Naval warfare

[Gaius Octavius]

In re building ships quickly with seasoned wood, (and if my memory serves), wood may be seasoned quickly by applying heat to it.

 

Again, if memory serves, the Japanese first attempt at building a battle ship, was to copy a British ship exactly as the plans indicated. Promptly sank.

[Kosmo]

FWIW, there's a parallel story from World War 2. As a diversion during the battle of Midway, the Japanese sent a small fleet to attack the Aleutians. A damaged Zero attempted to land on what proved to be muskeg rather than solid ground; its landing gear caught in the mud and the plane flipped over its nose. Several days later, the wreck was spotted by the Americans and shipped back to the States where it was reverse-engineered. The result was the Vought Corsair.

 

I think the first entire Zero captured came from the Java Campaign of early 1942. That's from the top of my head.

 

Returning to ancient naval warfare I was trying to understand some (other) things.

The main enemy of speed was weight. For the many people on board one needed lots of food and water. So, it seems that often campaigns aimed further away needed to be supplied by a convoy of trading ships. Still, I found mention about this only for the athenian campaign in Sicilly. Opinions?

I'm not sure about the way to spend the night. Some say that for the night a fleet would stop on a beach to eat and sleep, but this seems hard to believe in all cases. Did they spend often the night at sea? Did they sailed or waited at anchor?

The rowers carried weapons? As boarding was an important way to fight it seems only natural to have them able to fight. Vikings, turkish-arab pirates used lighetely armed rowers to augment the ships fighting power and to reduce the need for onboard infantry (and the added weight).

[caldrail]

The story of capturing a beached carthaginian warship may not be entirely hype, though I suspect some exaggeration is involved. After all, we see this sort of thing highlighted in modern warfare, where technological secrets of enemy equipment are vital intelligence.

 

FWIW, there's a parallel story from World War 2. As a diversion during the battle of Midway, the Japanese sent a small fleet to attack the Aleutians. A damaged Zero attempted to land on what proved to be muskeg rather than solid ground; its landing gear caught in the mud and the plane flipped over its nose. Several days later, the wreck was spotted by the Americans and shipped back to the States where it was reverse-engineered. The result was the Vought Corsair.

Nonsense. Read this...

 

http://www.f4ucorsair.com/tdata/history.htm

 

But back to things roman. Warships of the time were usually beached or anchored overnight as such vessels weren't exceptionally seaworthy, plus they had little in the way of navigation aids and a lot of superstitious sailors on board.

[Marcus Caelius]

Nonsense. Read this...

 

http://www.f4ucorsair.com/tdata/history.htm

 

I did, and I see nothing to refute the story.

 

A particularly significant event of the battle was the discovery by Allied forces of an intact A6M Zero fighter. A Japanese pilot attempted to set his aircraft down on rough terrain and died from a broken neck. The intact specimen was studied by Allied aeronautical engineers, and developed aircraft able to compete in aerial combat on even terms, such as the F6F Hellcat and later F4U Corsair.

 

That was from the Wiki article "Aleutian Islands Campaign," although I first read the story in "The Thousand-Mile War: World War II in Alaska and the Aleutians," by Alan Garfield. You'll find a more-detailed account at http://www.vectorsite.net/avzero.html, although the link to the Corsair is not as explicit.

 

"Nonsense," indeed!

 

One clarification: I did not mean that the Zero's features were incorporated into the Corsair. Rather, the Corsair's specifications were dictated by the need to counter the Zero's features.

 

Now, back to ancient naval warfare.

[Bryaxis Hecatee]

Returning to ancient naval warfare I was trying to understand some (other) things.

The main enemy of speed was weight. For the many people on board one needed lots of food and water. So, it seems that often campaigns aimed further away needed to be supplied by a convoy of trading ships. Still, I found mention about this only for the athenian campaign in Sicily. Opinions?

I'm not sure about the way to spend the night. Some say that for the night a fleet would stop on a beach to eat and sleep, but this seems hard to believe in all cases. Did they spend often the night at sea? Did they sailed or waited at anchor?

The rowers carried weapons? As boarding was an important way to fight it seems only natural to have them able to fight. Vikings, turkish-arab pirates used lighetely armed rowers to augment the ships fighting power and to reduce the need for on board infantry (and the added weight).

 

From all informations I found the use of naval supply convoys is spoken of three times in the classical greek period but there is also at least one other instance where it is certain : Egyptian Expedition, Corinth's expedition against Corcyrea ( Th. I,31 ; I 46-8 ), Sicilian Expedition, the Syracusan proposed counter expedition against the Athenian expedition ( Th. VI 34,4 ) Eteonikos' expedition ( Xen. Hell. I,6,7 ), but also a Sicilian expedition against the Carthaginian had an important number of supply ships with it.

 

About the night it must be stressed that night at sea was almost impossible on board a trireme because she was too small to allow sleeping on board and did not carry enough food and water for much time at sea : a trireme must have drunk some 500l of water a day. We know that an athenian sailor had to take a 3 days ration with him ( Th. I 48 is a proof ), a period which is the same for land expeditions by the way. A day ration is about three chenice of wheat or barley a day, that is 1,5 or 1,2kg of grain a day. Three day means some 4kg ( especially if we add some vegetables and onions ) of food for each sailor which, at around 200 men per ships means 800kg a ship of food. Add some 200 liters of water and you got a 1000kg to which you must add the weight of the men... Also their is the question of volume. Thus capacity of a warship of the time is very limited and landing every day becomes necessary.

 

It means that it was an integral part of naval warfare to use the time at which the enemy landed to strike him : two of the biggest athenian disasters happened this way, including Aigos Potamos, because the sailors had to go to the nearest market to get food and drink.

 

About weapons... In some expeditions the rowers were used as light infantry but usually they were not, the ship on board force including a specialized group of half a dozen archers and a dozen specially trained naval hoplites. One may also think that part of the rowers were slaves or servants to the fighting men and of the ship's officers ( but the use of rowing slave was never a big winner in the ancient time, it is mainly later including at the time of the famous Louis XIV galley that slaves were used ).

[Kosmo]

Thank you BH for yours informative answers.

 

From all informations I found the use of naval supply convoys is spoken of three times in the classical greek period but there is also at least one other instance where it is certain : Egyptian Expedition, Corinth's expedition against Corcyrea ( Th. I,31 ; I 46-8 ), Sicilian Expedition, the Syracusan proposed counter expedition against the Athenian expedition ( Th. VI 34,4 ) Eteonikos' expedition ( Xen. Hell. I,6,7 ), but also a Sicilian expedition against the Carthaginian had an important number of supply ships with it.

 

Added to the supply ships for the triremes they often had the main convoy of the army if the trireme fleet was the protection for the army transports. So, often the rowing fighting ships were just a part of a fleet that had many transport ships. I presume that this transport ships were sailing ships or with mixed propulsion as the transport capacity of a rowing ship was small.

 

About the night it must be stressed that night at sea was almost impossible on board a trireme because she was too small to allow sleeping on board and did not carry enough food and water for much time at sea : a trireme must have drunk some 500l of water a day. We know that an athenian sailor had to take a 3 days ration with him ( Th. I 48 is a proof ), a period which is the same for land expeditions by the way. A day ration is about three chenice of wheat or barley a day, that is 1,5 or 1,2kg of grain a day. Three day means some 4kg ( especially if we add some vegetables and onions ) of food for each sailor which, at around 200 men per ships means 800kg a ship of food. Add some 200 liters of water and you got a 1000kg to which you must add the weight of the men... Also their is the question of volume. Thus capacity of a warship of the time is very limited and landing every day becomes necessary.

 

I agree with you, but still that must be some cases when the fleets had to spend the night at sea. I'm thinking at open sea crossing like that from Sicilly to Carthage or from Epirus to S. Italy. Or were this crossings shorter then a day?

If they use 500 l of water a day this means 1,5 tons for 3 days to be added to the 800 kg of food to a total of 2.300 kg.

[caldrail]

Nonsense. Read this...

 

http://www.f4ucorsair.com/tdata/history.htm

 

I did, and I see nothing to refute the story.

 

A particularly significant event of the battle was the discovery by Allied forces of an intact A6M Zero fighter. A Japanese pilot attempted to set his aircraft down on rough terrain and died from a broken neck. The intact specimen was studied by Allied aeronautical engineers, and developed aircraft able to compete in aerial combat on even terms, such as the F6F Hellcat and later F4U Corsair.

 

That was from the Wiki article "Aleutian Islands Campaign," although I first read the story in "The Thousand-Mile War: World War II in Alaska and the Aleutians," by Alan Garfield. You'll find a more-detailed account at http://www.vectorsite.net/avzero.html, although the link to the Corsair is not as explicit.

 

"Nonsense," indeed!

 

One clarification: I did not mean that the Zero's features were incorporated into the Corsair. Rather, the Corsair's specifications were dictated by the need to counter the Zero's features.

You're still wrong. The Zero was not an advanced aeroplane at all. It wasn't strong, fitted with with armour or self-sealing fuel tanks, nor was it capable of fighting on even terms at high speed. The Zero was designed for agility, something the japanese pilot found desirable in his quest to become the perfect aerial warrior, and at speed the controls became hard to use due to accentuated compressibility effects whereas the Corsair had been designed to a different philosophy, that of the highest straight line speed. In fact, the study of the Zero had no effect on the more advanced Corsair design whatsoever. What they did learn from the captured specimen was its flight characteristics, not its technogical features, and therefore could evolve suitable tactics to counter what was already becoming an obscelescent design in 1941. The corsair was designed to a pre-war specification, not to an emergency war measure.

 

Now, back to ancient naval warfare.

Yep, I agree there.

[Rameses the Great]

Just a quick note, did not Sparta receive heavy support from Persia to build a navy?

[Marcus Caelius]

You're still wrong.

 

OK, yours is bigger.

[Gaius Octavius]

Just a quick note, did not Sparta receive heavy support from Persia to build a navy?

 

I'd rather have an answer to this.

[Bryaxis Hecatee]

Yes indeed the Persians gave a huge amount of ressources to Sparta in order for her to build a huge fleet. The persian support to Sparta was in two periods : before Cyrus the younger ( future rebel of the Anabasis ) and after his arrival. During the first period the persians provided 8 payments for at least 100 talents ( most conservative figure, but more probably between 200 and 500 talents ). When in 408 Cyrus came to the stage he provided at least 100 talents between 408 and 406 ( more probably between 200 and 500 talents ) and in 405 he gives the full taxes of the western parts of the Persian Empire to Sparta. When Lysander came back to Sparta the following year he still had 470 talents in his purse, that is almost a full year of payments for a 120 ships fleet. That is 13 tons of gold and must be compared to the 600 yearly talents that Athens got from her taxes and revenues. Keep in mind that Sparta also got money for her allies and the captured cities ( for example Rhodes paid 32 talents in 412/11, a month's payment for a 60 ships fleet ) whereas the Athenian figure I gave was what was available after the allies had paid their taxes.

[Kosmo]

What about roman and hellenistic fleets outside the Med? In the Black Sea, North Sea and Red Sea. Did they used also rowing ships of the same model (trireme, polireme) ?

[Bryaxis Hecatee]

Well the black sea fleets were mainly the Mediterranean fleets because the black sea was considered an extension of the Mediterranean, but their were not many war fleets operating in the black sea, those I can remember from the top of my head are the Athenian fleet of the 5th and 4th century and Mithridates's fleet in the 1st century B.C. . Piracy was not developped in the black sea and fighting occurred mainly in the Bosphorus area, before ships came to the black sea. One of the main reasons was that the fleets could thus find each other more easily than in open sea.

 

In the north sea we don't have much data but we know that Caesar and later Claude used Mediterranean designs for their ships as is best illustrated by the battle with the Venetian who used a different kind of ships, with higher flanks and big sails ( cf. Caesar's B.G. ). Other than that we don't have much informations but it seems that the imperial period navy in the area was mainly made of the larger river craft of the Rhine fleet which might sail along the coast, but no dedicated ships that I know.

 

For the Red Sea all I've ever heard points toward classical Mediterranean designs too but that fleet was very small.

[Kosmo]

Thank you BH.

About the Black Sea and North Sea I was thinking more about the roman fleets permanently stationed there that had to fight germans in the Late Empire.

[caldrail]

We know the romans used a variety of designs according to need. There was for instance those double-ended vessels used by Germanicus on an expedition via river deep into Germania, with rudders at both ends for manoeverability. I also note how easily north sea (or english channel) storms wreaked havoc on the fleets, so its apparent that roman ships weren't the most seaworthy.