Henry d'Esterre Darby Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Apologies for my slight tirade. I guess that I was in a mood. I do highly recommend Six Frigates. As for historical books, the writing has gotten much better and much more engaging. As a junior high student I read a book on the crusades that about killed me. Many of the writers now are so good. I read a book on the naval war of 1812. For the life of me, I can't remember the title or the author. I will try find out for everyone but I need to go to the library to find it. I will try to do so. It spoke of the war from the U.S. side, warts and all. It may take me a few days to find it. I'd love to read that if you can find the title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle Bill Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Matt, can I call you Matt?I have to agree with you. I think that I would prefere a smaller and more agile frigate. Since I have never sailed a real ship and have to temper my experience with games that I have played and books that I have read, You can call him Matt You can call him OT Don't call him late for Supper 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 I was simply asking the question. It was a question not as statement as I am not familiar with the author. I try to read books that are written by authors that are from both sides of any conflict and where possible neutral. Historian or not I have read far too many books that clearly have a patriotic leaning and maternal feeling towards the subject matter. Patton in fact is one of the worst for nationalistic fervour in authors. Sure somebody who comes from the same country can be impartial but often you just have to make sure you are aware a grain of salt may be needed even with a historian. People are people. Historian or not. But don't get me wrong. I was not judging just asking. Okay, well it's a very loaded question and an odd way to ask it. I was thinking perhaps you thought it was written by someone alive during War of 1812. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion74 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 OK found the book. 1812 The Navy's War. By George C. Daughan. Actually my sweet little spouse found it for me, so thank her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mageprince Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 the bigger question is how is the game going to accurately represent the bouncing of red coat lead off her starboard and portside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir. Cunningham Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 the bigger question is how is the game going to accurately represent the bouncing of red coat lead off her starboard and portside. Whilst the strong live oak on the USS Constitution did increase protection and proved a hard nut to crack, it would only stop long range shots from long guns up to 18 pounder in size, the larger 24 pounders and up would cut through the hull without difficulty 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spankybus Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Random outburst, I would like to sail the 1797 USF Constellation, with her rounded stern. I love the constitution, but she isn't the only Belle from that particular ball. I think of the constitution as a 'Jerk' frigate. Whereas a jackass frigate is on the small side, the Jerk is exactly that...a Jerk. No Frigate captain could refuse to engage her in single combat and not be seen as shy...despite the fact that it is clearly an unfair match. I am curious where she will fall into the scheme of things in NA. Somewhere between a frigate and a 74...and I honestly think she could hold her own with a 74 given the right commander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 I would like to sail the 1797 USF Constellation, with her rounded stern. 1797 Constellation had a rounded stern? That would be interesting to see, do you have draughts? Or if you're referring to the hull form of the existing ship, she doesn't bear much resemblance to her original self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spankybus Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 1797 Constellation had a rounded stern? That would be interesting to see, do you have draughts? Or if you're referring to the hull form of the existing ship, she doesn't bear much resemblance to her original self. http://memberfiles.freewebs.com/49/72/79417249/photos/Eagle-visits-Baltimore-Harbor/USS%20Constellation%20baltimore%20Harbore%202011web.jpgTBH I remember her being extensively rebuild near the civil war, but my understanding is that her restoration was to her 1797 specs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 http://memberfiles.freewebs.com/49/72/79417249/photos/Eagle-visits-Baltimore-Harbor/USS%20Constellation%20baltimore%20Harbore%202011web.jpg TBH I remember her being extensively rebuild near the civil war, but my understanding is that her restoration was to her 1797 specs. No, it's not possible to restore her to her 1797 form without rebuilding the entire ship. I was shocked to read that there is historical controversy about Constellation. Anyone who with the most cursory, informal command of nautical architecture can tell that that ship was completely rebuilt from the keel up in the 19 century. Her bow and stern are simply not that of a turn-of-the-century ship. The Civil War-era 'refit' was a bit of dodgy legal fiction by which the navy got around restrictions on building new craft. Maybe they saved some of the keel timbers, but they essentially designed and built a new vessel, recycled from the old. It's amusing that historians claim otherwise, and quite obvious that they never bothered to consult an expert on the subject. It's as if someone's amateur mechanic grandpa took this: http://www.classic-car-history.com/ford-truck-pictures/1948-1952-ford-pickup/1950-ford-f1-pickup-right.jpg And stuck it in his garage, broke out the tools and came out with this: http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ea/3e/47/ea3e47328bbfbbc1bce0597df3f4d756.jpg That's not a refit! Edit: Come to think of it, this is a real-world example of the Ship of Theseus concept: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Armstrong Posted November 16, 2014 Share Posted November 16, 2014 Maturin-Couldn't have said it better myself! I think one of the more humorous ones is here, where someone fanatacilly tries to prove that there wasn't a rebuild because both ships had t'gallant poles without crosstrees: http://www.frigateconstellation.com/new.htm Just looking at dimensions I don't understand anyone could believe it was the original ship. Or the bodyplan, or the plan...or comparing literally any information about the 1797 and 1853 vessels... Spankybus-Here's how the frigate constellation's stern looked. http://www.patrickobrienstudio.com/images/constellation%20vs%20l-insurgente.jpg Round sterns weren't invented until 1817 by sir Robert seppings, and the first example of an elliptical stern was on the USS Brandywine of 1820. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrutishVulgarian Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 I feel like Jack Aubrey, somewere there is a brilliant pun, revolving around someone "being brought up with a round stern." But it eludes me. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 'Round turn.' Maturin mis-used it as round stern. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spankybus Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Oh Well, that means the model I am building is of the Sloop of War. Still love it for just being different, though a 1797 variant would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggywrinkle Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Gotta love anything that's bluff to the fore and well rounded aft... ...boats are alright too 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawke Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Flat bottomed girls are where it's at. That rounded stern would have be throwing me off if it was included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrutishVulgarian Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 'Round turn.' Maturin mis-used it as round stern. Yes, "round turn" is what makes it a pun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Connor Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Oh Well, that means the model I am building is of the Sloop of War. Still love it for just being different, though a 1797 variant would be nice. I'd have to point out, the sloop of war is well outside the period for Naval Action (cut-off 1820), so if you are building this model for inclusion in NA it might be best to seek out plans for the original 1797 Constellation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subutai Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Yeah in no way would I be interested in facing off against a frigate armed with rifled guns and exploding shells... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6DuchiesMerchant Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The book is an objective view written about 8 years ago iirc and take no particular stance at all, it simply describes the circumstances surrounding and leading to the building of the Constitution and her sister ships, the design and build process and the effect they had on Anglo American "relations" during the War of 1812. In full disclosure, I thoroughly enjoyed the book and do not have specific examples of inaccuracies. However, it worth noting that my advising professor for my Master's thesis recommended that I NOT use 6 Frigates as a source. Apparently some of Toll's early work had some academic problems. Basically, go into the book with some caution. As to the original question, I've really enjoyed the informed discussion throughout these forums. I've learned quite a bit. Though I would put forward that perhaps this discussion has been a little to focused on the technical nature of which ship can throw a similar weight of iron to the U.S.S. Constitution. Isn't 'the weather gauge' also a viable answer? The skilled commander of a 32-gun ship with a crack crew and the weather gauge should be able to beat the Constitution. If not, I'm going to be dissapointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The weather gauge isn't actually a tactical advantage of any particularly great significance. Rather, it is the stuff out which Masters theses are made: a social construct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subutai Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Holding the weather gage determines who has the initiative... It isn't going to compensate for a gross mismatch. It's kind of more like getting to play white in a game of chess. You get that initial advantage that your opponent must respond to, sure, but once it's on, it's on, and if your opponent clearly outclasses you, getting that first move isn't going to be all that much help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Danforth Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 HMS Endymion was a 40-gun 5th Rate and captured Connie's sister ship, so no reason that couldn't work against Ol' Ironsides too, given the right conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hood Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 It's interesting but if you read about the fight between HMS Guerriere and the USS Constitution then Constitution had an easier fight due to the condition of the Guerriere whose masts were rotted away and she was sailing to have them replaced. Perhaps if the masts were in better condition then the Guerriere would have been able to completely out sail the Constitution (The Challenge, Andrew Lambert).She narrowly evaded HMS Shannon also. Now her escapes were very impressive when on so many occasions she could have become a prize, using her anchor to get upwind and away from British pursuers. However I believe that should she have met the Endymion like her sistership did then she too would have succumbed. Nevertheless they never met and technically she always fought an inferior British warship (and did so with impressive seamanship so as not to take anything away from the ship or crew) so it is hard to comment on what would/could have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GourmetGorilla Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 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. Yes, it's called a 5th rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now