Henry,

From this and other conversations I suspect an unrealistic view of Confederate manufacturing capability at the time. Few Confederate vessels were adequately built and propulsion was a problem both in construction and maintenance (some good British powerplants were ruined by the Confederates.) I've yet to read of any Confederate yard that didn't generate many complaints of substandard build quality from officers.

The South didn't have the machine industry it needed to do the sort of things that one might take for granted they could have done when looking at the past. Doesn't mean they were dummies, they just didn't have the critical mass in this area at the time. Someone could design great things, but that doesn't mean they could build or maintain them.

Look at the ironclads at New Orleans. They were all complete failures with regards to propulsion. (One had to await machining of its shaft in Richmond...and that was taken from another vessel.) The CSS Arkansas compares quite favorably to them, yet it had major failings as you and I have noted.

Mobile had only one vessel of consequence by the time of the Battle of Mobile Bay, the CSS Tennessee. The Baltic was rotting away and stripped of her armor. Two others (Tuscaloosa and Huntsville) were reduced to floating batteries because they could not stem the tide. This left three small gunboats to assist the Tennessee in an uneven fight.

The CSS Atlanta out of Savannah relied on a British built hull and propulsion. She leaked badly from the CS retrofit and her deep draught made her fatally vulnerable against monitors. The Confederates had trouble maintaining her propulsion--a common refrain in the Confederacy.

The CSS Virginia had major flaws. It drew far too much water (this eventually proving fatal.) And it was only a retrofit, a very important and novel one, but a retrofit of a U.S. vessel nonetheless. Her propulsion was problematic before the war and would prove so again.

The CSS North Carolina was so worm eaten that it sank. Her propulsion came from an old tugboat and had so many problems that she served as floating battery until the worms sent her to the bottom.

The CSS Raleigh ran aground and broke her back. This was blamed on faulty construction.

The famous CSS Albemarle also leaked badly.

The CSS Jackson/Muscogee was originally a failure because of the design of the propulsion and how much water she drew.

The CSS Missouri, Tennessee, and Nashville were all deemed unseaworthy by the USN as a result of the green timber in their construction.

The Union boats built during the war were sometimes built of wood that was too green as well. It was recognized by both sides that many of the boats would only last a few years. Both sides were building coastal vessels, not deep sea navies meant to project power around the globe for a generation. For a blue water navy the CSA contracted with the British and French.

With regards to Chattahoochee officers requesting reassignment: what officer wouldn't want reassignment from gunboats far from action on a relative backwater, to ironclads or other boats destined for action?

Take care,

Shawn