It was theoretical a draw, However, (you were waiting for that weren't you)? the Monitor did not use full charges in her 11-inch Dahlgrens. If you visit Virginia and the Mariners' Museum you can see the original turret and if you loot at the wall behind the cannons you will see a dent. When testing they fired a full charge it recoiled and dented it, so during the battle they only used half charges. The trouble was the sailors had screwed up the blocking (controlled the recoil) and the cannons could have fired full loads. Which when figure out mathematically would have done in the Virginia. However, they didn't we sank them yankee ships and only wished we could have cleaned house.
God Bless The Confederacy and the Southern People.
What most people do not know and eventually neither does the history books but Ironclads were being built on the rivers and various countries principally England and France.
2007-05-18 12:21:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
"The ironclads fought for about four hours, neither one sinking or seriously damaging the other. Tactically, the battle was a draw--neither ironclad did significant damage to the other. However, it was a strategic victory for Monitor. Virginia's mission was to break the Union blockade; that mission failed; Monitor's mission was to defend the U.S. fleet, which it did. The Virginia did however occupy the 'battlefield' after the strategic retreat of the USS Monitor, after the captain was hit in the eyes with gunpowder."
"USS Monitor : Battle of Hampton Roads" : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Monitor#Battle_of_Hampton_Roads
"The next day, on 1862-03-09, the world's first battle between ironclads took place. The smaller, nimbler Monitor was able to outmaneuver Virginia, but neither ship proved able to do significant damage, despite numerous hits. Monitor was much closer to the water, and so much harder to hit by the Virginia's guns, but vulnerable to ramming and boarding. Finally, Monitor retreated leaving Virginia in possession of the "battlefield". This was due to the fact that the captain of the Monitor was hit by gunpowder in his eyes while looking through the pilothouse's peepholes, which caused Monitor to haul off, but soon returned and the captain of Virginia, Catesby ap Roger Jones, thought it best to do the same and tend to any damages, it has been marked in history that the Virginia retreated, but the battle was a draw. The Union blockade remained."
"CSS Virginia : Battle of Hampton Roads" : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSS_Virginia#Battle_of_Hampton_Roads
2007-05-18 11:39:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Erik Van Thienen 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Hampton Roads
Other Names: Monitor vs. Virginia (Merrimack), Battle of the Ironclads
Location: Hampton Roads
Campaign: Peninsula Campaign (March-September 1862)
Date(s): March 8-9, 1862
Principal Commanders: Lt. John Worden [US]; Capt. Franklin Buchanan and Lt. Catesby R. Jones [CS]
Forces Engaged: 4 warships [US]; 1 warship [CS]
Estimated Casualties: 433 total (US 409; CS 24)
Description: On March 8, 1862, from her berth at Norfolk, the Confederate ironclad Virginia steamed into Hampton Roads where she sank Cumberland and ran Congress aground. On March 9, the Union ironclad Monitor having fortuitously arrived to do battle, initiated the first engagement of ironclads in history. The two ships fought each other to a standstill, but Virginia retired.
Result(s): Inconclusive
CWSAC Reference #: VA008
Preservation Priority: II.2 (Class B)
2007-05-18 11:31:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by jewle8417 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
USS Monitor technically won the battle because the Virgina did not break the blockade at Hampton Roads. A battle is only a victory if you complete the main objective(s)
******************ADD ON******************
For thous of you who say the battle is a draw
what were the objectives of the battle?
The Virgina was to destroy the Union blockade, The Monitor was to protect the blockade.
The Virgina only destroyed two ships the Cumberland and Congress. The Minnesota, Roanoke,and other ships was still on patrol. The Virgina did not destroy the blockade, and that was the Virgina's main Objective of the fight, all military commander would say to the Virgina, MISSION FAILURE.
You don't win unless you complete the reason that you started the battle IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also the Virgina would not hold the battlefield for long, she was short on Cannon Balls. Round two would have seen the Virgina running with her tail between her legs
Their were more then 4 US ships
USS Cumberland (1)
USS Congress (2)
USS Minnesota (3)
USS Roanoke (4)
USS Monitor ( That's 5!!)
and their is more outside the harbor. USS Congress AND Minnesota ran a ground and Congress was destroyed
Also colleges are starting to ban Wikipedia as a source because anyone can mess up the information. (NBC Nightly News proved that) ,so that is trustworthy [being sarcastic]
Always check info on the web with other places that are trust-able in their information.
2007-05-18 11:16:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by MG 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
The Monitor defeated the Merrimac
2007-05-18 11:29:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dave aka Spider Monkey 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
technically, it was a draw; neither side lost, but the Virginia (or Merrimac, as was her Union name) fled. however, it was a victory of sorts for the Union, whose blockade was being dessimated by the Virginia before the timely appearance of the Monitor.
2007-05-19 06:47:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by F-14D Super Tomcat 21 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The one that didn't sink.
2007-05-18 11:44:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by jcurrieii 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
It was a draw.
2007-05-18 11:14:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋