maturin
-
Posts
6,858 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
51
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by maturin
-
-
Malachi have you ever come across any tables for mast and rigging proportions in Danish service? It would be interesting to compare with a contemporary British frigate.
-
Never knew Little Belt was Danish.
Was she really sailed down by the head? Or could this be the trim at launch?
-
Actually the Admiralty is probably off to the right side of the canvas, with the Winter Palace in the background.
-
That is quite clearly the cathedral in the Fortress of Peter and Paul in Saint Petersburg at left. I don't see the Admiralty spire, but it may be hidden in the smoke. The buildings on the embankment look familiar.
-
-
4 hours ago, Intrepido said:
#sirtexasliketobeatroll
Says the guy who always makes passive aggressive whiny posts about other assets instead of reacting to the WiP actually being posted.
-
Leave it to a former NA player to make better L'Hermione videos than the professional PR team:
https://www.youtube.com/user/69buick350/videos?sort=dd&flow=grid&view=0
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Barbancourt said:
Why speed buff Battle sails when you could just go to Slow sails etc to achieve the same thing? (just in terms of speed, neglecting chaining)
Because handling topsails + gallants is easier than topsails + courses. Everything is attached to yards, no tacks and sheets to drag around at head height on deck with cannon balls flying around.
-
1
-
-
On 9/11/2018 at 8:36 AM, Wick said:
Contemporary sources reckoned that in battle conditions with an average of 10-33% misfire and the added stress, troops on land achieved about 10% hit-rate at 80 yards to a company sized target.
Add an ever moving ship, humidity and the immense smoke and what do we get?
Muskets were probably only become somewhat effective on occasions like at Nelson's death. Big ships locked together stationary.
Still i would love to see the option added with the changes i proposed earlier(speed dependent accuracy).
Accounts of close actions regularly reference the quarterdecks being swept clean by sharpshooters, and the number of dead officers backs this up.
Then there are the tactics of 1600s buccaneers, picking off the crew with muskets exclusively.
With a long battle and a lot of barrels, inaccuracy doesn't mean low lethality.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:
You would need to send less crew aloft to maneuver if you only use battle sails.
No one needs to be aloft to perform maneuvers.
With the possible exception of setting up the breast backstay on the new tack, or shifting the tack of upper staysails, but this can be done at leisure in good weather.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:
The issue is changing state, not steady state as I mentioned in my earlier post. The real life battles were fought with a lot less maneuvering and speed changes from what we do in-game. A Captain would reef his Courses due to the threat of fire, of course (right EdWatchmaker?). He didn't want to take bodies from the gun crews and there was enough bodies for sail handling in general. If he started changing speed and turning the way we do, a gun would never be fired. so yes, game play Vs reality as always.
Tacking a 74 gun ship under full sails requires around 40% of the crew. So you can do NA-like maneuvers in action (take a look at diagrams of some famous frigate duels for examples of this), but it will take manpower away from the guns.
It would also be very hazardous to set all your sails up to royals, and then not have the men on hand to brace the yards in a timely manner. So it is reasonable for the steady state to require the manpower.
-
38 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:
Wrong
You're exaggerating. Yes, obviously with less canvas set you need fewer men concentrating on sailhandling. They don't need to be 'aloft', but that is the sole inaccuracy in his post.
If you need to immediately and simultaneously brace around all thirteen square yards on Constitution (nevermind the gaff mizzen, its topsail, all the staysails and headsails), you will need an awful lot of men queued up on the lines ahead of time. And that is the state of affairs represented by Full Sail in this game, and it's what players expect to do in action.
A suitably severe time penalty on sailhandling and bracing might be overkill from a gameplay perspective, however.
-
3
-
-
On 8/24/2018 at 3:52 PM, DeRuyter said:
Regarding the Lynx and other ships in the game that currently still exist or have a modern replica, I believe that the modeling was taken, at least in part, from the actual ships. @admin can confirm but someone I recall reading that. As to the Lynx the shipbuilder acknowledged that she was based on the original but is not an exact replica. If you are in the US you can sail on her too! I can tell you she is fast in light air.
The Lynx model is definitely the reproduction ship, which differs wildly from the historical vessel. There is essentially no relation.
QuoteAs to the Pride she was hit by a "white" squall an event that could knock down most ships regardless of rig. I know there are issues noted in "Tall Ships Down" but not about the rig in general. Of course they went ahead and built another one with the same hull form and rig. The schooner rig is also easier for a small crew to handle than a square rig.😉
Well, let's call a spade a spade here. Pride's stability was deficient. Yes, there was possibly a microburst, but it does not take an extraordinary event to capsize an overcanvased vessel with loads of tophamper and low freeboard. She could have been knocked over by less. She also could have easily survived the squall that claimed her, had the sailplan and response been different. Just as she had faced bad weather on countless other passages.
Likewise, historical Baltimore clippers relied on good seamanship and conservative sailtrim to keep them safe.
Also, Pride II is a very different ship, much heavier with a lower sail area:displacement ratio. AFAIK she is actually faster, though, because she was built for voyages and not as a dockside attraction with saggy rigging.
-
On 8/23/2018 at 5:44 PM, Olikigotho said:
Only the longest and largest purpose-built privateers ever caught a prize during the war of 1812. Famous examples being, General Armstrong, Prince de Neufchatel, and Chasseur.
Err, you definitely misspoke there. Privateers had a low success rate, but this was mostly down to luck and skill. No privateer was too slow to catch any prizes, or it wouldn't have been fitted out in the first place.
If Fame of Salem (neither large nor purpose built) could do it, anyone can: https://schoonerfame.com/fame-the-war-of-1812/
Lynx is definitely too small to be particularly fast.
QuoteThe British were well aware of the Baltimore clipper design as they conducted experiments with ships like the HMS Flying Fish ex-Baltimore clipper Revenge. They proved unstable and poor gun platforms, hence they were never adopted, the British preferring their local equivalent, the cutter (French equivalent was the lugger). In fact, they were so unstable that many capsized, some even while docked with the sails taken down. The most recent example is the sinking of the Pride of Baltimore in 1986.
Baltimore clippers were the fastest ships of their size, but not overall, nor were they effective as men-o-war.
Now that is all highly tendentious. The British and French bought dozens of American schooners into service over several decades. You didn't often see cutters and luggers being tapped for Transatlantic or global service, either.
For what it's worth, Pride of Baltimore II has reached higher speeds than virtually every Napoleonic frigate ever launched, and on a broad reach where a topsail schooner is fastest.
-
3
-
-
On 8/9/2018 at 7:53 AM, admin said:
The width of stern for the first rate might not exceed 15-16 meters (or even less)
Realistically only a set of maybe 30 people could lay fire from the stern at the same time.Poop deck
Quarterdeck
Upper deck
Middle deck
Gun deck (2-4 ports only)
So that's more like 120 people.
-
Quote
Battle sails were used to "steady" the decks to allow accurate shooting.
This actually works the other way around. Shortening sail makes the deck jump around more as the ship rolls. More sail results in a more inclined deck, but this can be compensated for by changing the elevation of the gun.
Sailing fast upwind or on a beam reach would theoretically provide the most stable gun platform, heel permitting. Sailing downwind would result in the lowest accuracy, due to rolling. Sitting still with your sails depowered would be as bad or even worse, while heaving to properly would be quite comfortable. In practice the sea state has a big influence too, and that can interfere with the steadiness of the deck when close hauled, as the crests come with greater frequency and the ship is always pitching and scending.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Suppenkelle said:
If by #4 your picture #4 is meant and if I see the image properly, there is a reason for the ship to turn to starboard in the picture, even if the wind would come directly from behind. The center of effort of the sails is well to port frome the centerline of the hull. So, propulsion and resistance aren't balanced and lead to a turn to starbboard. Same as pushing your shopping cart with the left hand only.
Yes. The ship is turning to the left in-game.
QuoteIn the screenshot it's the front sail which isn't totally depowered (catching wind at small angle) that counters the rear and makes the ship turn to the left. With a front sail depowered the rear makes the ship turn to the right.
It should be turning to the right. The foresail would be almost entirely useless at that angle.
-
33 minutes ago, Barberouge said:
-
- Could be reduced by decreasing the sail power at the angle of the front yard
- Without the additional torque, the rear yard is too open to completely counter the front
- Can't be fixed without the additional torque
- In this one the front yard isn't exactly parallel to the wind - if it was the ship should turn right
Lateen curves will be tuned later. Maybe the system could also be updated for more realism.
There are two reasons the sails make the ship want to turn:
- Force vector from the angle of the sail (I think you're referring to this as torque)
- Greater windforce being exerted on the bow, relative to the stern (or vice verse)
We can argue over which effect is stronger in the case of the xebec, and probably you would need to do the math to find the right answer. That explains the discrepancies in points 1-3.
But for #4, there is absolutely zero reason the vessel should be turning to the right. The sails are not exerting any kind of force that would lead to this result.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, Wind said:
they did their research I did mine. I would not post fake sh*t here. Pay attention to structures not the movie.
lol
Every pirate ship in that show looks like a steaming pile of donkey chodes. If they don't care about the pirate stuff, what research do you think they did on the residential architecture of South Carolina?
Edit: Anyways, this topic is at least the fiftieth time the issue has been raised, and it should be locked. It makes no sense to limit ship types by nation, given how similar the designs of most nations usually were, and how many famous warships earned their spurs in the service of nations that did not build them. We also don't have nearly enough ships to outfit every nation with a full lineup.
-
1 hour ago, Wind said:
Boston is a pure example of an American port and how it should look like. You telling me Cuban style is historically correct? We even have Russian in Caribbean and they live in the same cuban style homes lol.
Let's not fool ourselves it must be fixed.
Charleston in this era would have looked more like Cuba than Boston. Its architecture was often compared to Southern Europe.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Wind said:
Bro don't even get me started on that. You telling me Boston did not have brick? lol You should change your name
Shallow port
So you're saying you have no idea where Boston is.
Not that I would be surprised to hear it.
-
1 hour ago, Wind said:
We don't even have ports that historically represent Nations (looks at US), Most of NA port models got Cuban housing. For example US ports had brick housing and looked industrial. Small ports (shallow) had colonial style housing. Never understood what Cuba had to do with US coast and the rest of the Caribbean.
We only have US ports south of Hatteras. Not much brick around there, nor industry.
-
1 hour ago, Wind said:
2. Sail colors
HMS Drag Queen
1 hour ago, Wind said:3. Better wind on sails physics.
Epileptic jellyfish canvas.
-
4
-
-
Xebecs are going to be 'dodging' chainshot like crazy, which is pure trash.
-
1
-
Lower gun deck water clearance on early American ships of the line
in History
Posted
USS Franklin is technically a two-decker, since her spar deck armament is all carronades. While pure three-deckers always had low freeboard for the main battery, two-decker 74s and 80s were expected to have over 6 feet of freeboard, enabling to fight in rough weather.
So the criticism is that Franklin is a Third Rate that is as vulnerable to heavy seas as a First Rate. Of course, she also mounted the same weight of guns on the upper deck as the main deck, which really mitigates this weakness.