With more and more searches, I find additional information about vessels of the American Civil War, whether Union or Confederate. Hopefully, the bibliography at the end of this manuscript will answer your questions about ACW war vessels. Undoubtedly, as the War progressed, the Union Navy became a gigantic instrument for dealing with the rebels in the South, including the strong Union blockades and bombardments to reduce and invest, the CSN and strongpoints in intercoastal waterways, respectively. The few stronger ironclads made by the Confederates, those that weren't burned or destroyed before capture, became mere sacrifices in an attempt to instill confidence for their cause and to infli6t wounds on a growing nemesis. Several examples were made by the Rebels, including the CSS Arkansas jwhich during July 22nd had only 28 crew [auth. Coombe]), the CSS Tennessee at Mobile Bay, and the CSS Merimac (a neutral action with the Monitor). The Confederate States Navy's operations to overpower the USN's reach into their territories were a series of uncoordinated and disjointed actions, designs by them made spontaneously or altogether improvised. The Confederates needed, desperately, to strengthen their naval prowess by combining their stronger elements, the ironclad rams. Yet during the years 1861-1865, this had never happened. The growth of the CSN had been in their smaller vessels, the river steamers and intercoastal craft that were easy to acquire and convert or strengthen. These would be the major supporters of their land-lockred buddies, and these same vessels would have to engage better and increasing opponents. This may already be comprehended at the Plum Point Bend engagement near Fort Pillow; and although the Rebel River Defense Fleet proved decisive for the moment (Ellet was constructing rams, too) the actual engagement marked only a meeting action. Someone might play with the notion that the vessels of the Rebel River Defense Fleet were somewhat the same, and they may be discouraged to find otherwise. For instance, both the CSS Bragg and CSS Webb (both ram steamers) were nearly the same size, 208' and 206', respectively in length. The Webb had 2 boilers and may have carried the same armaments, 1-32pdr forward and 1-24pdr aft. The CSS General Sterling Price had been, certainly, a different type of sidewheel steamer with nearly aft sidewheels (and larger) with a pilot's house on top of it and a bit forward; and her smokestacks are clearly more forward than the CSS Bragg's. She weighed 630 tons and was over 182' in length. Now someone would recognize that the Little Rebel, being 150 tons, had been called "little" as a sobriquet, but the CSS General Beauregard had been only 11' longer, checking in at over 161' in length and 454 tons. Design It was certainly the Union and its designers and builders who had taken to the heart of the War's ship acquisition and construction program. But the Union's programs had showed a remarkable heterogeneous relationship to their opponent. One reason was that a tremendous effort to centrally build and commission a series of vessels, along with acquiring and converting usable craft, made the Union Navy strong, intrinsically, then to surmount their opponent's warfare obstacles in preponderous numbers, including combined operations with Army and Navy elements. Still, with the Union's building programs, programs that would build a more homogeneous navy, there were a plethora of different vessels serving the coastal as well as the intercoastal waterways, Man vessels, such as the USS Hartford, USS Lancaster, USS Black Hawk, the USS Winona and Kineo, and the USS Kansas became thehodgepodge and amalgamationof acquisitions and conversions. USS Hartford: 2550 tons 1225' 110kn. 1,300 complement Armament.- Largely 9" with some 20#13, 30#R, 45#R, and 100#R; sometimes sixteen to twenty-four 9" with pairs of 20#R and 100#R only; twentyseven was the highest number of cannon attained during the American Civil War. USS Lancaster- 3250 tons 1235'110kn. 1=300 complement with 2 boilers, 2 engines, and one screw Armament: 211" and 20-9"; later add 4-9" and 230#13. (All references from either authors Bauer and Roberts or Silverstone.) A Short Historical Bibliography 1. Pratt, Fletcher. CIVIL WAR ON WESTERN WATERS. Henry Holt and Co., 1956. 2. Milligan, John D. Gunboats Down the Mississippi. United States Naval Institute, 1965. 3. Coombe, Jack D. THUNDER ALONG THE MISSISSIPPI, The River Battles that Split the Confederacy. Sarpedon, 1996. 4. Grattan, J.W. & Schneller, Jr., R.J. UNDER THE BLUE PENNANT. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1999. 5. Campbell, R. Thomas. SOUTHERN THUNDER, Exploits of the Confederate States Navy. Burd Street Press, 1996. 6. Gibson, Charles D. & Gibson, E. Kay. The Army Navy Series, Assault and Logistics, Union Army Coastal and River Operations, 1861-1866. Ensign Press, 1995. 7. Silverstone, Paul H. WARSHIPS OF THE CIVIL WAR NAVIES. Naval Institute Press, 1989. 8. Bauer, K. Jack & Roberts, Stephan S. REGISTER OF SHIPS OF THE U.S. NAVY, 1775-1990, Major Combatants. Greenwood Press, 1989. 9. CIVIL WAR NAVAL CHRONOLOGY, 1861-1865. Naval History Division. Washington, 1971. 10. Drury, Ian & Gibbons, Tony. THE CIVIL WAR MILITARY MACHINE. Smithmark Publishers, Inc., 1993. Back to Dispatch June 2001 Table of Contents Back to Dispatch List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2001 by HMGS Mid-South This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com