Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Malachi

Sir Benjamin Thompson´s frigate 1781 (With Plans)

Recommended Posts

Now this is a real beauty:

 

msBjS5X.jpg

 

Dimensions:

 

Length:                                                                 150'

Breadth:                                                                 39' 6'

Draft of Water Forward                                          15' 9''

Draft of Water Abaft                                               15' 9''

Height of middle gunport above the water:               6' 3''

L/B ratio:                                                                  3,8

Burthen in builder´s tonnage:                             1000 tons

Real Burthen:                                                        915 tons

 

 

Armament (proposed):

 

30*32-pounders  (described as 'light' - 26 CWT, on sliding carriages)

12*12-pounders (also 'light')

20 musketoons on swivel stocks

 

A battery of 30 long 18s and 8*32-pounder carronades plus 4*9-pounder chase guns would be more realistic, in my opinion.

 

 

Sir Benjamin Thompson, probably better known as Count Rumford, made this draught in the late 1770s and sent it, amongst others, to Marmaduke Stalkarrt, who, seemingly impressed by the absolutely innovative design, published it in his 'Naval Architecture or the Rudiments and Rules of Shipbuilding' in 1781.

Although this frigate has never been built, it´s remarkable for it´s V-shaped hull, similiar to Forfait´s 18-pounder frigates built in the 1790s or Symonds' work in the 1830s/1840s.

Edited by Malachi
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That deadrise is insanity!

All the more so since it's associated with light vessels, not superheavy armament. Doesn't it affect seakeeping an awful lot?

Edit: I see she's deeper and shorter than a Lively, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see she's deeper and shorter than a Lively, though.

 

 

 

Shorter, but not deeper. A Lively provisioned for channel service had a draught of 17' 6''/ 19' 6'', even a much smaller Niger sat deeper in the water (14' 8'' / 16' 11').

 

That deadrise is insanity!

All the more so since it's associated with light vessels, not superheavy armament. Doesn't it affect seakeeping an awful lot?

 

 

Jolly good question. The frigates by Simonds from the 1830/1840s like the Vernon  (176' , 44') had a very similiar hull shape and were considered very fast and excellent ships in the right hands. Forfait´s Seine- and Gloire-class also had a V-shaped hull, but with a more conservative deadrise, and were good sea boats, if I remember correctly.

 

Thompson sent the draught to a couple prominent persons (the list reads like a who-is-who of admirals, shipwrights and mathematicians of the time - Kempenfelt, Douglas, Wells, Barnard, Hutton etc.) for a review and their answers, which are - surprisingly :P - very positive, were also published in 'Naval Architecture'.

 

The main idea behind this kind of hull shape, according to Thompson, is to reduce the amount of ballast needed (and, logically, the overall displacement) to get a stiff ship and a stable gun platform in all seas. He compared his design to the Lark, a 132', 12-pounder frigate, and the immersed part of the hull is pretty much the same (32784 cubic ft / 32198 cubic feet) and subsequently proposed the masts and rigging of a 32-gun ship. Thompson, a physicist by trade, seems to have been pretty worried about stability.

Edited by Malachi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the 1780s and early 1790 were pretty much the 'golden age' of british shipbuilding - at least aesthetically.

Sleek, elegant lines combined with elaborate, but not excessive carvings.

 

Here´s the stern and the head in a better resolution:

fXbQSBG.jpg?1

MFVhhG1.jpg?1

 

And two of my other favourites of this era:

 

gc2qCEH.jpg?1

 

Fireship 'Comet' (1783), other ships of this class were converted to ship-sloops, armed with 32-pounder carronades. Considered very fast, based on the french prize Panthère of 1744.

 

T14wLEs.jpg?1

 

Termagant 1780. 22-gun ship-sloop, armed with 6-pounders. Also a very good sailor, based the french prize Chevert/Pomona of 1759.

Edited by Malachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The weight and 'sliding carriages' are descriptions of a carronade.

The normal weight gun and carriage for a 32lb carronade is slightly less than 25cwt. If these weights were given as 'complete' then I think they are descriptions of a relatively early proposal of this type as a main battery. Even if the guns are of conventional form (e.g. lacking the reduced diameter chamber and with other changes) and the weights are ordnance only, then these are still lighter, shorter pieces intended for firing with a significantly reduced powder charge with a convergent purpose to carronades. A course suggested after testing and publication of Benjamin Robbins' "New Principles of Gunnery" in 1747, where increases in calibre even at the expense of range were strongly advocated.

 

Edited by Lieste

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here´s the quote of the relevant chapter in 'Naval Architecture':

 

'All the guns upon the main deck are to be thirty-two pounders, upon a new construction, weighing

twenty-six hundreds each, and the quarter deck will be light twelve pounders.

 

As thirty-two pounder carronades, which are not half so heavy as the the proposed thirty-two pounders, have been proved with very large charges of powder, there can be no doubt that these guns may be made to stand fire with perfect safety; [...]'

 

As Thompson also experimented with guns and charges, I got the impression that he wanted to design a new type of light naval gun, much like Gover, Salder and Congreve did. And I suppose the sliding carriages would be pretty similiar to Chapman´s design for long guns he made for the Wasa- and Bellona-class. An earlier version of these can be seen on plate XXXIII in the Architectura Navalis Mercatoria.

 

Edit: The distance between gun ports is 7' 6'' on average, a bit more than what´s usual for 18-pounder frigates - if I remember correctly.

        In terms of weight, the equivalent for his 26 cwt guns (this is without carriage, I suppose) would be 7' 12-pounders (21 cwt), short 18-pounders

        (28 cwt) or 42-pounder carronades (22 cwt).

Edited by Malachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably similar to congreve's pieces then... a "super carronade", or weak gun.

 

Congreve pieces were found to be quite unmanageable, and had most of the disadvantages of the carronade (if not to the same extreme), they were rapidly phased out. (Bored out 24 and 18 lb guns, giving 32lb in 40, 32 and 25 cwt).

(And also the later model 32lb carronades were lengthened (L/D 10:1 vs the earlier 7.5:1), fitted with trunnions, and also weighed 25cwt (but aren't the pieces proposed for the Frigate here)).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily. According to Thompson´s calculations, the ship is able to store 4 months of provisions for 250 men with ease and the middle gunport 6' 3'' above the water, which is comparable to french 12- or small 18-pounder frigates of the era.

 

And I´m very tempted to make a hull model of this ship. I know a guy who has the necessary software to test hydrostatic and hydrodynamic capabilities of 3D ship models, the results might be quite interesting.

 

Edit: For comparison, here´s a plan of a 36-gun frigate from the 1830s, designed by Symonds (whom I mentioned earlier in this thread).

 

 

CfBYhV8.jpg

 

And a less extreme example of a V-shaped hull, La Révolutionnaire of 1795:

 

http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/82310.html

Edited by Malachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hy to all.

I'm not very knowledgeable in aspects of naval architecture and terminology. But I was wondering what sort of armament you are talking here about. Are you referring to 32pd carronades or canons? And one more thing. In your opinion how would she behave if she was to be armed with 24pd long guns on gun deck instead, in terms of speed, maneuverability and stability as a gun platform? 

Thanks

Edited by Rade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frigates carried 32s, just not quite in the NA time frame (I think the first was launched in 1824).

@Rade 

she wouldn't have been able to carry 24 longs, 7' 12-pounder max as I said in one of my posts above.

 

Share this post


Link to post
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

×