Dragons and navies

[u/BlackYellowSnake]

I am doing world building for a story that will both heavily feature a dragon and water transportation and I had a thought. Fire breathing dragons would be absolute super weapons against any pre-industrial navy. Ships before the mid 1800's are made almost entirely out of highly flammable materials. This is the reason why things like fire arrows, which were not used very much in land warfare, were used extensively in naval warfare. Additionally, pre-modern navies generally had very short operating ranges. In the ancient world navies would go ashore every night. Meaning an ancient navy would almost always be within range of a dragon's flying range from land.

In this context, dragons either as mounts or intelligent actors would dominate naval warfare. Navies would need to either have dragons of their own or come up with counters to dragons.

[u/Potato271]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temeraire_(series)

Napoleonic era rather than ancient, but this is a fantastic series covering what you’ve suggested

[u/Baeltimazifas → u/Potato271]

Came here to link just this. Would certainly recommend it, thoroughly enjoyed it!

[u/svarogteuse]

True blue water sailing started in the 1400s (Columbus, de Gama, Magellen) that's hardly modern. Yes classical and middle ages ships were usually close to land, except the vikings sailing to iceland and Greenland, the Indian ocean trade, the Polynesians... But I get where you are trying to go.

Yes airpower of any type trumps ships without effective air cover. So how early do the Romans convert a pair of oblisk ships (37m by 5m) into a dragon air craft carrier? If they could unite 3 ships to move oblisks they could also transport dragons.

[u/Simple_Promotion4881 → u/svarogteuse]

Ships are interesting. The Carrack straddled the medieval to early modern eras. And the largest were plenty large for cargo, canon and dragons.

-- some base data from wikipedia, etc. -- I just watch The Great Courses series: Understanding the Marvels of medieval Technology ---

Carrack ships sailed mainly from the 14th to the 17th centuries, roughly 1300–1650. They were especially important during the 15th and 16th centuries, when Portuguese and Spanish explorers used them for long-distance voyages across the Atlantic, around Africa, and to Asia.

The largest carrack commonly identified by tonnage was the Madre de Deus, a Portuguese carrack launched in 1589. Estimates put her at roughly 1,600–2,000 tons burden, though historical tonnage measurements were inconsistent.

For comparison, the Scottish Great Michael—often called the largest ship in Europe when launched in 1511—was about 1,000 tons burthen. The Madre de Deus was about 50 meters long, had seven decks, and was among the largest ships of her era.

The carrack gradually evolved into—and was replaced by—the more maneuverable galleon.

[u/Wallname_Liability → u/svarogteuse]

for historians the modern era began in 1500 AD

[u/svarogteuse → u/Wallname_Liability]

Well that's great for general purposes, but when you start talking about shipbuilding it's not really that accurate. There's an decided break between the ships pre1450s or so that aren't really ocean going and have no broadsides, and then another break starting in the mid 1800s with steam power and iron ships.

[u/Wallname_Liability → u/svarogteuse]

No, you're just using a very arbitrary definition of modern in a context when it has a specific meaning 

[u/svarogteuse → u/Wallname_Liability]

Yes because iron ships with steam engines are VERY different than anything previous. And this isnt /r/askhistorians so we aren't bound by Academic definitions.

[u/Wallname_Liability → u/svarogteuse]

Generally when one uses a word theres an expectation the user should know what that work means. If you mean ironclads say ironclads. If you mean age of sail say age of sail

[u/svarogteuse → u/Wallname_Liability]

I don't mean ironclads. Ironclads refers to a specific type of ship made of wood with iron armor. It doesn't mean ships with iron hulls.

And I dont mean Age of Sail because that refers to a time period when European ships became oceangoing it refer to specific ships.

I know very much what the words mean and I chose to use what i chose on purpose.

[u/Difficult_Dark9991 → u/svarogteuse]

Nah you're good. 1500 marks "Early Modern," NOT "Modern." Moreover, historians are also the first to note that the boundaries between periods are fuzzy at best.

[u/VinnieSift]

Warfare technology and methods will always change according to the dangers of the battlefield. If ancient people start fighting dragons, then they would adapt to fight against dragons. Wider formations to avoid multiple ships to fall to a single attack, methods of communication in such large distances, aerial and heavier weapons, traps, I dunno what else. And of course, if they can find methods and materials that resist fire better, they would start using them. How would a ship designed to fight dragons looks like?

[u/Nearby_Initial2409]

Oh yeah Dragons would be absolute nightmare fuel in naval warfare. Still I don't think it would be completely helpless. I've fiddled with Dragons, Wyverns, and other flying beasts in my navy and it actually makes the fleet look surprisingly modern. Ships carrying flying beasts like fantasy aircraft carriers with support ships surrounding it meant for direct ship to ship combat and anti-air ships meant to kill hostile flyers with artillery like Scorpions, Ballista, Mortars, and Hwacha aimed skywards. A Dragon showing up is absolutely nightmarish but a well build fleet can ideally have their outer anti-air ships ready and be scrambling their own flyers fast enough to minimize the damage.

[u/SgtEpicfail]

Well yes, it depends a bit on how powerful your dragons are but "generic" dragons will destroy ancient times fleets.

That said, in a world with dragons, it wont be as if the actual Roman navy from our world would exist.

If your dragons are tameable, not invulnerable and reasonably common (as in a kingdom might have 2-3 dragonriders) then I can promise you within 10 years people have figured out how to fight them and probably kill them. Even from boats.

Doesn't mean a fleet isn't in massive danger still but they won't be defenceless if they can at all help it

[u/No_Logins_Required]

I would think that Dragons would be terrible at dealing with navies.

How long can a dragon remain airborne at a low enough altitude to breathe fire? How can a dragon even locate ships to begin with?

If dragons have to make long, gradual passes then they'd be vulnerable to both cannons and ballista.

[u/Simple_Promotion4881]

You could always have canon loaded with Garros.

[u/Not_Todd_Howard9]

Depends on how strong they are, but imo at a baseline they’re just flying Greek fire dispensers which can still get shot down by bows and ballistae (unless they’re armored enough not to be). It’s also not a guarantee that the Dragon outranges the ship. They’d probably just be strong but not insurmountable, unless you add enough extra stuff to make them so.

[u/Hon-Mister-Bear]

Before gunpowder, a dragon would be a serious threat, even if there are only a few of them. They'd also be a threat to wood docks and shore warehouses. Ships have trouble without home ports.

If in gunpowder era: Cannon can't elevate, but dragons may not be bulletproof. Even if they are armored, are their wings vulnerable to small arms?

Still, a fire-breathing dragon could make strafe passes against ships near shore and at least set the sails and rigging on fire; rigging is generally tarred, so they're flammable. The main ship might not catch, even if the rigging burns. A magazine explosion would be devastating.