Haratik

Can't have the juicy tidbits without the extensive history behind it all. (Something certainly lacking in public school education).

Jenicyde, love it! (and not cuz it's a hot female, course that plays into it ). Used to have an old clan leader named Jenerik.

That's what I asked him to do, if you bothered to read my post at all. Back on topic.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood, I was merely indicating that the Ottomans were noted as having lightly built ships in their navies during this period. Back on topic.

No need to apologize I think that was a well thought out post. It sounds eerily similar to that piece I found on the Ottomans that touched lightly on their shipbuilding of the period.

Maybe so but I don't think they're keen on adding any first rates that were constructed in the late fashion.

show me your source then, and something other than wikipedia please, in the appropriate topic.

Laid down in 1821. Just missing the mark.

Same goes for you. The Franklin was a 74 gun third rate, not a first rate.

Very much this. Breaking the mold is something that I've been hoping for from a group of devs. It's one of the main reasons I've stuck around.

I'd say they're getting a pretty good nerfing already. The hammer and anvil being applied by the US and Britain must be really hurting at the moment. The devs supposedly have something planned for the pirates already, if true, it'll be a wait and see thing.

Why not have someone in SLRN just start a youtube account and do the grind to gather publicity and then introduce the subscribers to Naval Action?

Not a bad suggestion. This wasn't influenced by Assassin's Creed: Black Flag was it?

It seems in my effort to put up ship plans from Chapelle, as well as my willingness to exclude some, I have overlooked a few crucial plans that some would find interesting. I will be going back and adding these as I take the time to read the book, as well as adding additional information in the book that shed light on these plans. Note: Plans across pages are due to a reprinted copy of Chapelle's book. I wish it were otherwise, truly. First: Proposed 74 gun ship of the line (1799) History: Sometime during the last decade of the 1700s, the first Secretary of the Navy, Benjamin Stoddert, as well as numerous naval officers, recognized that the fledgling American Navy could not be as effective at defending the nation's interest utilizing just frigates and "ship sloops" alone, though such ships were quite necessary and useful. As early as 1797, Secretary Stoddert suggested to congressional groups the need of 74 gun ships, and late in 1798 he recommended the construction of such vessels. During the preliminary discussions, proposals had been made that 74-gun ships be purchased abroad. The Secretary pointed out that such a course of action was quite likely improbable since no foreign power would part with a first-class 74, and that in any event the expenditure of funds abroad would act as an unfavorable balance of trade on the national economy. He then recommended that twelve ships of this class be constructed and that the timber for them be acquired at once. He further suggested that, if the ships were not built at once after the timber was procured, the latter could be preserved in storage in wet decks for an indefinite period of time until needed. In 1799 Congress authorized the purchase of six sets of frames for 74's and authorized funds to "purchase timber for naval purposes". The funds authorized were in excess of those actually required; as a result some islands in the South with live-oak timber on them were bought, and altogether eight sets of ship frames were contracted for by Secretary Stoddert. In the winter of 1798-99, Joshua Humphreys was employed in assisting the Secretary with advice on the 74's, and the initial draught of the class was completed by March 20, 1799. Measurements: The ships were to be 178' 0" between perpendiculars, 48' 6" moulded beam, and 19' 6" depth of hold, armed with 28 32-pdrs. on the gun deck, 30 24-pdrs. on the upper deck, 12 9-pdrs. on the quarterdeck, and 4 additional 9-pdrs. on the forecastle. Humphreys' plan was a rough draft at best, but it served for discussion purposes. After numerous consultations with the Secretary and his advisers (which included naval officers), it was decided to make all the guns 32-pdrs. (I started laughing at this point, though this is probably where the over-armament of American warships began.). This required more displacement than the initial rough draft could tolerate, so a new drawing was required. Samuel Humphreys redrew the design under his father's direction, lengthening the ship 5' amidships and altering the position of the gun ports accordingly, but with no change in number. Naval architects Benjamin Hutton and William Doughty made copies of this plan, all of which survive*. The plan that Doughty copied has the name "Independence" written on its back. The 74's were never built and the timber acquired for them either rotted or was used for small craft and shore construction. The design of the ships is of value, however, as it shows the most advanced ideas in America on what a line-of-battle ship ought to be, at the end of the eighteenth century. Had the 74's been built, they would have been among the most powerful ships of their class in the world, and about the same length as the largest French ships. Having slightly less beam and depth, but with 6 inches greater length, they would have had a tonnage slightly less than that of the French 74's built in the same year that the proposed plans were designed. The larger of the two 74's built for the Royal Navy in 1800 was the HMS Spencer (1800), though none of the British nor French ships were intended to carry the armament proposed for the American design. Further Notes: The proposed 74's would have been sharp-ended for their class and would undoubtedly have been comparatively fast sailers. They retained the beakhead bulkhead of earlier ships, and in this followed general practice in 74-gun ship design abroad. They were spar-decked in the American fashion, though not intended to carry guns on the wide gangways amidships that were, in reality, the continuations of the forecastle and quarterdeck, which constituted the spar deck in fact, if not in name. Had the ships been built, it would have been found that they were unable to bear the armament proposed for them (no surprise there), but even with a slightly reduced weight of guns they would have been most formidable vessels. It has been theorized that if the proposed 74's had been either in commission or ready for fitting out, their existence might have been sufficient to prevent the events that finally led to the War of 1812. *The plan above is the revised plan made by Samuel Humphreys and copied by Hutton and Doughty. **The 1799 plan was similar in design to the later designs for the USS Franklin, USS Washington, and USS Independence, but was not the same. The plan for the Franklin exists and is in the post for the ship of the line designs on the first page of this thread, but no original plans for the Washington or the Independence are thought to exist, though the plan for the Independence in razee'd form can be obtained. ***The small print on the plans is difficult to make out, and attempting to take a picture only made it worse, so I will add it personally here. The first set of small print was the measurements already described above in the summary. The second small print reads as: Particular Dimensions: Foreside of M.F. is 73:6 1/2" from F.P. (":" may be ', not sure) M.F. sides 1:4" 41 to 43 is 4:4" 43 to A.P. is 3:5 7/8" Knuckle Timber is 5:0" from F.P. Room and Space 2:5 3/8?" Lowest Waterline 4'0" above Base; others 3:8 1/2" apart. Buttock 3:8 1/2" apart. Source material, unless linked otherwise, is from Howard Chappelle's "The History of the American Sailing Navy".

Yup already proposed: First Thread Second Thread If you're NOT sure that it has been proposed yet, make sure you're in the shipyard section of the forums, and use the search bar.

Painters have been known to exaggerate before

What am I looking for?

Maybe we could have it as a staff only ship, like the turtle ship from PotBS...then again, that can be abused easily (for any who remember the turtle ship pb about a year or two ago).

I must have glossed over that. Sorry!

If you have already learned a certain blueprint, it will no longer drop for you

Found this work of the USS President (1800) while doing more research into the Continental and early American Navies. A sister ship of the USS Constitution, she had a few minor structural changes: (Source)

I finally got around to posting the only ship of the line I will personally champion. Ladies, gentlemen, bastards, and wenches, I present to you: USS America Laid Down: May 1777 Launched: November 5, 1782 Builder: Colonel James Hackett Admiralty Model by: Robert Bruckner General Characteristics: Country of Origin: United States/13 Colonies Operators: United States, France Type: Ship of the Line Guns: 74 Crew: 626 Length: 182.5ft (55.63m) Beam: 50.5ft (15.39m) Draught: 23ft (7.01m) Displacement: 2,014 tons Speed: 12 knots Armament: 30 x 18-pounder guns 30 x 12-pounder guns 14 x 9-pounder guns (Source) Plans: History: There is, historically, very little information to be gleaned about the nation's very first ship of the line, other than what is readily available on Wikipedia and other public sources. The plans were obtained from Howard Chapelle's "The American Sailing Navy", and are available in my pinned thread American Ship Collection along with other ship drafts belonging to the Continental and American Navies. I'm going to extrapolate on why the armament of the USS America was so light compared to contemporary third rates of the era. I had given the idea in a previous post in the aforementioned thread that the guns for the USS America were probably obtained from the Continental Army after there was no longer a need for it (indeed the Continental Navy was shortly disbanded after the war and some of her armament may have come from ships that were sold off). It seemed my earlier hypothesis was a bit incorrect, as I assumed the guns available to the Continental Army were not much larger than 18-pounder guns. But I do believe that most of her armament, came from the Army, and not other ships in the Navy, though I have no sources to prove this. Little is gleaned of her history and armament after she was transferred to France. I wish her history was a bit more fleshed out and glorious than a trans-atlantic voyage to serve in the French Navy as a gift to replace the loss of Magnifique. Although there are other American ships of the line with longer service in the United States Navy that followed, I feel that their designs would be more out of place than the nation's first large warship. If the devs considered giving the US player base a ship of the line, I feel there is no better proposal.

http://www.uscg.mil/history/wars/1812/1812imagery.asp(scroll for photo and description) https://www.uscg.mil/history/webcutters/JamesMadison1807.pdf The description of the Madison's measurements do not match the image shown above.

I believe it was the design as a whole that was questioned as being the James Madison. There's presumption that Chapelle mislabelled the wrong ship. I'll do some research into it when I can hook up the laptop to some wifi

There is some debate as to if that is the plan for the James Madison or not. Hence why I did not post it originally.