

25
Mortar Raft Towed Small 2 1 6 FW: (3/3)

Barge Towed Small 2 0 6 Unarmed

Mortars ignore any armour modifier the target has.

25

50

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 EXAMPLES OF THE RULES IN ACTION
Firing Arcs and Firing

The above picture shows the USS Minnesota engaging the CSS Virginia. The red lines illustrate the port broadside (P) arc
of fire for the Union ship whilst the blue marker illustrates the forward wide (FW) are of the Confederate ship. The CSS
Virginia also has a port broadside factor (P) so reference to the play of the arc demonstrated by the Union vessel should
suffice. The range is two hexes when measured from the closest point of each ship – in this case the bow. The firing from
the Union ship is straightforward in that her broadside gunnery factor is four with a penetration factor of two (noted as 4/2)
meaning that 4D6 dice are rolled to score potential hits. As the range is two hexes this is reduced to 3D6 dice as a D6 die
is lost for each hex of range. As the Confederate ship has only just moved a single hex into the broadside arc of fire of the
Union ship i.e., between the two red lines; only half of the available gunnery dice are rolled. In this case it is three D6 die
divided by two and rounded up. This means she opens fire with 2D6 dice. The Union player rolls a 2, a 4 and a 5. There
are no applicable modifiers, so the scores stand. The 2 is discounted whilst the 4 and the 5 are a single damage roll for
each. The penetration factor of the Union artillery is two whilst the CSS Virginia has an armour factor of 3. This means that
the Union damage rolls will each suffer a minus one modifier: 2 – 3 = -1. The Union player rolls a 5 and 6! The 5 is reduced
to 4 which equals a single point of damage. The 6 becomes a 5 which is also a single point of damage BUT, a natural roll
of 6 entitles the player to another roll of a D6 die with the same modifier. The roll comes up with a 5 which when reduced
to 4 means that a further point of damage is inflicted on the Confederate ship or three points in total. Heavy damage, but
nothing fatal.

The CSS Virginia then fires back. The range is two hexes, but each hex occupied by the Union ship is in a different firing
arc. Her bow hex falls in the Confederate ship’s port broadside (P) arc whilst her stern hex is in the forward wide (FW) arc.
As only a single hex of the target ship is in either arc it means that both gunnery factors are halved. Her forward wide (FW)
artillery is rated as 2/3 whilst her port broadside (P) is rated at 2/2. Each arc loses 1D6 dice due to range meaning that the
CSS Virginia can roll 2D6 dice for potential hits as a combined total. A 4 and a 6 are rolled meaning there are three rolls for
damage plus an extra roll for the sole natural 6. This comes up as a 5 meaning that the Confederate ship has four D6 die
damage rolls to make. She rolls a 3, two 4s and a 6 requiring another D6 die roll which comes up with a 4. The modifier for
penetration is in this case, brutal. Using the higher factor of 3 against the armour factor of the wooden frigate of 0 means
that the Confederate rolls 5D6 dice each with a plus 3 modifier. She rolls a pair of 1s, a 2, a 4 and a 5. The two 1s are
discounted whilst the remainder become a scores of 5, 7, and 8. That translates into 5 damage points. There are also two
51

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 further chances of scoring 2 additional damage points from the score of 7 requiring a roll of 1 and the score of 8 requiring
a 1 or 2. The two D6 dice come up with a 3 and 5 so no further damage has been inflicted BUT as the five damage points
scored are greater than the frigate’s hull factor of 3 – she does not have an armour factor – there is the chance of a Critical
Hit. The D6 die is rolled and a 4 comes up meaning the loss of a Gun factor from the port broadside (P) battery.

The USS Minnesota has taken a battering from the Confederate ironclad proving once again that wooden ships of war have
had their day. The ironclad would rule the waves.

In this example the Union ship is unable to fire as no target is in her port broadside (P) arc (the red markers). The
Confederate ship is able to fire though, with her own port broadside (P) – the blue markers – and at full effect as both hexes
occupied by the Union ship are within the firing arc.

52

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 In this example the Union ship is able to engage the Confederate ship with her full gunnery factor as the forward section of
the ironclad is fully within the port broadside (P) firing arc (the red markers) as well as the ‘straddled’ hex. The Confederate
ship will be able to engage the Union ship with her full forward wide (FW) – note the blue markers – battery as the frigate
is fully within this firing arc.

53

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 In this example the Confederate ironclad has only her aft hex within the starboard broadside (S) firing arc of the Union ship
which means that only half her gunnery factor may be used. The CSS Virginia is able to engage the Union ship with her
port broadside (P) battery at half effect as only the frigate’s stern occupies a ‘straddled’ hex. However, her forward wide
(FW) battery can engage the Union ship at full effect as her forward section in fully within the arc and only the aft section is
‘straddled’.

Ramming

54

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The CSS Virginia has rammed the USS Minnesota in the aft quarter. The Confederate ship is a medium sized ship (Hull
Factor 3) which means she rolls 3D6 dice to attempt to damage the Union frigate. She is equipped with a ram bow and so
gains a plus one to each D6 die rolled. She does not have a speed advantage, nor is the target adrift, aground or at anchor.
She rolls 3D6 dice scoring a 3, a 5 and a 6. Each of these scores adds plus one making 4, 6, and 7. The score of 4 gives
one damage point whilst the 6 and 7 score two points each with the chance of scoring an extra point. The score of 7 minus
6 leaves 1 meaning that a D6 die roll of 1 would score an additional point of damage. The die comes up with 3 meaning
that the chance was lost. The USS Minnesota has sustained 5 points of damage and now it is the turn of the CSS Virginia.
As the Confederate ship had inflicted damage so there is a chance that she may have received some in return. The Union
player rolls 3D6 dice (the frigate is medium sized ship) with no modifiers. The dice come up with a 2, a 3 and 5 meaning
that the Confederate ship suffers a single point of damage. As both ships sustained damage each player then rolls a D6
die and if either of them rolls a 6, the two ships are locked together. The scores are a 3 and 5 so the ships are able to
separate.

As you can see in the picture above, the aft part of the Union frigate has pivoted away from the Rebel ship, so both are now
free to navigate and may take advantage of the one hexside free turn allowed. If the above attack had been directed against
the bow section, then the pivot away would look something like this.

55

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The ram attack into the forward section of the frigate’s hull. After the resolution of the attack and assuming that the ships
are not locked together then the move away would look like this.

In the case of a stern or bow head on ram attack the target ship is in effect pushed away from the ramming ship by a single
hex in the direction of the attack.

56

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 THE RULES IN ACTION – MORE TROUBLE ALONG THE MISSENHITTI
Introduction
In Bob Cordery’s book GRIDDED NAVAL WARGAMES, the American Civil War rules were ably demonstrated in
an entertaining action set along the Missenhitti river. The battle was fought between a newly commissioned Union
Monitor – the USS Admonisher – and a recently built Confederate casemate ironclad – the CSS Missenhitti. Both
models used in the battle were scratch built by Bob and instructions of how he made them also appear in the book.
The engagement itself was hard fought but largely inconclusive despite both ships having sustained significant
damage. At the conclusion of the action both ships had withdrawn from the scene to be repaired at their respective
bases.

Six months later …

With Union forces able to advance by stages along either bank of the Missenhitti it fell to the ships and men of the
Western River Fleet to ensure that river transport and supplies were uninterrupted by Confederate action.
After a series of minor skirmishes both on the river and along the banks, the main Rebel anchorage at Pratt’s
Landing was at last within easy reach of the Union fleet. Such a vital transport hub could not be allowed to fall into
Yankee hands and so the Confederates hastily built a small fort at Blueberry Point, the confluence of the Yahoo
River and the Missenhitti to interdict any enemy river traffic. Fort Duvet, as it was named, was supported by a
network of minefields, and could also call upon the services of the newly built ironclad, the CSS Secessionist,
together with a couple of smaller gunboats. The Rebels were confident that this force would act as a powerful
deterrent to the approaching Union forces.
Whilst the Confederate position at Blueberry Bend was being strengthened the Union had determined that action
was needed urgently to prevent the buildup of Rebel forces in the area. The fort would need to be destroyed before
any serious attempt on Pratt’s Landing could be considered and so a small squadron of four ships was selected
to undertake the mission. The Union ships consisted of two ironclad gunboats – the USS Carondelet and the USS
Essex – accompanied by the USS Tyler and the ram, the USS Queen of the West. There were rumours of a
second Rebel ironclad operating in the area, but no details were available. In any event, the plan was to engage
the fort at point blank range as soon as possible and then fall back on the rest of the fleet so that any enemy ships
would have little time to react.
As luck would have it a Confederate cavalry patrol had spotted the approaching Union ships and so had informed
the naval command at Pratt’s Landing. The ironclad CSS Secessionist, accompanied by the CSS Little Rebel and
the CSS General Sterling Price hastily raised steam and headed to face the oncoming enemy ships.

Setting the Scene

The initial dispositions. The four Union ships approach from the Northeast with the USS Queen of the West leading the
USS Essex whilst the USS Tyler leads the Northernmost column with the USS Carondelet following in her wake. For the
Confederates the CSS Little Rebel passes Fort Duvet leading the CSS General Sterling Price. The CSS Secessionist lurks
along the Northwestern edge.

57

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Dramatis Naves
The combatants taking part have the following statistics:

Union
Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)

F (2/3)
USS
3 Medium 3 2 9 P, S (1/2)
Carondelet
A (2/3)

F (3/4)
USS Essex 3 Large 4 2 12
P, S (2/2)

FW (1/1)
USS Tyler 3 Medium 3 0 9
P, S (2/2)

USS Queen of Armed solely with a

3 Medium 3 1 9
the West Ram Bow

Confederate
Gunnery Factors
Speed Hull Armour Damage
Name Size Factor Factor Points Firing Arc: (Gun
(SP) (HF) (AF) (DP) Factor/Penetration
Factor)
FW (2/2)
CSS P, S (2/2)
3 Medium 3 3 9
Secessionist
Equipped with a Ram
Bow

FW (1/1)
CSS General
4 Medium 3 0 9 Equipped with a Ram
Sterling Price
Bow

FW (1/1)
CSS Little P, S (1/1)
3 Small 2 0 6
Rebel
Equipped with a Ram
Bow

Fort Duvet - Medium 3 3 9 FW (3/3)

The mines making up the minefields are all contact ones and for the purposes of this action are shown on the
tabletop by small white counters. The number contained in each hex is determined at the point on entry into the
hex and is determined by the roll of a D6 die as follows:

58

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Dice score Number of mines
1 No mines present
2 or 3 1
4 or 5 2
6 3
When playing against a live opponent the number and location of any mines would be plotted on a sketch map of
the field of battle, to be revealed with enthusiastic glee when a hapless ship cruises unwittingly into such an area!
The victory conditions for this scenario are very straightforward in that the Union must reduce Fort Duvet to its
critical level or better, whilst preserving at least one of the ironclads. The Union has 10 game turns in which to
achieve this. The Confederates simply must prevent this happening. However, should they lose the CSS
Secessionist then the Union gain an automatic victory.

Blueberry Bend, at the Confluence of the Missenhitti and Yahoo Rivers …

November 1863
Turn 1
No firing and so straight to the initiative phase: Union 4, Confederate 5: the Rebels opt to allow the Union to move
first.

The situation at the end of the first turn, viewed from Fort Duvet. The Union ships turn to commence their attack run against
the Confederate fort whilst the Rebel ships, despite being outnumbered and outgunned, prepare to intercept them.
Meanwhile, to the north, the CSS Secessionist waits, poised to exploit any opening in the Union formation.

Turn 2
No firing from the Union ships but the CSS Secessionist is able to fire at the nearest Yankee vessel – the USS
Tyler. Her FW guns are rated as 2/2 so allowing for range she can roll a single D6 die, scoring 5 meaning one
potential damage roll. The armour of the USS Tyler is zero so the Confederate ship gains a plus two modifier to
her damage roll. She rolls 5 making 7 in total. This scores two damage points for reaching a six and she has a
further 1 in 6 chance of scoring an additional damage point. The roll is 1 so a further point is scored meaning three
damage points in all. First blood to the Confederates!
For initiative, the Union rolls 2 whilst the Confederates roll 3 and so once again opt to allow the Yankees to move
first.

59

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The situation at the end of turn 2. The pair of Union ironclads head due south to swing west and approach the fort as close
to the shore as possible. While they are doing this, the USS Tyler and the USS Queen of the West look to engage the
patrolling Confederate gunboats whilst the CSS Secessionist prepares to cautiously skirt the edge of the minefield.

Turn 3
The sole firing from the Union comes from the USS Tyler and is directed at the CSS General Sterling Price. The
range is three hexes meaning a single D6 die was rolled to hit. A miserable 1 is rolled and so misses. For the
Confederates, the first to fire is the CSS Little Rebel who is able to engage the USS Queen of the West with both
her forward wide battery – rated as 1/1 – and half of her starboard guns, which are rated similarly. She rolls 2D6
dice, scoring 3 and 6 respectively. The roll of a natural 6 generates a further D6 die roll that in this case comes up
with a disappointing 1. The D6 die roll of 3 plus 1 due to the closeness of the target makes 4, so with the 6 there
are three damage rolls to make. All the rolls are even as the penetration factor (1) is offset by the armour value
(1). The dice rolls come up as a pair of 6s and 5 – a magnificent score! That is five points of damage and a critical
roll as the score is more than the Queen’s hull factor (5 vs. 3) together with two further D6 dice rolls – this could
be serious but a pair of 2s determines otherwise. The Critical Hit roll comes up as 4, which is gun damage. As the
Queen is solely armed with a Ram Bow, she takes a damage point instead meaning six damage points in total.
Meanwhile the CSS Secessionist continues to fire at the USS Tyler. She rolls a single D6 die scoring 2 for no
effect.
For initiative, the Union rolls 5 whilst the Confederates roll 2. The Union opts to move first.

The USS Queen of the West rams the CSS General Sterling Price whilst the CSS Little Rebel steams past.

The USS Queen of the West rams the CSS General Sterling Price. She rolls 3D6 dice (equal to her Hull Factor of
3) and each D6 die gains a plus 1 as she is equipped with a Ram Bow. She rolls 2, 3, and 6, which become 3, 4,

60

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 and 7. Her extra D6 die roll for the natural 6 is a less than impressive 1! This means that she has inflicted three
points of damage with a 1 in 6 chance of a further point. She rolls 1! This means a further point of damage making
four in total, and as this is more than the General’s hull factor of 3, a roll on the Critical table is required. The roll
is 5 meaning that the General Sterling Price has a flood! This incurs a further damage point meaning that she has
taken five points of damage in total, and now also has a flood to contend with. The USS Queen of the West
receives no damage in return – the rolls of 2 and a pair of 3s are insufficient.

The CSS Little Rebel rams the battered USS Tyler as she attempts to lengthen the range from the CSS Secessionist.

It is then the Confederate move, and so the CSS Little Rebel duly rams the USS Tyler. She rolls 2D6 dice (she is
a small ship, so her hull factor is 2), each with a plus 1 as she also has a Ram Bow. She rolls 6 and 4 which
become 5 and 7. She inflicts three points of damage with a 1 in 6 chance of a further point as well a further D6 die
roll for the natural 6 – this is a lowly 1. For her extra damage chance though she again rolls 1! This is four points
of damage in all, one more than the USS Tyler’s hull factor of 3 meaning that a roll on the Critical Hit table is due.
However, she is also now at her Critical Hit point – she has taken eight points of damage out of nine – meaning
that an additional roll on the Critical Hit table is due. The two rolls come up with a 2 and 3 meaning that in this
case her hull factor is reduced by 1 and for the roll of 3 some engine damage has occurred that halves her next
movement phase (rounded up) from 3 to 2.

61

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The situation at the end of turn 3. The ram attacks have been resolved and the ships involved have drawn apart. For the
Confederates the situation looks encouraging in that they have badly damaged one Union ship – the USS Tyler – and a
second is about to come under fire from the fort. The Rebel ironclad appears content to engage at long range but is ready
to intervene if required. Meanwhile, the two Union ironclads – the USS Essex and the USS Carondelet – are bearing down
on the fort and the CSS General Sterling Price.

Turn 4
The CSS General Sterling Price rolls to see what happens with the flood. She rolls a 1 meaning that the flooding
has been successfully brought under control. The CSS Secessionist continues to fire at the USS Tyler with a D6
die and scores 5. The damage roll is 5 which gains a plus 2 (her FW guns are rated 2/2 whilst the protection of the
USS Tyler is 0) making 7 in all. This translates into two damage points and a 1 in 6 chance of a third. The roll is a
1! This means that the USS Tyler has sustained 3 damage points which, along with the 8 she has already
sustained, totals 11. This is 2 more than her total of 9 and so she settles by the bow and begins to sink! The USS
Tyler rolls a D6 die to determine how many game turns she takes to sink and rolls 1! Clearly the damage from
gunfire and ramming is too much for her and so she quickly sinks into the murky depths of the Missenhitti.

Shot through by heavy rifled artillery and rammed for good measure, the battered USS Tyler finally succumbs to her wounds
with the CSS Secessionist administering the coup de grace. The white marker represents foaming water with one marker
being removed at the start of each game turn remaining before sinking. In this case it will not be very long!

62

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The CSS Little Rebel fires at the USS Carondelet with a single D6 die and scores a miserable 1. The CSS General
Sterling Price also tries her luck against the approaching Union ship – she rolls 2!
Fort Duvet also opens fire against the USS Queen of the West. She rolls a D6 die and scores 6! Sadly, her extra
roll is 2. Her damage rolls are 6 and 4, each of which receives a plus 2 modifier as the Queen has an armour factor
of one – scant protection against the fort’s heavy rifled artillery rated at 3. Her extra D6 die roll is 1. The additional
rolls both fail but it matters little as the 3 points of damage inflicted, added to the 7 she has already sustained are
sufficient to sink her. The sinking roll is 3 so she will slip beneath the waves in three turns. The USS Carondelet
chooses to ignore the CSS Little Rebel and instead opens fire on the CSS General Sterling Price. The roll of 2
misses. The USS Essex tries her luck but again to no effect.

As the guns of Fort Duvet fall silent, so the USS Queen of the West slowly sinks beneath the murky waters of the Missenhitti.
Note the sinking USS Tyler in the background and the lurking menace of the Confederate ironclad the CSS Secessionist.

For initiative, the Union rolls 4 whilst the Confederates roll 2. The Union allows the Confederates to move first.
The CSS General Sterling Price moves at full speed and rams the USS Carondelet head on. She rolls 1 and a
pair of 5s. The impact of her Ram Bow is offset by the head on angle of impact and so 2 points of damage are
inflicted on the Union ironclad. In return the Rebel ship suffers a single point of damage. The ships are not locked
together and so are able to back away from each other.

Head-to-head the CSS General Sterling Price rams the USS Carondelet. Both ships suffer minor damage in the exchange
– much to the relief of the Confederate ship.

63

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The situation at the end of turn 4. The two Union ironclads have separated whilst their Confederate opposite number
manoeuvres around the edge of the minefield to enter the fray. Meanwhile the two Union ships – the USS Tyler and the
USS Queen of the West – settle deeper into the water. The CSS Little Rebel attempts to avoid the oncoming USS
Carondelet whilst the heavily damaged but still afloat CSS General Sterling Price attempts to disengage.

Turn 5
Both the USS Tyler and the USS Queen of the West each remove a sinking marker and so the former slips beneath
the waves and is removed from play. The CSS General Price fires at the USS Essex with a single D6 die at range
1 meaning a plus 1 to the die as well as a plus 1 for the size of her opponent (the USS Essex is a large ship). She
rolls a thoroughly depressing 1! The CSS Little Rebel opens fire at the USS Carondelet with a single D6 die, again
with a plus 1 for the range. She rolls 6! Sadly, her extra roll is a 2. Roll of 6 goes to 7 so she has two damage rolls
and a 1 in 6 chance of a third which she fails by rolling a 6. Her guns are rated 1/1 and the armour on the USS
Carondelet is 2 so the 2D6 dice will each have a minus 1. She rolled 6 and 5 reduced to 5 and 4, which translates
into two damage points inflicted – even her extra roll for the natural 6 was only 2. At a range of 6 the CSS
Secessionist fires at the USS Carondelet scoring 5. The damage roll has no modifiers – 2/2 guns versus armour
of 2 – and the die roll comes up with a 2 so no damage.
The USS Essex opens fire on the CSS General Sterling Price with her broadside of 2 at a range of 1. She rolls 2
and 3 meaning that the 3 becomes 4, and so a damage roll is made with a plus 2 modifier for her guns against the
unprotected enemy ship. She rolls a 2 which goes to 4 meaning a single point of damage is scored. The USS
Carondelet opens fire on the CSS Little Rebel. She rolls 3 which becomes a 4 due to the plus 1 for range. The
damage roll of 2 with a net plus 1 modifier is not enough to cause any damage.
For initiative, the Union rolls 2 whilst the Confederates roll 1. The Union opts to move first.

The situation at the end of turn 5. As the USS Queen of the West settles lower in the water she is rewarded by seeing the
two Union ironclads having virtually a clear run at the fort. The USS Essex will be first to reach Fort Duvet although the USS
Carondelet will not be far behind. However, the CSS Secessionist is handily placed to lend support.

64

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Turn 6
A further sinking marker is removed from the USS Queen of the West. The CSS Secessionist opens fire against
the USS Carondelet at a range of 3. She rolls a single D6 die scoring 4 for a damage roll. The overall modifier is
plus 1 but with her roll of 1 is an automatic miss. Fort Duvet tries her luck. She scores 4 again with an overall
modifier of plus 1 but her roll of 2 is not enough. The USS Carondelet rolls against the Rebel fort scoring a single
hit. The damage roll is 6 but the modifier reduces this by 1; nevertheless, the Fort has taken a hit. The extra roll is
4 reduced to 3 for no effect. The USS Essex fires at the CSS General Sterling Price. She rolls 6! Once again, her
extra roll is a miserable 1! The two damage rolls of a pair of 2s, together with the modifier of plus 2 make a pair of
4s or two damage points. This is serious as the Confederate ship has now reached her Critical Point (eight damage
points out of nine in total). Her Critical Hit role comes up with 3 – engine/steering damage – which in turn comes
up with 6. Her top speed is permanently reduced by one and in addition she is now required to pay two movement
points to turn one hex side. It is immaterial though, as for her the war is over.
For initiative, the Union rolls 5 and the Confederates 1. The Union decides to move first.

The two Union ironclads close on the fort, passing the sinking USS Queen of the West, whilst the CSS Secessionist steams
boldly between the two approaching enemy ships. As yet, the Union ships are unaware of the mined approaches to the fort.

Turn 7
The final marker is removed from the USS Queen of the West as she vanishes from sight. Fort Duvet opens fire
on the USS Essex scoring 6 and 1. Her extra roll to hit is a 2 so no effect. The two damage rolls, each with a plus
1 modifier (3/3 guns against 2 armour) are 6 and 4 which convert into 7 and 5. That is three points of damage and
a 1 in 6 chance for a further point. The roll is failed. The CSS Secessionist opts to fire on the USS Carondelet at
range 1. She rolls 2D6 dice, each with plus 1 for the range. She rolls 1 and 6 becoming 2 and 7. The 7 converts
to two damage rolls and a 1 in 6 chance of a further roll. This is failed – she needs 1 and rolls a 2. The damage
rolls are at overall plus 1 and 2 and 3 are rolled becoming 3 and 4 respectively or a single damage point. The USS
Carondelet fires at the Rebel ironclad with half her forward battery. She rolls a D6 die with a plus 1 for the range.
A 4 comes up becoming 5 so still a single damage roll. This is with no modifiers as her guns of 2/3 are offset by
the armour of 3. The roll is 6 so the Rebel ship takes two points of damage – her extra natural 6 roll is 3 so not
enough.
For initiative, the Union rolls 2 and the Confederates 4. The Confederates allow the Union to move first.
To get into the most advantageous firing positions against the Fort, both Union ships enter what turns out to be
two minefields. The USS Essex detonates a single mine with a D6 die roll of 5 but the damage roll is 1, meaning
a loud bang and lots of water but very little else. The USS Carondelet is less fortunate in that whilst one mine goes
“Phut”, the other goes off with telling effect. The roll on the flood Critical Hit entry is 5, meaning that she loses one
damage point initially and is then required to roll a D6 die on the same table at the start of each turn to see how it
progresses.

65

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 The situation at the end of turn 7. Despite venturing into a minefield, the two Union ironclads are now well placed to be able
to bombard Fort Duvet – assuming that the flooding aboard the USS Carondelet can be contained. The CSS Little Rebel
prepares to reengage whilst the CSS Secessionist prepares to take on the USS Essex.

Turn 8
The USS Carondelet rolls to see how her flooding is progressing. The solitary D6 die comes up with a welcome 1
and so the flooding stops! Her situation remains less than ideal though as she is still in a mined hex with a mine
waiting to explode if she moves to exit the hex or turn a hexside. For the present though, she is content to keep
her station as there is work to be done to reduce Fort Duvet to rubble.
Fort Duvet opens fire and concentrates on the USS Carondelet. She rolls 3D6 dice, each with a plus 1 for the
range. She rolls 2 and a pair of 3s. These become 3 and a pair of 4s, so there are two damage rolls each with a
plus 1 modifier (the Fort guns are 3/3 whilst the armour of the USS Carondelet is a 2). The Fort rolls 3 and 2,
adjusted to 4 and 3 meaning that a single damage point is inflicted. The USS Carondelet fires back with 2D6 dice,
each with a plus 1 for the range. She rolls 3 and 4 adjusted to 4 and 6 meaning three damage rolls are needed.
These are at evens as her 2/3 guns are offset by the ‘armour’ of 3. She rolls 3, 4, and 5 to secure two damage
points against the fort. The Union ships are not finished as the USS Essex also opens point blank fire at Fort Duvet
– and with heavier artillery. She rolls 3D6 dice, each with a plus 1 for range. She rolls 3 and a pair of 5s that adjust
to 4 and a pair of 6s making five damage rolls in total, each with a plus 1 as her guns are rated 3/4 against the 3
of the fort. She rolls 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6, which adjust to 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 – the extra natural 6 roll is a 3. This in turns
converts to five damage points with a 1 in 6 chance of a 6 – which is failed. The Fort has taken eight damage
points from nine – and so has reached her Critical Point. Her Critical Hit roll is 1 so she opts to reduce her ‘armour’
by one point to 2.
(I had neglected to add a rule for forts surrendering, so ‘off the cuff’, when a fort reaches its Critical Point, it must
roll a D6 die in addition to the Critical Hit roll. If the roll is 1, then the fort hauls down its flag and surrenders. The
D6 is rolled and comes up with a 6 so whilst royally battered, Fort Duvet is still in the fight.)
The CSS Secessionist opens fire at the USS Essex. She rolls 2D6 dice, each with a plus 1 for range and a plus 1
for the size of her opponent. 4 and 5 are rolled, adjusted to 6 and 7. meaning four damage rolls are needed. These
are at a plus 1 as her guns are rated 2/3 against the armour of the USS Essex of 2. The rolls are 2, 3 and two 6s!
Luckily for the Union ship the two natural 6 rolls are 1 and 2! The hit dice are adjusted to 4 and two 7s meaning
there are 5 damage points and two 1 in 6 chances of further damage points. Both rolls fail. It is fortunate for the
Union ship that she is large enough to be able to withstand such a heavy blow (she has 12 damage points as she
is rated as Large) although obviously not on a prolonged basis!
For initiative, the Union rolls 6 whilst the Confederates roll 2. The Union opts to move first.

66

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 As the USS Essex aligns herself with the Confederate ironclad, thereby taking the fort out of her forward firing arc, so the
USS Carondelet backs away – very carefully, to avoid detonating any further mines. She succeeds and is still well placed
to continue firing at the fort.

The USS Carondelet reverses carefully out of the mined hex triggering one of the ‘infernal devices’ as she goes.
The D6 die roll is 4 so the mine fails to detonate but remains in play – much to the relief of the crew!
Meanwhile, the CSS Little Rebel powers into the USS Essex, ramming her on her forward starboard quarter. She
rolls 1 and 4. The 4 gains a plus 1 for having a Ram Bow and plus 2 for travelling at a speed of 3 compared to the
1 of the USS Essex for plus 3 overall becoming a 7, meaning that two damage points are scored with a 1 in 6
chance of further damage. This is failed as the roll of 4 is too high. The CSS Little Rebel escapes unscathed as
the Union D6 dice rolls are 1, 2 and a pair of 3s. Unfortunately, the rolls to see if they are locked together come
up as 5 and 6 meaning that they are grappled together!

The situation at the end of turn 8. The CSS Little Rebel is entangled with the USS Essex, under the guns of Fort Duvet
whilst the USS Carondelet has successfully extricated herself from the minefield. The CSS Secessionist manoeuvres
carefully whilst preparing to engage the USS Essex. Meanwhile, the CSS General Sterling Price limps carefully homewards,
hugging the far shore as she goes and keeping a healthy distance between herself and the Union ships.

67

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Turn 9
The two entangled ships roll a D6 die each with a view to separating. Mercifully, 6 comes up and so both ships
move apart, pivoting off their sterns. Unfortunately for the USS Essex this takes her straight into the minefield
recently vacated by the USS Carondelet! The roll of 2 means that the mine has fails to detonate but remains in
play – meaning that should the U.S.S Essex attempt to leave the hex or turn within it, she will be at risk again.
Firing has become desperate for both sides. The CSS Secessionist opens fire at the USS Essex with a single D6
die at range 2. She rolls 3 which with the plus 1 for the size of the Union ship is a potential damage point. The
damage roll is at plus 1 but with a roll of 2 is insufficient to dent the Union ship. The USS Essex then opens fire at
the CSS Little Rebel at a range of 1 with half her broadside artillery due to the position of the Rebel ship. The plus
1 for range is offset by the small size of her opponent meaning that a single D6 die with no modifiers is rolled to
hit. The roll is a soul destroying 1! The return fire is rather more effective as the single D6 die comes up with 6,
plus 1 for the range and a further plus 1 for the size of the target meaning plus 2 overall for a total of 8. The natural
6 roll is 5 which, with plus 2 makes a 7. This means that there are 4 damage rolls and two 1 in 6 chances of further
rolls. These are 3 and 4 so no extra chances other than the four already decided. The damage rolls have a minus
1 modifier. The dice come up with a thoroughly depressing 2, a pair of 3s and 4. All are reduced by 1 meaning
that no damage is scored – the USS Essex breathes again! The USS Carondelet fires once again at the fort with
a single D6 die. The roll is 5 so a single damage roll is required with no modifiers. The roll of 5 is sufficient to score
a single damage point which is all that remains of the fort. Her flag is lowered and so Fort Duvet has at last
surrendered!
For initiative, the Union rolls a 3 whilst the Confederates roll a 5. The Confederates opt to allow the Union to move
first.

The situation at the end of turn 9. With Fort Duvet hauling down its flag the remaining Union ships are now thinking about
heading home. In truth both ships have sustained heavy damage but are still in the fight at present. The final turn will be
crucial for both sides.

Turn 10
The USS Essex turns her guns on the CSS Little Rebel. She rolls a single D6 die with a minus 1 due to the
Confederate ship’s size. The roll is a 6! The natural 6 roll is 4 which is reduced by 1 meaning a miss so there are
only two damage rolls to make. These have a plus 2 modifier. The rolls are 3 and 4 which adjust to 5 and 6,
meaning three points of damage are inflicted on the plucky Rebel ship. With the three points of damage, she
already has, the broadside from the Union ship is enough to sink her with a roll of 4 meaning she will go under in
four turns. She fires back with 1D6 die scoring 5 plus 2 for the range and the size of her opponent, making 7 in
total, so two damage rolls and a 1 in 6 chance of a further roll. The extra roll fails. Her damage dice each receive
a minus 1 so the 3 and 4 are not enough to damage the Union warship. The CSS Secessionist also fires at the

68

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 USS Essex. She rolls 3 which goes to 4 due to the size of the Union ship. Her damage dice are at plus 1 but with
a roll of a 1 this is not enough to damage her.
For initiative, the Union rolls 4 whilst the Confederates roll 5. The Confederates allow the Union to move first. As
the USS Essex backs away so the mine emits a whistling sound prior to exploding. “Phut!” It fails to ignite!

The situation at the end of turn 10. With the CSS Little Rebel sinking and with the heavily damaged CSS General Sterling
Price very close to joining her, the Confederate position is an unenviable one. The CSS Secessionist has taken some
damage but would be well able to continue the fight. However, taking on two ironclads may be tempting fate especially now
that the fort has been reduced. The Rebel ironclad would be needed now, more than ever.

In conclusion
Well, that was a humdinger and no mistake! The scenario was a fictional one, but I hope it served to give the
flavour of a typical type of action fought along the rivers during the American Civil War. A Union force attempting
to reduce a Confederate strongpoint is a scenario that can be scaled up or down as required and will provide a
great tactical challenge for either side. A little research into the period will come up with all manner of other ideas
for many such rewarding actions and this is an equally enjoyable facet of the hobby.
Of the rules themselves I would reiterate what I have said previously in that if something does not feel right then
please change it into something that does! It may be that these rules are not to your taste which is equally fine –
the history can be gamed in many ways and at many levels of complexity – and the bibliography lists but a few
others that are commercially available. No rules are perfect, and these are no exception, but I hope that this action
has served to demonstrate the fun that can be had with a few model ships and an idea for a game.

69

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 MODELLING THE WARSHIPS OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR
All of the models in my collection that have featured in the pages of this book are scratch built. I opted to do this
mainly because I rather liked the idea of building some ships of the period in a simple, old-school style. The end
result is, I like to think, the naval equivalent of old-style toy soldiers so basic detail, simple colour schemes and in
this case, lashings of satin varnish are very much the order of the day. In truth I have gained many hours of
pleasure making these models and although the collection now sits at around eighty or so vessels there are many
more I could add and indeed, will probably do so over time as the mood takes me.
I am not going to give a blow-by-blow account of how I made these for the simple reason that the method of
construction is straightforward enough and well within the capacity of even the most reluctant modeller. What I will
do though, is to describe specific aspects of the construction process I used for various key parts, for example
hulls, turrets, casemates, and masts.

Tools and Building Materials

The tools and materials I have used are quite commonplace and consist of the following:

Tools
• A scalpel with a good supply of blades
• An assortment of tweezers
• An assortment of nail files and emery boards
• A handheld pin drill with assorted bits
• A modelling hacksaw
• A selection of metal rulers
• A selection of adhesives – superglue, PVA wood glue and UHU
• Assorted acrylic and enamel paints
• Wood sealer
• Satin varnish

70

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 I also made use of a Dremel for a couple of models; to be honest it is not really essential, but it will save you time
when having to file certain hull shapes for particular ships.

Building Materials
• Assorted lengths of basswood strip
• Assorted thicknesses of dowel rod
• Plain grey card in A4 sheets
• Assorted sized craft sticks and coffee stirrers
• Assorted lengths and thicknesses of balsa wood
• Bamboo barbecue skewers
• Wooden cocktail sticks
• Assorted laser cut MDF hull templates and various fixtures and fittings.

71

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 All of my ship models feature a hull made up of a single or multiple layers of laser cut MDF of assorted lengths but
a uniform 3mm thickness. There are also various fixtures and fittings made from the same material and it is safe
to say that were it not for the exemplary service from [Link] this project would have never got off
the ground.
The models themselves are very simple to build as long as one bears in mind that the end result will be ‘purely
representational’ rather than super detailed.
In each case it is worth taking a look at what the ship actually looked like and whilst this may seem obvious you
will be pleasantly surprised at just how much variety there is in respect of how a given ship was depicted – both
at the time and in the eyes of current model manufacturers! Google images and some of the works listed in the
Bibliography are useful for this part of the process.
The first thing I should point out is that none of my models have been built to any specific scale as such. When
used on a gridded playing surface size does not really matter and indeed, my only nod to anything remotely scale
like is to try and work to relative sizes between ships where possible. I tended to use three main sizes – 3”, 4” and
5”- of hull template and in each case the shape was very generic – ‘boat shaped’ to use a technical expression –
with straight sides and a slightly curved stern and with a rather more pronounced bow. There are a few variations
on this, for example, the City-class gunboats were quite snub nosed so in each case the bow was filed down. My
basic hull template was ordered and produced by Warbases, along with some specialty types, including a
‘fishbone’ style version for use with ships that had a broadside gun deck. Warbases also fashioned no end of
components for the models, all to my design, and this proved to be an inspired idea as the quality and service has
been exemplary and has saved me a huge amount of time.

Hulls
These are quite simply various layers of MDF depending on the desired height of the hull. Casemate ironclads
and monitors tended to have very low freeboard so are typically a single layer. Most other models are around two
or three layers although the ocean-going warships – frigates and sloops – are five and four, respectively. The
‘fishbone’ hull template was designed to be used for ships that used a broadside gun deck – typically the ‘old navy’
of the Union. The idea is that this layer is painted separately from the rest of the hull and with a white edge. When
placed in position – voila! – an instant gunport white lining. Purists may baulk at the incorrect number of gun ports
but, as I have mentioned previously, the models are ‘purely representational’ rather than museum quality scale
reproductions! The top layer of the hull – the main deck – usually has some random hatch covers placed to break
up the bare space. I am currently embarking on a project to furnish as many ships as I can with lifeboats, again
purely to give some of the decks realistic levels of clutter. One of my early ideas was to arrange for some of the
hull templates ordered from Warbases to have holes pre-cut for placing masts. Similarly, a small notch for the
bowsprit is also handy. As a rule, I have not bothered with gunwales on the main deck so in essence the hull is
usually a solid lump of varying layers of MDF.
72

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Turrets
These are simplicity itself. Using layered circles of 3mm thick MDF (usually three) with the central layer having two
notches cut for the guns is all you need to do. All my turrets do not have any gun barrels showing – the rationale
is that they are currently inboard being reloaded!

Casemates
These are pretty straightforward to make and although my method works well enough it is probably not the most
efficient method of construction. Essentially, I take a pre-cut wooden Jenga-style block and position this on the
hull where the casemate will be. I then take a craft stick and draw the four sides required – fore and aft and port
and starboard. These are then cut out – I deliberately make them slightly larger than they need to be – and glued
to the edge of the hull (now you can see the advantage of using straight hull edges!) and the top edge of the central
block. I usually file the inside of the top and bottom edge so that there is a slight angle as it gives the glue more to
adhere to. When the four pieces are in place some vigorous filing then takes place to bring the entire top surface
of the casemate flush with the central block. The same thing is then done to the fore and aft casemate faces along
the top edge and also along the angles. After all this heavy-duty filing, the end result is a rectangular box with
angled sides and front edges. I then add the detailing – gun ports (5mm square card), hatch covers, a pilot house,
funnels, and a flagstaff.

Masts and Spars

I was really not looking forward to making these but with some careful thought and planning they are actually quite
straightforward. Most of the masts are in three pieces and are made from bamboo barbecue skewers whilst the
spars are from wooden cocktail sticks. A cunning trick I employed – especially important given the large number
of gaff rigs in use – was to position the fighting tops in such a way that they were able to provide an additional
surface to take adhesive for the gaff spars themselves. These are glued to the mast at an angle as well as along
the inside edge of the cut out to the rear of the fighting top. The end result is surprisingly sturdy. Potentially some
of these models could be rigged but to be honest it would be a refinement that would be out of kilter with the
standard of the model.

Extra Bits and Pieces

I fashion funnels from dowel rod of varying thicknesses and flagstaffs are from wooden cocktail sticks. Deck guns
are simply a card rectangle for the carriage and a short length of cocktail stick with one end rounded off. Simple
but effective. Most of the hatches and gun ports are squares of card – usually 5mm. Pilot houses are made from
basswood or whatever seems suitable for the task in hand. Paddle boxes I have fudged to an extent. Looking at
contemporary illustrations some of these appear to be fully enclosed – presumably after having been taken in
hand and converted into a gunboat – whilst others still sported their pre-war boxes with all manner of artistic cut
outs and designs. My simple solution to all this flam and paradiddle was to use solid versions for ease. In any
event at table viewing distances such fripperies would be largely indistinguishable from their more businesslike
counterparts on the fully converted steamers! Another thing I did not bother with was to show the paddle wheels
themselves. When the models are viewed from above at table ranges these are close to the waterline and so are
largely invisible which was excuse enough for me!

On Shore
I have built a small fort for use either as an objective or to aid the defenders. I fully intend building more in a similar
style, but larger, along with buildings and similar. The fort itself consists of four Jenga blocks, some wooden strip,
card for the gun carriages, shutters and gates and cocktail sticks for the gun barrels and flagstaff. Whilst the
fortification purist might sniff somewhat disdainfully at the result, it serves its purpose and besides, along with the
rest of the collection, is ‘purely representational’!

Painting
The entire collection was painted using a selection of acrylics and enamels. For anything bare or painted metal –
monitors or ironclad casemates for example – I opted to use shades of grey whilst decks were a variety of light
and dark browns. Superstructures were various colours. Some hulls were black and of course the colour schemes
used for the ‘old navy’ steam frigates and sloops would not look out of place in the war of 1812 except for the
funnels. To be honest I was fairly relaxed about painting, but the end results certainly look the part when in action.
I opted to use satin varnish as it is a good compromise between full on gloss and matt – it is bright enough to bring
the colours to life but not so much that it causes problems taking pictures. One thing I was meticulous about was
proper preparation. Models were first sealed with a specialist wood/MDF sealer and then undercoated in white by
hand. The models were then painted and quite often while still partially assembled. Funnels, pilot houses, masts,
gun barrels and flagstaffs were always painted prior to final assembly. Ironically, the only item on my models that

73

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 is a constant scale are the ensigns – these are all 1:600th and are printed on self-adhesive paper, trimmed to size,
and wrapped around the flagstaff or occasionally a gaff spar. For the Union, the flag was very simple but for the
Confederates I opted to use either the earlier naval ensign or the more usual (and probably less likely) Confederate
flag.

Closing Thoughts
The models in the collection are very much a mixture of historical and generic looking types. Initially I was only
going to build around a dozen or so and these were intended to be fairly anonymous looking, even to the extent
that I was going to use interchangeable flags as required. There is a historical precedent for this as both sides
made use of captured vessels so a simple change of flag would work well. As the project grew, I then started
modelling more historical looking models, principally some of the Confederate ships although the Union also has
its fair share of named vessels.
I very much enjoyed building this collection and although there are currently some sixty or so models there are still
many others I will add in the fullness of time. A notable exception to the lineup thus far is any form of stern wheeler.
At the time of writing, I have yet to come up with a viable option for making this type of ship although I expect I will
be able to improvise something suitable in time. It has been a lot of fun and taking the early decision that these
models were going to be simple and purely representational looking rather than museum standard scale
reproductions certainly helped. The construction techniques I have used have evolved over the life of the project
and will certainly be used for other periods as and when I get to them. The advantage of using laser cut MDF and
working off simple and stylised templates has been enormous and has saved me hours of time.
I hope that this brief overview of tips and techniques I used to make the models that have illustrated this book will
serve to demonstrate that this can be fun as well as an absorbing part of a naval wargames project. It is enormously
satisfying to design and build something from scratch rather than merely buying a model and then painting it. It is
a matter of personal choice though, and whilst there are some quite splendid looking commercially available
ranges of models for the period in a variety of scales, for a number of reasons I chose instead to build mine.
Furthermore, one can build these ships with as much or as little detail as one wishes – for me, the latter certainly
holds true!

74

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 A REVIEW OF THE FLEETS
The action along the Missenhitti was fought using models representing some of the more common types in action
along the rivers during the American Civil War. As mentioned previously, originally my plan was to build around a
dozen or so generic ships and indeed, that is how the collection started. However, the best laid plans of mice and
wargamers meant that inevitably two things would, and did, happen. To begin with, the number of models I wanted
increased as I delved deeper into the period and then I decided to take a few tentative steps into building specific
ships. The upshot of this is that the collection now consists of fairly generic models with a smattering of historical
types. All of them were built using the techniques described in the chapter on modelling the ships of the period.
The models in my collection that were built early on are quite easy to spot. Before taking advantage of the
availability of 5mm card squares from Warbases I used to fashion gun ports and hatch covers from the plastic
used in margarine tubs. These are larger than the card squares so can easily be spotted in the pictures following.
I may refurbish some of the models to the current standard and there are a couple that are in mind for a rebuild –
the CSS Georgia and the USS Galena, spring to mind, along with the pair of CSS Stonewalls and the Union 90-
Day gunboats.

The Union Fleet

Union Monitors – from left to right the USS Roanoke, a pair of Milwaukee class double turret monitors, a pair of Passaic class
Monitors, and the USS Monitor herself.

Union ironclads – from left to right the USS New Ironsides, the USS Galena, the USS Atlanta, and the USS Keokuk.

75

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Union river ironclads – from left to right the USS Benton, the USS Essex, the USS Carondelet, the USS St. Louis, the USS Louisville
and the USS Ozark.

Union river gunboats – from left to right the USS Tyler, the USS Conestoga, and the USS Lexington.

Union fully rigged steamships – a frigate and a selection of sloops.

76

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Union war-built gunboats – a pair of ‘double enders’ and a pair of ’90 Day’ types.

Union river gunboats and rams – the smaller types are used as ‘Ellet Rams’.

The Confederate Fleet

Historical Confederate ironclads – from left to right (top row) the CSS Virginia, CSS Georgia, CSS Louisiana, CSS Mississippi,
(bottom row) CSS Arkansas, CSS Missouri, CSS Atlanta and the CSS Manassas.

77

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 Projected Confederate ironclads and the CSS Selma with her unique supporting frames (bottom right).

Confederate river gunboats and rams including the CSS General Sterling Price (top right) and the CSS Little Rebel (bottom right).

Confederate raiders – a pair of the CSS Stonewall type (they never served in the Confederate navy) and an ocean-going sloop.

78

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 At the time of writing, I have another ten models at various stages of construction to add to the collection and in
truth there are many more ships I would like to add in the future. The technique is quite portable in that I fully intend
using the basic method of construction for other historical periods and at a similar level of detail. Once I had taken
the decision to build the models this way, foregoing much in the way of fine detailing, the collection grew fairly
quickly. I hope that these pictures and the pointers contained in the modelling chapter will inspire gamers to root
around in their spares boxes, raid coffee shops for stirrers, make a virtue of recycling bits and pieces and look at
ships from the perspective of the ‘three feet rule’ – and above all have fun building them as the resulting models
are intended to be ‘purely representational!’

79

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 FINAL THOUGHTS, FURTHER THOUGHTS, ERRORS, AND
OMISSIONS
Final …
So, there you have it! My American Civil War naval wargaming project has at last come to a significant pause,
significant in that it has now gone as far as I want to for the present. I have no doubt that further ships will be
commissioned in the future, along with some bespoke terrain pieces and other assorted bits and pieces. Such is
the way of a wargaming projects – they never really end; they just grow in various directions!
Ordinarily I have an enviable record when it comes to launching new projects – rather less so when it comes to
actually completing them – so I am personally very pleased with myself to have gotten this far! It has been a
thoroughly enjoyable process and at the risk of sounding mawkish I have learned a lot about myself in undertaking
this endeavour. At the very least I have developed a healthy respect for those that write for a living and also an
enhanced appreciation of those that are far better modellers than I am! I have also gained the confidence to tackle
scratch building in a way I never previously entertained – mainly because if the models are destined to be playing
pieces, then finite detail is not necessary when viewed at table ranges. ‘Purely Representational’ or Hollywood
style ‘Based Upon’ has been very much my mantra throughout and it is an approach that suits me to a tee. The
end results fight just as well as their more detailed, scaled, and expensive counterparts and besides, it is a lot of
fun making them!
To the aspiring ironclads era wargamer I would say go with whatever models work best for you – be they scratch
built or commercially available and in a constant scale. There is no wrong way to do this – I have fought naval
games with everything from museum quality scale models to cardboard counters with equal success and
enjoyment – so gamers should be free to decide for themselves what path to follow when choosing to fight battles
in this, or indeed any period or genre.
The rules contained in this book give, I hope, an easy couple of hours’ entertainment with what is for me at least,
the correct amount of complexity, level of detail and the all-important ‘feel’ of the period – at least within the
confines of my understanding of naval warfare during the American Civil War. In many ways this first attempt at
writing a set of rules has a lot in common with my chosen period in that much of the techniques used are untried
in the harsh arena of combat in the same way that the new steam ironclads and new technology was – the results
will either work, fail or, more usually, fall between the two extremes and require constant support from a reluctant
engineer! Seriously though, if something within the rules does not sit well then by all means change it into
something that does. The core system is, I hope, sound enough to withstand a degree of house rule tinkering and
indeed, I would be surprised if this did not take place. I am by no means an expert on the period and so any input
from more learned sources is always welcome.

….and Further.
I certainly have plans to the core system for the later ironclad and pre-dreadnought period – the years from the
mid-1880s to 1905 – and already have in mind the revisions required to cater for more advanced artillery, more
efficient engines, and advances in metallurgy according better degrees of armour protection. Naturally, the
increased effectiveness of the self-propelled torpedo is something else to consider. At this stage I am mindful of
the fact that all these advances would require the rules as they stand to be changed not only in points of detail but
also to in effect be dialled back. My limitations of space are still there so movement distances and ranges etc.
would need to be kept within sensible boundaries so, for example, instead of a one hex movement point equalling
around three knots it would now equal around six. It is early days in the process, but I reckon with some
experimentation it can work just as well. The acid test will come when I look to think about dreadnought battleships
although as it stands, they may be a step too far – there are limits to the number of D6 dice that even I would be
happy rolling! I am not overly worried about that though as my interest in the Great War from a naval perspective
has moved on from the endless refights of Jutland in my younger days – fun though they were – to the lower-level
cruiser and gunboat style of operations. At this level I believe the rules could work although at this stage I have
done little with the idea other than to think about it.
On a completely different tack I have also thought about using a version of the rules for starship-style combat in
some way. Again, nothing tangible to show at present other than a couple of ideas kicking around in the grey
matter for the Portable Starship Wargame.
I hope that this book has been of interest to both experienced naval wargamers and relative newcomers to the
genre. Naval games have a big advantage in that compared to land battles one certainly does not need anything
like the same amount of material to fight a good battle. In its purest form a plain blue cloth and a dozen or so
models from the period preferred is more than enough to be getting along with. Be warned though, building and

80

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 or painting model ships can be hugely addictive and before you know where you are you end up with sixty odd
models and writing a set of rules to go with them!
That is my excuse, and I am sticking with it!

Errors and Omissions….

I am quietly confident that unintentional gremlins will surface over the course of time and playing experience.
These rules are an amateur effort and in my defence any such errors are unintentional and accidental. As
mentioned previously, anything that does not sit well can always be changed to suit the outcome required. The
Portable Wargame stable actively encourages this and it would be foolish of me to suggest otherwise! Should a
situation arise during a game that is unclear in terms of the applicable section of the rules then by all means debate
and compromise on a workable solution – I am great believer in a quick fix during a game with the inevitable
debate taking place after the action, mainly as this is a game time saving expedient – so that the battle can
continue. A simple D6 roll is a great adjudicator!
As far as omissions are concerned, we are on slightly more stable ground. I have touched on some of these such
as the use of sails, the effects of tide and current and also infantry fire. For me, these areas fall very much in the
realms of ‘if I need them then I will come up with something’. At the risk of offending the purist the question of tide
and current is a tricky one in that in certain cases this was sufficient to be more powerful than the machinery of
certain ships meaning that it was impossible for them to make headway. Whilst it makes for an extra challenge to
overcome in a game if one is in command of such a vessel it can lead to an exercise in frustration. Historically
accurate for sure but it does not lend itself to a great tabletop experience. Planning naval operations around the
tide and currents is assumed to have taken place already in my games and so the ships are engaging during the
optimum time for such activities. A ‘fudge’ but a welcome one!
I have not drafted a play sheet to accompany the rules, neither have I drawn up a ship damage chart. I am quite
sure that an enthusiastic gamer will do so in both cases and this unknown hero will have my eternal thanks –
especially if they are then uploaded into the Files section of the Portable Wargame Facebook group! Seriously
though, in the case of the former I did not need a play sheet, mainly as I had various pages of the rules deployed
around the table whilst fighting numerous actions and in the case of the latter, I tended to simply write out the stats
as required.
I reckon that this just about wraps things up in respect of this entry into the PORTABLE WARGAME stable and so
I hope that it will serve as a useful primer for the newcomer to naval battles or as a pleasant diversion for the more
seasoned tabletop admiral.

81

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION
During the course of this project, I made use of many sources – both physical and digital. The internet is a fantastic
resource for getting all manner of information about ships and battles and when using Google, the images section
is particularly valuable. Over the life of this project, I had also acquired a modest library devoted to the naval side
of the American Civil War and have dipped into all of them as the need arose.
Cannery, Donald L LINCOLN’S NAVY: THE SHIPS, MEN AND ORGANISATION 1861-65
(Published by Conway Maritime Press 1998, ISBN 0 85177 669 8)
Coombe, Jack D. THUNDER ALONG THE MISSISSIPPI – THE RIVER BATTLES THAT SPLIT
THE CONFEDERACY (Published by Sarpedon 1996, ISBN 1 885119 25 9)
Coombe, Jack D GUNFIRE AROUND THE GULF – THE LAST MAJOR NAVAL CAMPAIGNS OF
THE CIVIL WAR (Published by Bantam Press 1999, ISBN 0 553 10731 3)
Gibbons, Tony WARSHIPS AND NAVAL BATTLES OF THE CIVIL WAR (Published by Gallery
Books 1989, ISBN 0 8317 9301 5
Greene, Jack & Massignani, IRONCLADS AT WAR (Published by Combined Publishing 1998, ISBN 0 938289
Alessandro 58 6)
The following are a really useful selection of titles published by Osprey and from the pen of the well-respected
writer on naval matters, Angus Konstam.
CONFEDERATE SUBMARINES AND TORPEDO VESSELS 1861-65 (New Vanguard title 103 2004, ISBN
9781841767208)
CONFEDERATE BLOCKADE RUNNER 1861-65 (New Vanguard title 90 2004, ISBN 978181766362)
CONFEDERATE RAIDER 1861-65 (New Vanguard title 64 2002, ISBN 9781841764962)
UNION RIVER IRONCLAD 1861-65 (New Vanguard title 56 2002, ISBN 9781841764443)
MISSISSIPPI RIVER GUNBOAT 1861-65 (New Vanguard title 49 2002, ISBN 9781841764139)
UNION MONITOR 1861-65 (New Vanguard title 45 2002, ISBN 9781841763064)
CONFEDERATE IRONCLAD 1861-65 (New Vanguard title 41 2001, ISBN 9781841763071)
HAMPTON ROADS 1862: FIRST CLASH OF THE IRONCLADS (Campaign title 103 2002, ISBN
9781841764108)
DUEL OF THE IRONCLADS (a single volume combining the Union Monitor, Confederate Ironclad, and the
Hampton Roads titles) 2003, ISBN 1 84176 721 2
Musicant, Ivan DIVIDED WATERS (Published by Harper Collins 1995, ISBN 0 06 016482 4)
Reid, Rowena COMBINED OPERATIONS OF THE CIVIL WAR (Published by Naval Institute
Press 1978, ISBN 0 87021 1226)
Ed. Still Jr, Dr. William N. THE CONFEDERATE NAVY: THE SHIPS, MEN AND ORGANISATION 1861-65
(Published by Conway Maritime Press 1997, ISBN 0 85177 686 8)
Tucker, Spencer C BLUE AND GREY NAVIES (Published by Naval Institute Press 2006, ISBN 1
59114 882 0)
The above titles have been my constant companions during this endeavour although a couple arrived quite late
on in the project. The book that really started it for me though was Thunder Along the Mississippi although it is in
fact a pretty basic history. The Tony Gibbons title is a great resource and well worth picking up as are any of the
titles by Angus Konstam.
Special mention should also be made of the quite superb book written by John Wallis entitled:
IRONCLAD AND IRON PROTECTED VESSELS OF THE CONFEDERATE STATES NAVY 1861 – 1865
It is available from [Link] John is currently working on a second edition of this work in the light
of latest information although as yet there is no release date.
From the perspective of rule sets about naval wargaming in the period then my list is a whole lot shorter. GRIDDED
NAVAL WARGAMES by Bob Cordery features prominently (naturally), as does the whole catalogue of rules and
expansions published by David Manley. Bob’s available works are listed at the beginning of the book and are
available in a variety of formats depending on the title. There is also an extremely useful Facebook group for the
Portable Wargame in its many iterations which Bob actively supports and is well worth joining.

82

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 David Manley’s works are available from [Link] – and a search under Long Face Games will
bring up all manner of naval goodies above and beyond the period covered by these rules. He has written rules
for the ancient, medieval, renaissance, age of sail, pre and post dreadnought (meaning from the Spanish American
war of 1898 to WW2) and even for modern, missile armed fast attack boats and, in many cases, complete with not
only campaign settings but even ship counters! Definitely worth taking a good look at if your naval gaming tastes
extend to include other historical periods.
For the period covered by these rules he has produced the following:
DAHLGREN AND COLOMBIAD – the rules that inspired a substantial part of this book!
BY SEA AND BY RIVER – Campaign rules for the above and including a whole range of additional rules
and ship types.
BROADSIDE AND RAM – these are fleet level rules for the ironclad period and in this instance are focused
on the Lissa campaign of 1866, together with a set of rules for running the campaign. There is also a
supplement to this with the ship specifications for both fleets converted for use with Dahlgren and Colombiad
for a more detailed and tactical level gaming experience.
The following supplements cover the two major wars fought in South America, the Boshin War in Japan, and all
three include full ship specifications as well rules for conducting campaigns:
THE WAR OF THE PACIFIC
THE PARAGUAYAN WAR
THE BOSHIN WAR 1868 TO 1869
For the European theatre there are the following supplements:
SHIPS OF THE RUSSO-TURKISH WAR
THE SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN QUESTION
As the ship details for the rules in this book use much of the information that David Manley has painstakingly
gathered it would not be difficult to factor in additional vessels for the Civil War or others, as required. A word of
caution though, if doing so be sure to use the DAHLGREN AND COLOMBIAD specifications as many of the
supplements include those for BROADSIDE AND RAM which is set at a much higher, fleet action level.
Other sets of rules that have served to provide some inspiration include those available from [Link]
called HAMMERIN’ IRON. These are well supported by a very useful range of 1:600th scale models – mainly in
resin but with some in metal – along with terrain, some forts and shore batteries and even figures for infantry,
cavalry, artillery, skirmishers, and command.
Another set is produced by Mike Haught of [Link] fame. The rules are called DAWN OF
IRON: THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR AT SEA 1861 – 65 and are also available on the Wargames Vault. They look
quite superb and with a level of playable detail sufficient to satisfy the most detail focused naval wargamer. At the
time of writing work is in hand on an expansion covering the War in the Pacific. Mike uses 1:600 th as his scale of
choice and has produced some quite outstanding looking scale models fashioned from balsa wood etc. There is
a Dawn of Iron Facebook group which is well worth looking at and Mike is very active on it.
For the gamer on a budget then Project Gutenberg is a great resource. I have a downloaded a copy of the eminent
naval historian and theorist AT Mahan’s GULF AND INLAND WATERS on my Kindle which forms volume 2 of the
History of the United States Navy. It covers naval operations on the rivers and in the Gulf of Mexico and is well
worth a read. The language may be dated – it was written in 1883 – but it is a mine of information as are the four
volumes of BATTLE AND LEADERS OF THE CIVIL WAR, of which I am fortunate enough to have a physical
copy.
In short, the would-be American Civil War naval gamer has plenty of material to work with in respect of background
material and the items mentioned above have all served me well in one way or another. At the very least the
internet is a hugely valuable resource and so I would highly recommend spending some time browsing it before
taking the plunge and embarking on raising the fleets required. I suspect that most gamers probably do that at the
start of a project anyway – I know that I do!
Finally, mention must be made of the Naval Wargames Society, who have kept naval wargaming alive across the
26
world for many years, and who have a very active Facebook page .

[Link]
26

83

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)

 OTHER BOOKS IN THE PORTABLE WARGAME SERIES
In order of publication, the other books in the Portable Wargame series are:
THE PORTABLE WARGAME (2017) Hardback: ISBN 978-1-326-90454-8
Paperback: ISBN 978-1-326-90458-6
EPub: ISBN 978-1-326-90460-9
DEVELOPING THE PORTABLE WARGAME (2017) Hardback: ISBN 978-0-244-01101-7
Paperback: ISBN 978-0-244-91102-7
EPub: ISBN 978-0-244-61103-3
GRIDDED NAVAL WARGAMES (2018) Hardback: ISBN 978-0-244-68854-7
Paperback: ISBN 978-0-244-38854-6
EBook: ISBN 978-0-244-08856-9
THE PORTABLE NAPOLEONIC WARGAME (2018) Hardback: ISBN 978-0-244-73909-6
Paperback: ISBN 978-0-244-13910-0
PDF: ISBN 978-0-244-44054-4
THE PORTABLE COLONIAL WARGAME (2020) Hardback: ISBN 978-0-244-87482-7
Paperback: ISBN 978-0-244-57482-6
Kindle: ISBN 978-0-244-27482-5
THE PORTABLE PIKE & SHOT WARGAME (With Antoine Bourguilleau, Paperback: ISBN 979-8-567-70890-3
Alan Saunders, and Arthur Harman) (2020)
Kindle: ASIN B08P3T4ZF6
¡ARRIBA ESPAÑA! (SPAIN ARISE!) INCLUDING THE PORTABLE Paperback: ISBN 979-8-5319-4558-7
SPANISH CIVIL WAR WARGAME RULES (2021)
Kindle: ASIN B098GX2GTW
THE BALKAN LEAGUE: A MATRIX GAME CAMPAIGN, Hardback: ISBN 979-8-48838-456-9
INCLUDING THE PORTABLE BALKAN WARS WARGAME RULES
Paperback: ISBN 979-8-48835-822-5
(2021)
Kindle: ASIN B09J2F9JH3
THE PORTABLE WARGAME COMPENDIUM (With David Barnes, Justin Hardback: ISBN 979-8-4883-5959-8
Barrett, Mark Cordone, Arthur Harman, Marc Pavone, Martin Rapier, and Mike Taber)
Paperback: ISBN 979-8-8069-7109-9
(2022)
Kindle: ASIN B09YQ5TZXT
Except where otherwise credited, these books were all written by Bob Cordery and published by Eglinton Books.

84

Walter O\\\'Hara (Order #37505199)