In naval battles of the 1700's and 1800's, were battles always fought un

Position:Home>History> In naval battles of the 1700's and 1800's, were battles always fought un

Question:

Or, did they ever just have a truce, where they sailed away without anyone winning!? Or did always at least one ship get commandeered or destroyed!?

I guess I was wondering if with so much damage, did the battles ever end on one or both ships giving up and sailing away!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

During the age of sail, it was actually very difficult to sink an enemy warship!. Think hulls often prevented the penetration of the solid shot fired from the naval cannons of the day; USS Constitution got her name "Old Ironsides" from when British shot bounced off her hull!.

The main tactic of 18th and early 19th century naval warfare was to "demast" the enemies ships!. That is, to destroy the sailing masts of the enemies ships, making them impossible to maneuver!. Once a warship was unable to maneuver, boarding parties could be sent over to capture the ship!. This is one the reasons why marines were used on warships of many navies!.

Captured enemy ships did have value to the navies and their officers who captured them!. But if an enemy ship could be sunk with the fierce hand-to-hand fighting to occured when boardings took place, it was preferred!. Naval officers preferred to batter an enemy ship until it surrendered, by lowering or "striking" its colors, or if they ship surrendered with little or no fight!.

Some sailing warships were sunk, either by having their hulls holed by cannon shot or if their gun powder magazines exploded!.

By the middle of the 19th century, with the introduction of iron clads, the sinking of the enemy's vessels became more common!. Naval cannon was still unable to sink most ships, but the use of the ram, used first in ancient times, allowed steam powered iron clads to puncture the hulls of most ships!.

By the end of the 19th century, naval artillery technology had improved to the point that wood and iron could be penetrated by projectiles fired from long distances!. Since then the boarding and capturing of enemy warships become less common!. The last enemy warships captured on the high seas during wartime by the United States Navy was German U-boot U-505, which is now on display at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

The goal was usually to capture or sink an enemy ship!. It was most beneficial for the crew and captain to "take a prize"!. Returning to port with a ship and prisoners could result in monetary rewards!.

The cannon battles were usually over when the sun set!. It was not uncommon for both sides to continue fighting if the moonlight permitted!. When grappling hooks between ships were used the ships were often lashed together and this resulted in hand to hand combat that lasted until either party was defeated!.

17th century English Admiralty began to develop tactical fighting instructions for fleet actions, but not on strategies fleet actions would support!. Late-17th-century maritime wars thus demonstrated the centrality of French doctrine, in which major naval campaigns were concerned with coastal defense and attacks on individual or small groups of ships!. Maritime activity was therefore extended in pursuit of these campaigns and was only periodically punctuated by concentrated fleet battles!.

It is always a possibility for a group to break away from the engagement if the wind permitted!. Most gunnery from this time period was effective within only a thousand yards or a very little over!. Knowing the capabilities of one's opponent and devising tactics that take those into account is the primary focus of any battlefield commander!. Having a way out is usually a good idea!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Shjp-handling and maneuver were key factors in naval battle; seldom were ships evenly matched in critical areas, eg, size, weapons, kind and age of ship, and especially gunnery, at which the Royal Navy was unsurpassed, both in accuracy and rate of fire!. If brought to battle, there was almost always a victor, and most often a captured ship!.

Remember, not only were ships expensive, but ship's officers of the winning vessal got substantial sums of money for their shares of the prizes!. Many British captains retired as rich men with large holdings due to their prize money!.

The biggest ships of the line (1st-5th raters) were almost never sunk by gunfire, they were too big, too well built, and too well armed to allow substantial near-range broadsides, except in fleet actions allowing multiple ships to engage a single enemy!.

Fire was the greatest threat in navy battles, followed by damages to sails/masts that made maneuver impossible!. In either event, ships usually struck their flags and surrendered!. Naval warships were extremely skilled at repair of battle damage!. After Trafalgar, one Bitish first-rater returned home with no masts standing, just jury-rigged spars in use!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

All the variations you described were possible, but, ideally, one commander would try to capture the other vessel!. The cost of building new ships was tremendous!. If an enemy ship could be captured and brought home, the enemy would have one less ship and the winning side could have one MORE ship!.

The other thing to consider is that the largest, most significant naval battles involved FLEETS of ships manuvering against each other!. Under the right circumstances, it may be possible to place one's ships in a strategicly overpowering position, forcing the surrender of the enemy fleet without much loss of life!. This would be, of course, very rare, but not unheard of!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Quite often battles were fought until one side surrendered!. One of the things you wanted was to actually be able to capture a ship, and it wasn't just pirates looking to do so!. Navies would give a bonus for capturing an enemy ship!. Which the ship's crew couldn't get if you sunk a ship!. And then the ship would be repaired, renamed, and put to work for your Navy!.

If a battle went on too long or a ship was either overpowered or out numbered, then the battle might end with both sides sailing away (in the case of over powered or outnumbered one side might try chasing the other)!.
Www@QuestionHome@Com

Until one was sunk or better yet!.!.!.!.captured!

Capture was ALWAYS the best course!.
Capture the ship itself!.
Capture of crew!.
Capture of profitable prisoners!.
Capture of weapons!.
Capture of goods and gold/money!.

Oh, I am sure there were plenty of times where two ships, but greatly and equally crippled!.!.!.!.seeing no good use of taking the other ship!.!.!.!.sadly limped away from one another to try and fight another day!.

But those stroies you really don't hear a lot of!. But I am positive it has happened more than once!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

More often that not, the winners of sea battles in those days were decided by which side had suffered the heaviest losses of both ships and men, and the battle usually continued until one side or the other "struck" (lowered) their flags and surrendered!.Www@QuestionHome@Com