Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

What beats the USS constitution?


Destraex

Recommended Posts

I know that just about any ship of the line. A 74 for example would beat the constitution.

But theoretically the consitution was built to run from those ships. It was never meant to fight a real battle.

 

So with this in mind and considering how heavy it's pound for pound 44 gun shot is for a frigate. 

Did the British or any other nation have anything comparable in the period?

 

I know the British captured a 40 gun french frigate that may have come close. But could it have outrun her?

 

Basically I am wondering if everybody will be running constitution class ships in the open game. Two of

these ships could be unbeatable by anything but a three decker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Americans actually operated a super frigate during the War of Independence. To my annoyance, I can't remember the name or particulars, but IIRC she was built in France and was a really heavy warship. May have even carried 32-pounders on the main deck. I think she had a French name as well, which was changed?

 

Anyways, for sure once the British saw the effectiveness of the type, they built their own heavy frigates. They also made razees, which would be a match for her, since it's just a lineship with the upper deck cut off.

 

Also remember that Constitution only escaped from a British squadron by the skin of her teeth, so in certain conditions (light winds) she is far from the the fastest vessel out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Razee's would be too slow to catch her though right?

 

Were there british super heavy frigates built within the time frame though?

 

Not really talking about squadrons taking the constitution on as in this game navies will be much more even in terms of player numbers

where as in the time period the americans could not possibly dream of coming close to the number and power of the british fleets at home in europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Indefatigable from hornblower seems like she should come close to the constitution?


Question is could she sail as well?


 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razee


 


Three 64-gun ships were cut down (razeed) in 1794 into 44-gun frigates. The most successful was HMS Indefatigable which was commanded by Sir Edward Pellew.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about this one. This was probably a purpose built 44 gun frigate.

However. The real question is with regard to pounds in the broadside and sailing speed and ability
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Virginie_(1796)

 

The Consititution had:

 

Armament: 30 × 24-pounder (11 kg) long gun
20 × 32-pounder (15 kg)carronade
2 × 24-pounder (11 kg) bow chasers[2]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Americans actually operated a super frigate during the War of Independence. To my annoyance, I can't remember the name or particulars, but IIRC she was built in France and was a really heavy warship. May have even carried 32-pounders on the main deck. I think she had a French name as well, which was changed?

 

Anyways, for sure once the British saw the effectiveness of the type, they built their own heavy frigates. They also made razees, which would be a match for her, since it's just a lineship with the upper deck cut off.

 

Also remember that Constitution only escaped from a British squadron by the skin of her teeth, so in certain conditions (light winds) she is far from the the fastest vessel out there.

That super frigate was the South Carolina, operated by the South Carolina Navy rather than the main Continental Navy. About the same size as the Constitution, carried 36lb guns on the main deck but only 40 guns in total compared to 56. Had problems with hogging (bending in the middle of the hull) because her construction wasn't strong enough for the weight of guns. Ended up being captured by a british squadron. Was the inspiration for Humphreys to built the later super frigates.

 

As for British frigates equivalent (or roughly equivalent) to the Constitution...

 

As mentioned, three semi-obsolete 64 gun third rates were razeed into large frigates with a main battery of 24lb guns. They were certainly powerful ships but being shorter and broader wouldn't have been as fast, and only carried 44 guns compared to Constitutions 56.

 

HMS Endymion was based on the french Pomone, somewhat larger than the typical frigate of the time and carrying a main battery of 24lbers vs the standard 18lb guns. When the British started losing 18lb frigates to the American 24lb ships they realized they needed their own 24lb armed frigates and the only readily available design was the Endymion. Consequently another 5 ships were built to this design.

 

Although smaller than the American super-frigates at 1277 tons vs 1576 and 48 guns vs 56, Endymion defeated one of Constitutions sisterships, the USS President, which surrendered with over a hundred dead or wounded after a running battle (Endymion did not immediately take possession due to a lack of boats, opting instead to repair sails while the rest of the British squadron caught up, and after half an hour Decatur raised sails and made a run for it, only to be run down by 2 other british frigates). Endymion was extremely fast, reaching 14.4kts compared to the Constitutions 13kts.

 

The British also built 2 real super frigates, the Leander and Newcastle, as a direct counter to the Constitution with the almost identical armament and overall dimensions. Indeed, Leander carried 60 guns, but this may just have been British preference since President was also armed with 60 guns following her capture. There were also successful experiments with fitting Leda class frigates with a special short pattern 24lb gun in an attempt to increase their fighting abilities. 

 

Finally a number of 74 gun 3rd rates were razeed into 58 gun 4th rates. These would have been even more powerful than the Constitution with a main battery of 32lb guns, but likely somewhat slower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Five or six of these could deal some serious damage in the hands of capable captains. I wonder if razing ships will ever be available in game. Taking a slower top rated ship and turning into a faster hard hitting frigate would be quite fun to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently similar French heavy frigates were considered failures but were not. It was due to lack of french crew - i.e. french gunners were being used ashore in the army and the french fleet was short of quality men.

The British captured many of them easily with smaller frigates and drew the conclusion that they did not want to spend extra crew that it took to man super heavy frigates when smaller frigates were handier and more effective.

 

Never the less they still fielded these ships. However they were primarily 24pdr and not the 32pdr arrangements that the americans later had on the constitution and her sisters.

 

The constitution class were similar to the german ww2 pocket battleships and seem to have met the same fate for the most part. Doing well but eventually being overwhelmed ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The French had quite similar vessels, the Egyptienne and Forte. They were essentially the same size as constitution and sisters, but had nowhere near as successful careers. Egyptienne was captured with the fall of Alexandria to the British. Forte was captured in he Indian Ocean in a night duel with the HMS Sybille, a French built 38 that was a near-sister to HMS Java. While there was an element of surprise in the battle, with a thoroughly well trained crew she should've been able to overpower Sybille. The forte was wrecked before it could reach England, but Egyptienne served in the RN. The Brits found her even more weakly built in proportion than most French frigates, so despite excellent sailing performance, high maintenance costs and hogging problems meant she didn't see a ton of use, and I'm pretty sure she was broken up by the time the war of 1812 came around. With the capture of the USS President by a squadron consisting of HMS Majestic, 58 (a razeed 74) HMS Endymion, 40, and Pomone, Junon, and Tenedos (all 38s) the Brits had their strategy for dealing wih 44s. While 24pdr frigates were quite expensive for such a large navy, they could fairly effectively blockade and mob them with squadrons of 18pdr frigates and maybe a 24pdr flagship. many Brits like to pretend that Endymion captured USS president alone, because it was the only instance in the war where 24pdr frigates exchanged broadsides, so it's a prime opportunity for national pride building because president was eventually captured. However, president used star shot to shred the sails of Endymion forcing her to drop out of the chase, while Endymion had been firing into president's hull, causing higher casualties(though certainly less than a hundred). For a moment it seemed like president had escaped, but eventually one of the 18pdr frigates caught up, and after exchanging some broadsides and finding another 18pdr frigate on her quarter, and with the prospect of the  razee coming up as well, President was forced to surrender to overwhelming force. Claiming that the Endymion beat president is as ludicrous as when Americans claim the victories of the USN 44s were wholly equal fights. Even the captain of the Endymion forced a newspaper to withdraw a claim that Endymion had beaten president alone, because he knew he couldn't back it up.
I'm not super well informed on the pocket battleships, but as can be seen above, the strategy developed was to overwhelm them with a frigate squadron. Also All the original US 44s had 24pdrs like Forte and Egyptienne, not 32s.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Captain Armstrong, do you have any good books to recommend on these sorts of topics?

 

I ask, because naval warfare history books almost always disappoint me. They re-hash the same old stories for a casual audience, and somehow the writing never conveys the real drama and beauty of the events or players. Not to mention, Wikipedia almost never provides sufficient information.

 

Where do you learn about French frigates and all the stories that aren't part of the usual Nelson-and-Constitution (or even Decatur-and-Jarvis) canon?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While USS Constitution was an uncommonly heavy frigate (the heaviest I could find) with her 21 inch thick hull planking and 50 broadside guns (30 24pd great guns and 20 32pd carronades) She, like all ships, was by no means unbeatable. She unarguably had an advantage over any british ship on the station by broadside weight but she was by no means faster as a ship. Having been successfully clean just before the outbreak of war and refitted again under Bainbridge during the war she would have had a significant advantage over the blockading squadron perpetually on station or running up and down to halifax for rapid provisions and no time for a real overhaul.

 

However time and again history has shown us that it does not always come down to broadside weight to determine an engagement the captains of engaging ships played a huge part in any out come and both Hull and William Bainbridge were notably competent seamen whereas for example Captain Dacres of Guerriere had been ashore for the 4 years prior to the command and had only one major action (and this was storming a fort) before.

 

I'm rambling terribly from my point which is if wind, condition of ship, skill of command and luck were to favour an opponent it is far from inconceivable that the ship itself could be taken by a much lighter ship. Were it for example to be demasted by a lucky or skilled shot it would be no better off than any other ship.

In regards to the game I would be quite unhappy to see everyone bumming around in constitutions because it wouldn't reflect the period well at all and as Destraex mentioned in the OP they would certainly be a match for all but the heaviest ships especially if it is capable of the same speed as a lighter frigate.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If im not mistaken, long guns out range carronades. It seems the british and french particularly the british almost exclusively used carronades. The americans preferred the long guns for their accuracy and range. Maybe some spanish ships would do well against the constitution?

I love american ships, however i would agree how lame it would be if everyone were sailing the Constitution

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct in the respect of long guns out ranging carronades by quite a considerable distance and the longer barrel makes them significantly more accurate. Carronades however were rarely used as a principle armament especially in ships the size of a frigate or above due to the shorter effective range. It is true that they were more commonly employed by the royal navy (they were invented by a scottish arms manufacturer). As to the spanish my limited experience suggests that whilst they often over gunned their ships and built perfectly monstrous vessels such as the Santissima Trinidad they were not considered in general to have a high standard of gunnery nor seamanship like that of american warships of the period.

 

IMO there shouldn't be any single ship type available to players which is the be all and end all of fighting and so used by everyone. I'm perfectly aware that it takes time and effort to make additional ship models and I would not expect different frigates to be made at this early stage of development but certainly later on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel the best thing to do, for the sake of ingame balance would be for gunnery and seamanship to be for the most part equal starting off- something to be earned through the course of gameplay, and maybe different nations get their own perks. That is a subject altogether different though. Afterall- a greenhorn is still a greenhorn regardless of nationality. Im czech and yet ive never once been seasick in my career yet ive seen plenty of seasoned portuguese, french and irish fisherman with their head overboard xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct in the respect of long guns out ranging carronades by quite a considerable distance and the longer barrel makes them significantly more accurate.

With their flat trajectory and windage-free barrels, carronades were a lot better at hitting distant (to 400m) targets than they got credit for. This author argues that gun crews simply didn't know how to aim them, in absence of formal gunnery training and sights, and as a result of the different barrel shape. Carronades were not rejected as ineffective, so much as the technological advancements inherent in the design were transferred to long guns as a whole.

 

http://artillerymanmagazine.com/Archives/2004/carronades_sp04.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good read. Makes a good argument too. As the author says though they didnt have sights till later, the barrel shape made it harder to aim for the gunner, i reckon like a howitzer would be, sounds to have a similiar trajectory also. Employed orrectly the carronade could be quite deadly. Lack of training would make any weapon ineffective, but one that is easier to load and aim... i would prefer personally. They each have their place, but a skipper with long guns can engage one with carronades more effectively at a longer range no? Accuracy would be determined by the crew and how well they can aim a carronade, harder to aim could be the reason for its bad reputation, but that would be somewhat deserved as a design flaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carronades are not automatically bery short ranged weapons. Indeed they could have a better range when not beeing elevated (always depending on type comparisn). point blanc.

I always keep this side in mind when someone says Carronades have so much less range than long guns: http://ageofsail.wordpress.com/2009/02/28/introducing-the-carronade-the-range-myth/

Carronades are lower-ranged but by far not as low than many books want us to think.

I did not however find ANY tests regarding accuracy of carronade vs long gun. Since both guns are bare tubes with a ball thats not 100% round. My stomach wants to tell me long guns have better accuracy but then.. I didnt find evidence.

 

Main reason to mount Carronades on a ship is about always 1st: higher caliber by same or less weight and 2nd: less men needed to man and still managing a higher firing frequency.

About the carriages the Carronades used its said they were not as reliable since the barrel can fall off the slid when recoiling.

They fixed this in later versions but I cant give figures about years here..

 

back to topic:

 

The USS Constitution was a new design to build heavy frigates. She and here sisterships first had those reinforcements within the hull inside to stabilize her a a whole.

Also while beeing armed so heavily and having exellent armor agains medium frigates (fitted with 9-12lb guns) she still was very fast. Thats due to the hull design and high masts. Still 18 pounders will penetrade her with relative ease.

 

The shipdesigner made an exellent choice in about all aspects of this frigates.

 

Only ships comparing in gunweight and armament were at that time razees. 64 gunners beeing rebuild to heavy frigates. Still mounting the main armament of 24lb guns and a good ammount of guns at the weatherdeck(s).

But they were old shipdesigns rebuild. Slow and sluggish to maneuver.

 

Ingame I would try the frigate vs Constitution at once. Just to see how much difference there is between playerskill and armament vs maneuverability.

Ive seen that a good rakin gbroadside can win a duel. And nimble ships have the advantage on their sides obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Constitution is certainly fast, recording 13.5 knots, and escaping from a British frigate squadron in 1812 (including Guerriere and Shannon). While that's not an entirely unheard of speed for other frigates, it's still faster than most. Maturin: as a general reference, I'd have to recommend the Caxton pictorial histories series on the French revolutionary and napoleonic wars. They include both well-known and rarely heard of events, and generally have well-written and thorough explanations. Also they are loaded with tons of period illustrations, diagrams, and plans, so it's easy to visualize what they talk about. http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=caxton+pictorial+histories&tag=googhydr-20&index=stripbooks&hvadid=32990805865&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8352925697927252544&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=t&ref=pd_sl_3bdx4im3v4_b

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

awesome and valid research,,,,so i believe it would be in service to the game to keep performance stats of each ship as close as they realy were,,and xp to be used by the player to level those ships to performance and to also level the crew and to level the captain ,,the player should be allowed to choose what amount of xp goes where,and to what performance he needs to raise,,in this way a lesser frigate may have an edge over mr megabucks just bought constitution becouse her captain has been advanced,ship and crew enhanced by time and experiance,,this may solve the problems,and can give a chance to those who cant afford the big super ships,,just an idea is all,,looks to be a great game with these fellow players here as learned in these matters as they are,will truely be formindable opponants,,

 

   however the world itself has me perplex as are we to just head out to the open sea to just blow away anything we see,,so alliances,,friends and business may keep thier territory safe for now,and im not sure what happens when your ship gets sunk. but so far the game is very exciteing and should be a great show on open..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

awesome and valid research,,,,so i believe it would be in service to the game to keep performance stats of each ship as close as they realy were,,and xp to be used by the player to level those ships to performance and to also level the crew and to level the captain ,,the player should be allowed to choose what amount of xp goes where,and to what performance he needs to raise,,in this way a lesser frigate may have an edge over mr megabucks just bought constitution becouse her captain has been advanced,ship and crew enhanced by time and experiance,,this may solve the problems,and can give a chance to those who cant afford the big super ships,,just an idea is all,,looks to be a great game with these fellow players here as learned in these matters as they are,will truely be formindable opponants,,

 

   however the world itself has me perplex as are we to just head out to the open sea to just blow away anything we see,,so alliances,,friends and business may keep thier territory safe for now,and im not sure what happens when your ship gets sunk. but so far the game is very exciteing and should be a great show on open..

 

If skills can only be acquired through time spent at sea and those skills have significant impact on success then not only does it address the pay-to-win issue, but also adds realism. There are certainly examples from the period of nations expending vast resources building fleets when they did not have the skilled manpower necessary to successfully fight with those fleets. Let them buy a fleet of 74's - if they miss stays when tacking, are slow to reload and fire short, it's not going to matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...