As promised, a quick “connections’ commentary on some pretty remarkable IEDs on ships and boats in history.

“Fireships” in terms of boats and ships loaded with incendiary material go back in history – I have found reference to them as far back as 413 BC.  With the invention of gunpowder, fireships occasionally contained gunpowder. Sometimes in massive quantities.  In an earlier blog here, I wrote about the “hellburners”,  two explosively laden fireships used by the Dutch defenders of Antwerp in 1584 against the invading Spanish – one of these the “Hoop” (Hope) detonated against a temporary Spanish bridge, killing 800 – 1000 soldiers. If this is true, it is still probably the most lethal single IED in history. I have now found a diagram purporting to the the clockwork timing mechanisms of the device manufacturer by Bory. The Hellburner itself was designed by the Italian Giambelli, who possibly at the time (and certainly later) was an agent of the British.

References I have found recently suggest that Giambelli mounted a series of earlier attacks , floating explosive objects down the tidal river, with limited success. These IEDs were generally floating objects and rafts which carried barrels of gunpowder on a burning fuse.

After these earlier attacks failed Giambelli “thought big” and amidst a fleet of regular fire vessels sailed two explosive vessels (the “Hoop” and the “Fortune”) down the tide towards the target bridge. My earlier post has more details.  The “Fortune” had a burning fuse (which I have also fund an description of, but it is too complex to post details here).

The Hellburner incident and the use of explosive ships (described by the Italians as “Maschina Infernale”, and by the British as “Machine Vessels” became well known among the navies of Europe for several hundred years.

Just over a hundred years later in 1693 the British Navy led by Admiral Benbow used a ship, imaginatively named the Vesuvius, laden with 300 tons of explosives, (other sources say 20,000 pounds of gunpowder) during an attack on the French port of St Malo. The vessel was sailed in by a Captain Philips. The ship did not quite reach its target, became stuck on a rock and exploded “blowing the roofs of half the town”. But causing little loss of life.  The capstan of the “machine vessel” was thrown several hundred yards and landed on an Inn destroying it.

Machine ship “Vesuvius”, 1693

The following year in a raid on Dieppe, again led by Benbow a machine vessel was sent in to the port to destroy it. The ship, skippered by a Capt Dunbar was placed again the quay – and the crew and Capt Dunbar left it quickly. Unfortunately the fuze went out – but Dunbar re-boarded the vessel, re–lit the fuze, and evacuated a second time.

The Dieppe Raid, 1694

Similar machine vessel attacks were mounted on Dunkirk in the same year.

(Note: There were a number of vessels developed in parallel at the time , known as “bomb vessels” but these should not be confused with machine vessels. Bomb vessels were essentially ships built to mount and fire mortars.  To confuse matters the Vesuvius was a bomb vessel converted to a machine vessel)

A little over 100 years later in 1809 Captain (later Admiral ) Cochrane used an explosively laden ship in the Battle of the Basque Roads on the Biscay Atlantic coast of France.  Cochrane used two explosive ships and twenty-one fire ships to attack the French fleet moored off Ile d’Aix.  Here’s Captain Cochrane’s description (who personally set the fuses on one explosion vessel himself)

 “To our consternation, the fuses, which had been constructed to burn fifteen minutes, lasted little more than half that time, when the vessel blew up, filling the air with shells, grenades, and rockets; whilst the downward and lateral force of the explosion raised a solitary mountain of water, from the breaking of which in all directions our little boat narrowly escaped being swamped. The explosion-vessel did her work well, the effect constituting one of the grandest artificial spectacles imaginable. For a moment, the sky was red with the lurid glare arising from the simultaneous ignition of fifteen hundred barrels of powder. On this gigantic flash subsiding, the air seemed alive with shells, grenades, rockets, and masses of timber, the wreck of the shattered vessel. The sea was convulsed as by an earthquake, rising, as has been said, in a huge wave, on whose crest our boat was lifted like a cork, and as suddenly dropped into a vast trough, out of which as it closed upon us with the rush of a whirlpool, none expected to emerge. In a few minutes nothing but a heavy rolling sea had to be encountered, all having again become silence and darkness.”

Cochrane went on , in 1812, to design even bigger machine vessels, but never got the political support needed to build or employ them. His 1812 designs used a hulk, rather than a rigged vessel.

“The decks would be removed, and an inner shell would be constructed of heavy timbers and braced strongly to the hull. In the bottom of the shell would be laid a layer of clay, into which obsolete ordnance and metal scrap were embedded. The “charge,” in the form of a thick layer of powder, would next be placed, and above that would be laid rows and rows of shells and animal carcasses.   The explosion ship would then be towed into place at an appropriate distance from anchored enemy ships, heeled to a correct angle by means of an adjustment in the ballast loaded in the spaces running along each side of the hulk between the inner and outer hulls, and anchored securely. When detonated, the immense mortar would blast its lethal load in a lofty arc, causing it to spread out over a wide area and to fall on the enemy in a deadly torrent. Experiments conducted with models in the Mediterranean, during his layoff, convinced Cochrane that three explosion ships, properly handled, could saturate a half-mile-square area with 6,000 missiles–enough destructive force to cripple any French squadron even if it lay within an enclosed anchorage.”

In 1864, during the American Civil war an explosively laden ship, the USS Louisiana was used to attack a Confederate fort, Fort Fisher, guarding Wilmington, North Carolina.  The ship was meant to be run aground adjacent to the fort walls and then detonated.  The ship was carrying “215 tons of explosives”. The attack failed as the Louisiana detonated too far away from the fort walls to cause damage.

Here’s a diagam of the ship. Note the huge amount of explosives. I have obtained a detailed description of the numerous initiation systems and fuzes but it is too complex to post here easily.  Suffice to say there were 5 independent firing systems.

USS Louisiana, 1864

Just over a fifty years later the Zeebrugge raid of 1918 saw the British Royal Navy again use an explosive vessel, this time the submarine C-3, under Lt Cdr Sandford. Sandford was subsequently awarded the Victoria Cross.

“This officer was in command of submarine C3, and most skillfully placed that vessel in between the piles of the viaduct before lighting his fuse and abandoning her. He eagerly undertook this hazardous enterprise, although well aware (as were all his crew) that if the means of rescue failed and he or any of his crew were in the water at the moment of the explosion, they would be killed outright by the force of such explosion. Yet Lieutenant Sandford disdained to use the gyro steering which would have enabled him and his crew to abandon the submarine at a safe distance, and preferred to make sure, as far as was humanly possible, of the accomplishment of his duty.” After pushing the submarine under the piles of the viaduct and setting the fuse, he and his companions** found that the propeller of their launch was broken, and they had to resort to oars and to row desperately hard against the strong current to get a hundred yards away before the charge exploded. They had a wonderful escape from being killed by the falling debris.

Damage caused by the detonation of the C-3 – Zeebrugge 1918

The final one from this series is Operation Chariot, aka “the Greatest Raid”, the British Navy and commando raid on St Nazaire in 1942.  I won’t repeat the story, other than provide this link to the Wikipedia article – not many Wikipedia articles make the hairs of my neck stand up, but this one does. In this raid, HMS Cambeltown was converted into a massive IED and rammed into the docks in St Nazaire to prevent their use by the German Battleship Tirpitz.

HMS Campbeltown rammed onto the dock gates in St Nazaire, before she exploded. 1942.

One big concept – massive IEDs in ships, woven through history.

I have much more to post on historical naval IEDs. Be patient!

Another in the series of posts about historical use of IEDs.  I’ve been slowly gathering material on naval use of IEDs , and have some great stories to tell. In future weeks I’ll write about:

• Three massive ship borne IEDs of 1673, 1693 and 1694, (used by the British Navy against the French)
• Floating IEDs designed by Cornelius Drebbel in the 1620s, (used by the British Navy against the French)
• An attack using an IED on a ship in the Tagus in 1650 (by the British parliamentarian Navy on a British royalist ship)
• An attack off Boulogne on 1804 using a fascinatingly designed IED on a small catamaran, (used by the British Navy against the French)
• Admiral Benbow’s attacks  and Admiral Cochrane’s attacks (on the French in St Malo) using massive IEDs in 1693 and 1809 and their spooky similarity with the Campbeltown attack in the raid on St Nazaire in WW2

For now, I’m again I’m grateful to Leslie Payne for flagging me a source document – a letter from Robert Fulton to the President of the USA in 1810.

Fulton was an interesting man who worked on a  range of naval engineering matters. Born in the USA in 1765, he experimented with explosives as a child and developed paddle wheels for his father’s fishing boat .   By 1797 he was a well-known inventor in Europe and was building steam boats and a submarine, the Nautilus, for Napoleon Bonaparte.  Some sources suggest he was also making explosive charges for the French Navy

France and England were at war at the time (as usual). In 1804 Fulton switched sides and went to England to offer his inventions there.  He was commissioned by the Prime Minister, William Pitt, to develop a range of Naval weapons including explosive charges.   It is in this period that the attack, described below, occurs.

Fulton then switched allegiances again and went home to the US, to build submarines and torpedoes for use against the British. In 1810 he wrote a letter to the President James Madison on the subject of “The Torpedo War and submarine explosions”.   The letter is interesting on several levels:

1. It describes a very successful demonstration undertaken by Fulton, where he blew up a ship as a demonstration to the Prime Minister off the cost near deal in Kent in 1805. (Samuel Colt conducted a similar experiment a few decades later for the US Navy in the Potomac near the Navy yards.)
2. Initially the devices were large (180 pounds of gunpowder) and initiated by clockwork  with an 18 minute delay.
3. There is a beautiful quote about a sceptical British Naval observer to the trial;   “Twenty minutes before the Dorothea was blown up, Capt Kingston asserted that if a Torpedo were placed under his cabin while he was at dinner, he should feel no concern for the consequence. Occular demonstration is the best proof for all men.”
4. A pithy quote from a British Admiral, Earl St Vincent, who said of the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for Fultons plans  “ Pitt was the greatest fool that ever existed, to encourage a mode of war which they who commanded the seas did not want, and which, if successful, would deprive them of it”
5. It describes a similar experiment conducted in New York harbour in 1807, but which failed at first because of a design fault in the explosive devices.
6. A detailed description and diagram of the device. Although the demonstrations used clockwork initiation systems, Fulton designed a lever switch which a passing ship would act on, so causing a cocked gun trigger to fire, initiating the charge.
7. An “attack torpedo” using a clockwork timer and a harpoon gun to fasten the torpedo to a target.

1. A detailed description of the attack on the French ships anchored off Boulogne by Capt Siccombe of the Royal Navy and his men in 1805.  In two separate attacks, one led by Capt Siccombe and another by Lt Payne, the “infernal machines” failed to seriously damage the ships, and Fulton conducted a rapid technical evaluation to attempt to understand why.  It appears that the ballast adjustments of the two charges were incorrectly set, so the charges detonated on the surface of the water next to the ships rather than under the keel as intended.
2. The letter describes the efficacy that a few well armed, fast moving small boats can have on a major naval fleet, if moving at speed and with novel weapons…. (Iran, Persian gulf, Sixth fleet….any premonitions?) and discusses the cost effectiveness of his infernal machines against warships and the asymmetric warfare principles behind it.  He describes how a fleet of small boats could command an area like the Straits of Dover (or the Persian Gulf!)

Update on Friday, September 28, 2012 at 9:17PM by Roger Davies

This is beautiful!.  Here’s a document I just found – a legal contract between the British Government and Fulton, Note the values of his rewards and also his promise not to divulge the plans to anyone else for 14 years (a promise he broke in his letter to President Madison)

Articles of Agreement between the Right Honourable William Pitt, first

Lord Commissioner of his Majesty’s treasury and Chancelor of the Exchequer,

and the Right Honourable Lord Viscount Melville, first Lord of the

Admiralty, in behalf of his Majesty’s government on the one part, and Robert

Fulton, citizen of the United States of America and inventor of a plan of

attacking fleets by submarine Bombs, on the other part.

     The said Robert Fulton agrees to disclose the principles of his scheme

to Sir Home Popham and to superintend the execution of it on the following

conditions:

     First. To be paid Two hundred pounds a month while he is employed on

this Service for his personal trouble and Expences.

     Second. To have a credit lodged from time to time for the payment of his

Mechanical preparation, not to exceed Seven thousand pounds.

     Third. That in his Majesty’s dockyards and Arsenals shall be made or

furnished all such articles as may be required which are applicable to this

purpose.

    Fourth. If any circumstance should arise to prevent government carrying

this plan into execution then the parties are each to name two commissioners

for the purpose of examining the principles; and trying such experiments as

they may think proper, and if it should appear to the Majority of the

members that the plan is practicable and offers a more effectual mode of

destroying the enemies fleet at Boulogne, Brest, or elsewhere, than any now

in practise and with less risk, then government is to pay the said Robert

Fulton the sum of Forty Thousand Pounds as a compensation for demonstrating

the principles, and making over the entire possession of his submarine mode

of attack.

     Fifth. When the said Robert Fulton has destroyed by his submarine

carcasses or Bombs one of the enemies decked Vessels, then Government is to

pay him the sum of Forty Thousand pounds, provided Commissioners appointed

As in the previous article shall be of opinion that the same Scheme can be

practically applied to the destruction of the enemies fleets.

      Sixth. If the Arbitrators differ in opinion then they are to draw lots

for the choice of an Umpire and the majority of the Voices to decide all

points of reference within the construction of this agreement and that

decision to be final.

     Seventh. One half the supposed value of all vessels destroyed by Mr.

Fulton’s Submarine mode of attack to be paid him by government as long as he

superintends the execution of his plan; but when government has no further

occasion for his services; or that he wishes to retire then he is only to be

paid one quarter of the supposed value of such vessels as may be destroyed

by his scheme, and this remuneration to continue for the space of fourteen

years from the date hereof. 

    Eighth. In case the Vessels destroyed by this scheme should exceed in

amount Forty thousand pounds, then the Forty Thousand pounds first

stipulated to be paid, shall be considered as part payment of the whole sum

which may become due to the said Robert Fulton.

    Ninth. If in the course of practice any improvements Should be Suggested

that can only be esteemed as a collateral Aid to the general principles of

Mr. Fulton’s mode of attack, then such improvements are not to demenesh or

set aside his claims on government. 

     Tenth. All monies which may become due to Mr. Fulton to be paid within

six months from the time when they shall be so adjudged according to the

tenor of this agreement.

     Eleventh. This agreement to be considered by both parties as a liberal

covenant with a View to protect the Rights of the individual, and to prevent

any unproper advantage being taken of his Majesty’s Government.

      Mr. Fulton having deposited the drawings and plans of his submarine

scheme of attack; in the hands of a confidential friend with a view to their

being delivered to the American government in case of his death, does hereby

bind himself to withdraw all such plans and drawings and not divulge them or

any part of his principles to any person whatever for the space of fourteen

years; which is the term during which he is to derive all the advantages of

their operation from the British Government.

     The benefit of the foregoing agreement shall be extended to the heir

and executors of the said Robert Fulton.

     Signed this Twentieth day of July One thousand eight hundred and four.    

                                              ROBERT FULTON.