Fifth-rate two-deckers.

[Idle Champion]

Currently, the entire collection of in-game fifth-rates are true sailing frigates - long, low ships with most of their armament concentrated in a single gun deck. The Renomee seen in game is one of the earliest examples of this type of ship; for the first half of the 1670-1830 time frame the typical fifth-rate or equivalent ship was a compact two-decker, shorter and more upright than later frigates. These ships tended to have 22 guns or fewer on each gun deck and minimal armament on the upper works of the ship, and were given a range of contemporary labels as broad as just 'ship' to the more descriptive French labels like fregate a deux batteries or frigate-vaisseux de premiere ordre.

 

As an example of the type - HMS Rainbow.

 

 

Plans are not of Rainbow, but of Expedition and America, two other ships of the 1745 Establishment 44-gunner group.

 

Measurements, crew, and later armament details are for Rainbow herself. (http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=6062)

Length: 133' 3" (at gundeck), 108' 9" (at keel)

Beam/Breadth: 37' 10 3/4 "

Depth in hold: 16"

Burthen: 830 75/94 tonnes.

 

Crew complement by design: 280 men.

 

HMS Rainbow was built after Renomee and her capture; by the time she was launched, she was unfashionable and obsolescent. Rainbow had a perfectly respectable career and for whichever reason was kept in service while the other ships of the 1745 Establishment group of 44-gun ships was broken up or sold out of service; after HMS Crown was broken up in 1770, Rainbow was the last of her class. Small two-deckers like Rainbow were much cheaper to keep on station than powerful ships of the line and would be more powerful than single-deck frigates for a little while longer, so Rainbow was kept occupied and there was even a small resurgence in two-decker fifth-rates with new ships of the Roebuck-class and HMS Serapis being ordered. In one of the larger naval battles of the American War of Independence, Rainbow and HMS Flora with the brig HMS Victor encountered two frigates of the Continental Navy, Boston and Hancock and the captured British frigate Fox - the elderly two-decker was able to pursue the two American ships and then the Hancock when they separated for thirty-nine hours, eventually coming up on Hancock and trading broadsides until the American ship surrendered.

 

In 1782, Rainbow was chosen as the platform for an experimental armament of carronades, which had previously been sold to merchant ships and privateers and not found favour with naval authorities. Thoroughly obsolete by design and thirty-five years old, Rainbow encountered L'Hebe, recently-launched and the first of her class, in the English Channel. L'Hebe's captain became alarmed when he realised the shot fired from Rainbow's bow chasers were 32-pounder balls, reckoning that Rainbow was a disguised ship of the line. On Rainbow's first broadside, a 68-pound cannonball from her main battery carried away Hebe's foremast while another destroyed the helm; Hebe's captain ordered one broadside fired so as not to disgrace the flag before surrendering. Hebe had an extended career in British service, and the state-of-the-art ship was the basis of the Leda-class frigates of which the in-game Trincomalee is an example. Carronades became a typical part of the armament on the Royal Navy's ships after Rainbow's duel, though all-carronade armaments were only used on marginal ships that would not have had adequate armament otherwise. Rainbow herself was placed in ordinary in 1784 and eventually sold out of service in 1802.

 

Her armament varied over her career between 44 and 48 guns. Her original rating reflected an armament of 20x18 pounders, 20x9pounders, and 4x6 pounders on her quarterdeck. Following repairs and recommissioning in 1762 her armament was 20x18 pounders, 22x9 pounders, and 2x6 pounders on her forecastle. When she was armed with carronades she carried 20x68 pounders, 22x42 pounders, and 6x32 pounders with both the forecastle and quarterdeck armed. Records of both the Hancock and Hebe incidents refer to her firing bow chasers, while the plan of her sister ship America shows gun ports at the level of her main battery below the stern gallery.

 

What might she be in-game? A bruiser. A slower and less agile ship the single-deck frigates, but with decent firepower - a broadside of 280-300 pounds - and durability reflecting the additional enclosed deck and her mass and structure being condensed in a shorter ship (She's 17 or 18 feet shorter than Trincomalee). A way for lower-ranked captains to experience the sailing and fighting style of later ships of the line, and at higher levels a tank among frigates and a watchdog and tagger for ships of the line. If, like other fifth-rates, she had the option of an all-carronade armament, the equivalence between carronade and cannon weights is different in game, and the 68/42/32-pounder setup would be more likely to find expression in a 32-42/32/18-24 pounder setup.

 

Yes, Rainbow is a British ship, but I've been able to find plenty of information about her along with plans and models of her sisters and her career as an old-style two-decker that served in the time dominated by single-deck sail frigates is interesting. There are a whole heap of intermediate two-deckers from other nations but I've largely only been able to find minimal information for them - mostly names, service dates, and career highlights with a sort of two out of three of armament, measurements, and crew complement and without models, plans, or art of them. So while I've opened with Rainbow as an example, I invite anyone to discuss any intermediate two-deckers or demi-batteries that would match the in-game fifth rate.

[Cragger]

I would personally really enjoy a 44 or 50 gun two decker and have been hoping that one comes but so far it still seems to be a dream. I always did like variety.

[Rackham the Red]

I really hope the Devs would add these kind of ships in the game. 44-54 SOLS are my favorite type of ships. The HMS Rainbow would be a beautiful add on on the game.

[Mirones]

plans for Leopard/portland 50gun  and the Robuck class 44gun  are here in the forum section

[OlavDeng2]

plans for Leopard/portland 50gun  and the Robuck class 44gun  are here in the forum section

there are also plenty of dutch 50-56 gunners in the dutch ship plans thread, would be nice to see some of those as well.

[Idle Champion]

I'm aware that there are plans for 50-60 gun 24 pound 4th rates floating around the shipyard, and I do think the game needs some genuine fourth rates to slot in below the Ingermanland and alongside the curiously-armed Wapen von Hamburg when it's ready. This is less about filling gaps by adding a 220-280 BR 4th-rate like the Dordrecht or Leopard, and more about variety. The Rattlesnake adds variety to the sixth-rates, when it's ready the Christian VII will add variety to the second-rates, and that's the sort of variety I'm hoping ships like square-rigged seventh-rates and two-decker and demi-batterie fifth-rates will bring.

 

plans for Leopard/portland 50gun  and the Robuck class 44gun  are here in the forum section

 

The Roebuck-class ship and Rainbow's sister ship America are floating around the forum - from memory the Roebuck has its own thread, and America is in the 5th-6th rate ship collection thread, but these are definitely the sort of ships I'm thinking about. Malachi has a thread for the French demi-batterie L'Amazone as well. Other contenders would be older, less powerful fourth rates with smaller crews like the Goto Predestinatsia (58 guns, but Russian 16-pounders on the main deck).

[Alex Connor]

I started building a Roebuck-class model, didn't get much beyond the base hull form.

Strangely competitive during their lifespans, you wouldn't think such a small 2 decker could be fast, and yet Roebucks and HMS Rainbow have distinguished track records of chasing down and defeating frigates that should on paper have been quicker. I suppose the Royal Navy being the only ones with coppered hulls during this period helped.

[Idle Champion]

Speed is a tough one - very few ships of the period could really approach their hull speed, and there were certainly sailing benefits to the stiffness of an extra deck and fuller lines at the bow. Rainbow was comprehensively refitted in 1775, so she was in good condition when she chased Hancock and was freshly refitted again when she encountered L'Hebe. For Hancock, the 39-hour pursuit indicates only a marginal advantage, but even that could be attributed to weather or damage to Hancock rather than an overall advantage in sailing qualities or outright speed. Even though L'Hebe would have been in excellent condition, it isn't clear that the weather or the Channel itself would have permitted Hebe any avenue of escape, and even if there was an avenue of escape the ship and the crew may have been in need of shaking down. Actual sailing records, complete with information about weather and the condition of the ship (age, recent battles and repairs, time since last cleaned) aren't easy to come by.

 

It's worth acknowledging the importance of balance and role dynamics as well - if an in-game Rainbow was tougher than a Frigate and had chase guns and a slight advantage in firepower, it should have disadvantage somewhere so as not to undermine the Frigate and a sailing or speed disadvantage would not seem unreasonable.

[Cragger]

Speed is a tough one - very few ships of the period could really approach their hull speed, and there were certainly sailing benefits to the stiffness of an extra deck and fuller lines at the bow. Rainbow was comprehensively refitted in 1775, so she was in good condition when she chased Hancock and was freshly refitted again when she encountered L'Hebe. For Hancock, the 39-hour pursuit indicates only a marginal advantage, but even that could be attributed to weather or damage to Hancock rather than an overall advantage in sailing qualities or outright speed. Even though L'Hebe would have been in excellent condition, it isn't clear that the weather or the Channel itself would have permitted Hebe any avenue of escape, and even if there was an avenue of escape the ship and the crew may have been in need of shaking down. Actual sailing records, complete with information about weather and the condition of the ship (age, recent battles and repairs, time since last cleaned) aren't easy to come by.

 

It's worth acknowledging the importance of balance and role dynamics as well - if an in-game Rainbow was tougher than a Frigate and had chase guns and a slight advantage in firepower, it should have disadvantage somewhere so as not to undermine the Frigate and a sailing or speed disadvantage would not seem unreasonable.

 

New acceleration and momentum changes bring an advantage without needing to change anything. Larger more massive ships take a lot longer to respond to the wind now. 

[maturin]

 

 

Speed is a tough one - very few ships of the period could really approach their hull speed, and there were certainly sailing benefits to the stiffness of an extra deck and fuller lines at the bow.

Stiffness from an extra deck? Eh?

 

The theoretical disadvantage of an extra decks comes into play on the wind or any time leeway is an issue.

[Cragger]

Stiffness from an extra deck? Eh?

 

The theoretical disadvantage of an extra decks comes into play on the wind or any time leeway is an issue.

 

More decks does increase longitudinal stiffness of a ship's hull. Not to be mistaken with stiffness in relation to the ship's response to the wind pressure. One of the main reasons more and more decks were added was the limitations of wood construction put a limit to how long a ship could be. New techniques like diagonal stringers allowed that to be pushed further later on which is what allowed the 4th rate 'not frigates' be replaced by 50 gun frigates for frigate duty. 

[maturin]

Well that's a confusing use of terms, especially since resilience of the hull isn't a 'sailing benefit' until years into the ship's life cycle when hogging becomes a concern.

[Cragger]

Well that's a confusing use of terms, especially since resilience of the hull isn't a 'sailing benefit' until years into the ship's life cycle when hogging becomes a concern.

 

It actually is, energy converted into heat flexing the hull over waves is energy not spent propelling it forward. Just like stiffness to the wind means the ship harnesses the energy more efficiently.

 

Also comes into play with wave frequency and hull harmonics with speed. Some of the very last wooden hulled clipper ships had bilge pumps that had to be ran constantly because of leakage from the flexing. 

 

Not saying it would ever make an older style two decker faster then a 44-50 gun frigate running on the wind but might have some advantages in certain wind conditions or sea states.

[Idle Champion]

Stiffness from an extra deck? Eh?

 

The theoretical disadvantage of an extra decks comes into play on the wind or any time leeway is an issue.

 

We may be using the same term for different things here, or you may be using the game term for the sailing characteristic. Stiffness refers to a high degree of initial or form stability - stability characteristics from the hull, its shape, and its materials. Aren't you referring to weatherly vs. leewardly, rather than stiff vs. tender?

[maturin]

We may be using the same term for different things here, or you may be using the game term for the sailing characteristic. Stiffness refers to a high degree of initial or form stability - stability characteristics from the hull, its shape, and its materials. Aren't you referring to weatherly vs. leewardly, rather than stiff vs. tender?

The degree to which a ship is stiff or tender should correspond with its roving center of gravity (as stores are consumed or tophamper added). With the hullforms and materials we are talking about, the ability of a ship to stand to its canvas was a good indicator of overall stability.

 

I thought you used the term to suggest that having an extra gundeck would make the ship less tender, which of course isn't the case.

[Idle Champion]

I thought you used the term to suggest that having an extra gundeck would make the ship less tender, which of course isn't the case.

 

I don't see that as an 'of course'. The additional enclosed deck and its framing does raise the centre of gravity, yes, and a high centre of gravity does erode overall stability. But an early 18th-century ship gets most of its structural strength, including its torsional rigidity in every direction, from the skeleton. It may be more often expressed in terms of load-bearing and resistance to hogging but I am using the term to suggest that the additional gun deck, in the absence of later construction techniques and designs that can make up for the loss of strength in other ways, makes the ship stronger and less tender despite the raised centre of gravity.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong, and I wouldn't make the same argument of a late 18th century ship or a 19th century ship, but I would say it of a ship of Rainbow's period - 1769's L'Africain is probably the first single-decker frigate with a broadside weight like Rainbow's.

[maturin]

 

I... suggest that the additional gun deck... makes the ship... less tender despite the raised centre of gravity.

 

Apologies, but you have lost me entirely. How?

 

'Tender' means means heeling more than other ships, indicating a stability deficit (possibly initial stability only). I assume this is the only definition we're using here.

 

Why are you talking about stability and construction strength in the same paragraph? Or are you just aggregating pros and cons into some sort of final 'score.'

[Idle Champion]

I'm saying initial stability isn't wholly a product of hull form, unless hull is contiguous, watertight, and provides all the necessary torsional rigidity. Without such an ideal hull, construction strength becomes relevant. I'm ascribing a similar relationship between hull form and initial stability as there is between length at waterline and hull speed; a known and strong relationship that can be limited by other factors.

 

Imagine a ship that looks to have good form stability by design but is of weak hull construction. Rolling, pitching, heeling, any of those motions would apply torque to the ship - once the ship approaches the limit of its torsional rigidity it will flex and behave as a tender ship just as surely as if it had poor form stability, with slower rolls through a greater range of motion and slower righting with broader recovery angle. Giving the same ship internal reinforcement to support the hull would improve its initial stability within its other limits, up to the initial stability possible for its hull form.

 

A 1740s ship does not have an ideal hull - not contiguous, not wholly watertight, and providing limited torsional rigidity. I doubt that either a 1740s 44-48 two-decker and a similarly loaded single-decker built using 1740s techniques would have the initial stability possible by their hull forms, but I'm claiming that the two-decker would be the less tender of the two ships by virtue of its torsional rigidity.

[maturin]

I see what you are referring to now; I never thought of that.

 

But it's a very large claim to make unless you are prepared to do the math. I think you would need at least a Master's thesis to demonstrate that hull flexing has anything but a trace impact on stability, buried in other more important factors. Sure, there could be a theoretical difference between two ships that had the same center of gravity, but I can't imagine that it would make up any real difference between differing vessels.

 

I don't recall R. Braithwaite's stability analysis of HMS Southampton dealing with the matter at all.

[Idle Champion]

That was definitely a pretty major defect of small two-deckers and demi-batterie ships but it was one that did get ameliorated over time as the ships grew up, both in the sense of better designs and of bigger ships. There's a pretty solid size gap betwen the 1745 group Rainbow belongs to the Lark group introduced at the start of the 18th-century - Lark is a 1703 ship and is very much an example of the 9-pounder main, 6-pounder upper gun deck type you are describing. Rainbow isn't just bigger than Lark, she's bigger than HMS Antelope, the largest of the 54-gun ships of the line contemporary with Lark, with very similar length but greater beam and much greater depth in hold; you can also see in the plans for her sister ships that the main gunports aren't the waterline-hugging features of smaller two-deckers and demis.

 

A 9-pounder two-decker that regularly had to deal with the main gunports closed or awash and only had a 150-pound broadside even with them open probably wouldn't be that appealing to play. That said, some of the less powerful demis and two-deckers are still interesting - L'Atalante (1741, 32-gun demi-batterie with 10x12 pounders and 22x8 pounders) would have a penetration advantage over Surprise or Renommee, while something like Tigre (1689, 36-gun Dunkirker with 18x6 pounders and 18x4 pounders) would be a polar opposite for Niagara.