USS Lehigh ironclad gun turret-optical illusion

[Cannoneer]

 In August 1863, commanded by Commander Andrew Bryson, the USS Lehigh headed down the coast and joined the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron in the Charleston Harbor off Charleston, S.C.. The monitor took part in the Sept. 1st and Sept. 2nd attacks on Fort Sumter, being struck several times; on September 7th and 8th the ship engaged Ft. Moutrie on Sullivan’s Island, taking a total of 29 hits; she then covered a landing party attacking Fort Sumter on September 9th; and from the 27th of October to the 20th of November she engaged Fort Sumter almost daily, running aground on the 16th of November off Sullivan’s Island under heavy enemy fire. For his actions in freeing the vessel the 18 year old Seaman Horatio Nelson Young was later awarded the Medal of Honor. The damage on the turret you see in the photograph was inflicted in these engagements.
This picture is a halftone reproduction of a close up photograph that was published in the "Strand Magazine" in 1901. For some reason when the photo is rotated 180° you see this illusion.

[GGaskill]

You expect the sunlight to be coming from above and interpret the highlights in the 2 dimensional image as meaning the top of the blemish is sticking out. So the rivet heads appear to be small indentations and the shot marks appear to be protruding.

[RocklockI]

That hit on the left looks like they were shooting bowling pins . Must be some kind bar or chian or.....?

[BoomLover]

That is very interesting! Whoever was inside that turret was most likely rendered deaf for the rest of their life! At the very least, a constant ringing in their ears...BoomLver

[KABAR2]

The effect seems to have something to do with the photo being upside down,

I put it in my photo program and turned it right side up and everything was fine.

I guess the strand photo was taken in 1901 for the paper as there is a very modern

looking bicycle in the background this photo would have been taken 3 years before

the ship was scrapped.

[seacoastartillery]

     

That hit on the left looks like they were shooting bowling pins . Must be some kind bar or chian or.....?

     This is merely a SWAG, but I think the most likely cause of that odd shaped hit on the turret's left side is a whack from a Confederate version of the Federal Navy's Stafford bolt.  Although Mr. Stafford's patent was not granted until June of 1863, Confederate agents were remarkably clever in recovering, buying, and stealing whatever they were assigned to find.  The public record patent drawings alone would have been enough to get the Confederate Ordnance folks going.  All Navy Monitors armed with 200 Pdr. Parrott rifles were required to carry as ready ammunition several of these special steel armor punching bolts by the last months of 1864.  Less glamorous is the possibility of it being a collision result or a target result after the war.

Regards,

Tracy and Mike

[Victor3]

That hit on the left looks like they were shooting bowling pins . Must be some kind bar or chian or.....?

 Look at it again. Now.... tell me that wasn't caused by a turkey drumstick.

[GGaskill]

Frankly I think someone forgot to take the rammer from the barrel before firing.

[Cannoneer]

George, I think you're right, in that the reversal of what area is in shadow, and what area is in light sends an image through the optic nerve to the brain that results in this deception.


M&T are getting my vote for what most probably caused the far left indentation on the turret armor in the right side up photo. This damage wasn't caused afer the war, as the photo below proves. If you look along the line of sight in reverse, from muzzle to breech of the boat howitzer barrel, you'll see that about three feet up from where the line ends on the plate of the turret is the indentation in question. The Confederates were definitely experimenting with armor piercing bolts, and indeed fired some at the USS Lehigh in at least one of these South Carolina coastal battles, as none other than Admiral John A. Dahlgren witnessed first hand; In September, 1863, Admiral Dahlgren reentered Charleston Harbor with ironclads and exchanged fire with the coastal forts in which the Hopsen projectile was used. This time the Confederates did not fair as well and Admiral Dahlgren commented: "The enemy fired some shots of wedge shape, samples of which were picked up from the decks of the Lehigh - an absurd practice originating in the brain of some wild inventor." +
I'm guessing that one of these bolts tumbled in flight, and caused this odd shaped dent when it hit.



+  http://mmcwrt.missouri.org/2004/default0407.htm


BoomLover, you're absolutely correct about the unbearable racket caused by shot hitting the turrets of these war ships. From first hand accounts of some of the sailors that manned the guns inside these turrets, many commented on how the noise from these hits demoralized them more than any other factor involved in these battles.


Allen, you've got good eyes, that bike being there surprised me too. This quote is taken from the Naval Historical Center website: "During 1875-79, Lehigh served as a practice ship at the U.S. Naval Academy and was on active duty with the North Atlantic Squadron. She was laid up in the James River, Virginia, from then until 1895, when she went to Philadelphia for repairs. The old monitor was briefly in commission in April-September 1898, providing a measure of coastal defense in New England waters during the Spanish-American War. Inactive thereafter, USS Lehigh was sold for scrapping in April 1904". The first photo I posted, showing the dents in the turret was taken in 1901.

[Cat Whisperer]

That hit on the left looks like they were shooting bowling pins . Must be some kind bar or chian or.....?

 Look at it again. Now.... tell me that wasn't caused by a turkey drumstick.

Could it have been from a canister round of early KFC drumstick failures?  Or did Colonel Sanders just LOOK that old?

[Victor3]

That hit on the left looks like they were shooting bowling pins . Must be some kind bar or chian or.....?

 Look at it again. Now.... tell me that wasn't caused by a turkey drumstick.

Could it have been from a canister round of early KFC drumstick failures?  Or did Colonel Sanders just LOOK that old?

 LOL! I think Boom J's excellent research has just about ruled that out. 

 They do get a little stiff when the grease hardens in the fridge, but I'm thinkin' them boys might still have eaten a bucket of them rather than use it as a canister.

 

[Cannoneer]

That hit on the left looks like they were shooting bowling pins . Must be some kind bar or chian or.....?

 Look at it again. Now.... tell me that wasn't caused by a turkey drumstick.

Could it have been from a canister round of early KFC drumstick failures?  Or did Colonel Sanders just LOOK that old?

 LOL! I think Boom J's excellent research has just about ruled that out. 

 They do get a little stiff when the grease hardens in the fridge, but I'm thinkin' them boys might still have eaten a bucket of them rather than use it as a canister.
 

You know I never noticed it before, but you and Tim are regular laugh riots.  You both display a hilarious shtick reminiscent of the famous Frick and Frack. Have either of you ever considered changing your user names to Bud and Lou? Now, seriously, if the indentation in the iron plate of the turret were caused by a drumstick then it would have to be from the leg of an ostrich, or at least an emu, you both have to know that a leg from one of the Colonel's fryers couldn't have caused that degree of damage.   Now a bowling pin I find even more plausible, I had to investigate the time line on this, and I found that bowling was indeed known in N. America even in colonial times, (the ball was rolled down the incline of a wooden plank that was aimed at the pins).

[Cat Whisperer]

But were not the bowling pins of earlier New England times straight - about 1-1/2" in diameter and maybe 10-12" high?  They were so when I was up at Ft Devens in 1971-72.   I have one bowling ball that is a bit larger than 4.5" - I'll have to measure it.

[Artilleryman]

The odd shape impact impression reminds me of a Schenkle shell.

[GGaskill]

Maybe a grazing shot when the hit was on the side of the turret instead of straight on?  The shot skidded and left the elongated mark?

[Cannoneer]

But were not the bowling pins of earlier New England times straight - about 1-1/2" in diameter and maybe 10-12" high?  They were so when I was up at Ft Devens in 1971-72.   I have one bowling ball that is a bit larger than 4.5" - I'll have to measure it.

Okay Cat, that's enough, because now you're just mocking me; how ignorant do you think I am (don't answer that). Do you honestly think that I've never seen the "Flintstones": I know darn well, that bowling existed before written history recorded the fact, and I also know that the pins had the same general shape as they do now, the only difference being that they used to be made of stone.

[Cat Whisperer]

That is a concept I'd not thought of - a prehistoric petrified bowling pin used as a CW projectile.  The museum curator must have had such mixed emotions between supporting the war effort and the depletion of irreplaceable artifacts!

[Double D]

Candlepins?  Why am I encouraging this?

[Cat Whisperer]

Candlepins?  Why am I encouraging this?

Because SOMEONE has to play the 'straight' role in this comedy!   

[leesecw]

That indentation looks EXACTLY like the mark in the wall  from a lamp tossed at one of my buddies by his ex girlfriend

[Cannoneer]

That indentation looks EXACTLY like the mark in the wall  from a lamp tossed at one of my buddies by his ex girlfriend

How come licensed relationship therapists never teach their clients the skill of knowing how to duck?

[Cannoneer]

Maybe a grazing shot when the hit was on the side of the turret instead of straight on?  The shot skidded and left the elongated mark?

George, that's the first explanation I considered when I saw the dent in the plate, but after studying the mark for awhile longer it seems to me that it was probably caused by some type of bolt landing either sideways, or at an angle; of course this is just conjecture.

The odd shape impact impression reminds me of a Schenkle shell.

Norm, there's no question that the CSA arsenals were copying Federal Schenkl shells, and also altering captured Union shells to fit their rifles. They were cutting on lathes, the 4.5-inch US Schenkl shell made for the Federal 4.5 in. Ordnance rifle, so it would fit 4.2-inch 30 pounders. The only thing that might cast some doubt on the dent being caused by a Schenkl shell is the realization that the guns at Ft. Sumter, and the other coastal and island strongholds, were probably mostly large bore seacoast guns. There exists a list of the artillery present at Ft. Sumter on August 17, 1863, and the smallest gun was a 24-pounder smoothbore, but who knows, it's possible that Ft. Moultrie on Sullivan Island, or one of the other earthwork fort coast batteries fired Schenkl shells at the Lehigh.

[Double D]

Not a glancing skiding shot, a keyholing shell,  you can see an impression of a driving band.

[seacoastartillery]

     We, like several of you fellows, believe that this unique dent was the result of a "keyholing" bolt or shell that struck the Lehigh's turret armor a few degrees off of perfectly sideways.  We looked through Jack Bell's fantastic volume on large projectiles and drew the conclusion that the top photo of the Confederate 6.4" Bolt is most likely the cause.  See what you think.  We think that all the possibilities are shown below, unless some really bizarre, completely unknown, projectile is the cause.  See what you think and let us know.

The following quotes and photos are from the excellent book on large gun projectiles by Jack Bell called, Civil War Heavy Explosive Ordnance.    Just to save our Montana moderator the trouble, I found that www.abebooks.com has fifteen of these excellent books available.

Regards,

Tracy and Mike


“The ratchet head was designed to “grip” the ironclad’s armor, improving the penetration.”  We now believe that this Confederate- designed armor penetrating bolt may have been used by a 6.4” Brooke Rifle from any one of several Confederate artillery batteries which surrounded Charleston’s outer harbor.  We believe that this type of bolt, tilted with it’s central axis approximately 11.5 degrees off of a parallel attitude with the Lehigh’s turret armor, and with the bolt’s ratchet end deepest within the resulting dent, could indeed produce such a dent which we describe as a “shaving brush impression”.  The spinning ratchets on the bolt could have caused the "bristles" of the "shaving brush impression".




The Schenkl shells and bolts were very popular almost from the beginning due to excellent accuracy and a Paper-Mache Sabot which the muzzle blast disintegrated making their flight over Infantry troops acceptable.  These were made in large sizes like the 7” and perhaps copied by the Confederates, just as the smaller sizes were.




“The bolt’s weight and center of gravity are concentrated forward, probably to ensure stability of flight.”  We don’t think this particular design made the Lehigh’s dent, but maybe it is possible, given a certain unique angular attitude of bolt body to armor.




“The shell worked like the bolt, as a thin, high speed, projectile intended to penetrate ironclad ships.  This shell had some type of percussion fuze that would have detonated as it penetrated the armor.  It appears that this shell’s upper brass ring would have deformed badly during firing, which would have caused it to fly off course.”  This would be our second choice for the Lehigh’s dent.

[Double D]

 Let's put every thing on the same page for comparison.




 

 


 

[Double D]

If it's one of these four its the 4.5 Stafford bulb bolt, hands downs

[RocklockI]

Cs 6.4 is my guess .
It looks to me like it struck a bit from the right and high .

The nose started to dig ,or catch which threw the entire projectle cockeyed and the rear slamed into into the reinforced whatever that is behind those rivets.

those look spireling grooves look like ratchet teeth to me .

thats my story and i'm sticking to it ! and I could be wrong ......

[Victor3]

If it's one of these four its the 4.5 Stafford bulb bolt, hands downs

 I agree.

 Looking at the dent, I think something like the bulb bolt hit it pretty much solidly sideways with no skidding.

 Look at the clear impression of what would probably be from a turned step (or groove?) in the large end. Also, as the small mid-section diameter of the bolt bent upon impact (as the heavier ends of the bolt dug in deeper), it could have left the 'wasp waist' impression seen between the "bulbous" looking ends of the dent.

 I imagine if one were to examine the fired bolt, it would be somewhat flattened on both ends and bent in the middle.

[Artilleryman]

Of the ones shown the Stafford bolt has my vote.

[SLEEPY BEEPER]

Any chance the shell in question hit the deck first. And was tumbling when it hit the turret?