In reality, was warrior class ironclass so powerful?

[visser300]

I played a custom battle today to test the capacity of warrior class ironclad ship. I command only one ship and enemy has a combination of armoured ships and some second class ironclads. I blew them up with little damages.

In reality, was it really powerful? I see that it still has some wooden parts so how could it win a full-iron ironclad ships such as Roeske.

[Ferdiad]

It has the power of Britishness,.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Warrior_%281860%29

[Markas]

In reality, was it really powerful? I see that it still has some wooden parts so how could it win a full-iron ironclad ships such as Roeske.

You mean the Roanoke? Well the Warrior had 4 1/2 inch iron and 18 inches of teak. The Roanoke had 4 1/2 inch iron as well as the original hull (1.5 inches). In terms of armour Warrior was way ahead.

In terms of guns the Warrior outgunned Roanoke in terms of number. Roanoke had a heavier calibre gun, the Dahlgren 15-inch (2 of them) but had inferior range to the 64-Iber by 900 yrds. The 11-inch dahlgren (2 of them) of the Roanoke were comparable to the 10 7-inch Armstrongs of the Warrior in terms of range. The turrets would have raised the ability of the Roanoke had she been a custom ironclad.

The Warrior was a custom-built ship rather than a conversion that allowed it to sail around the world whilst the Roanoke was unstable in seaways due to her overly-heavy turrets which was exascerbated when she fired. Warrior was, critically, more than twice the speed of Roanoke.

Neither saw action and were old (but not obsolete) by the Boshin War.

[gord96]

Sweet! Can't wait. Just sent in an order for a shiny new Warrior ironclad in my Tosa campaign. Expecting delivery in 4-6 weeks.