Windward and Leeward in Age of sail naval warfare tactics

[Hethwill]

Why to be windward of the enemy is decisively better ?

What make it so decisive ?

What impact does it have on the different aspects like gunnery, wind management, space and distance ?

And, the opposite.

What makes being leeward a decisive worst option ?

What impact does it have on gunnery, if any ?

What would be the critical wind positions to make a difference ?

Thanks a ton.

[Shrez]

Is this a question? or  a discussion?

[Hethwill]

A lot of questions. Really want to know, as much in depth as possible.

 

[DFIL3]

Hello guys, I would like to add my small contribution to the debate.

Concerning the gunnery: being upwind means that you have to aim lower, and being downwind means that you have to aim higher than usual. This seems quite evident.

Concerning the rest:

a)The positive thing about windward position is that you have more maneuverability and   thus more time to turn than the opponent.

However sometimes I do  fire from leeward side because in this position it takes a square-rigged ship  much less time to bear down ( = to go downwind)  from the adversary and to gain speed fast and to sail away for another turn.

b) So I would say that having the weather wind is better when the distance between you and the adversary is big because you can maneuver easier, even outmaneuver him.

But when you are  giving him a  full broadside at a very small distance,  having the leeward side gives you more chances to turn away faster, showing only your stern to the opponent's return broadside, and to sail way faster and to outmaneuver him afterwards

On the contrary: if you sail upwind   just after your broadside, then your speed  will be  falling very fast and you have more chances to get hit by the opponent in return.

What do you think about it?

Edited March 25, 2019 by DFIL3

[Vernon Merrill]

I think an often overlooked reason is the fear of fire...  Given that most "actual" battles in age of sail were fought at distances relatively closer than NA battles, and that the cannons emitted far more burning wad and debris than we have represented in game, one can easily see where a captain having the advantage of better vision once the battle is joined would be important.  Never mind having less fear of canvas sails and tar and slush (lard)-covered rigging catching on fire. 

I often think of how awesome it would be to try these battles at different wind conditions.  

Near dead-calms slog-fests with both sides firing blindly into smoke...  barely able to maneuver.  Making each decision super- important.

[Surcouf]

Small contribution. I'm sorry in advance for the translation from French to English. I hope it's still understandable!

When windward of the enemy it is easier to come alongside him when the right moment presents itself.
If the wind is fresh gale, the waterline is less exposed to the balls, and in the gundeck you are not bothered by the smoke. But if the fight is unfavourable, it is not easy to break up. We're also more exposed on the quarter deck and the forecastel because of the heel. And if we to take of the masts, the sails hide the whole the gundeck when to the mats fall.
It is also more difficult to reload the guns because once fired it falls back into the ports. If the wind is too strong, it is sometimes not possible to use the first gundeck.
If the ship is a to be brought by the lee, we quickly fall under the enemy who can easily a racking fire.

When you leeward, it's easier to escape the fight. But we're a lot bothered by the smoke from the shots that hides the enemy from you. There is a greater risk of burning the boat because of the burning debris coming back on board.
The waterline is more exposed to balls. And if you are in a very close fight and by still gale and on the wind, it is difficult to point the guns to fire into the hull.

[Snoopy]

In RL you would have quite a bit more leeway and much worse close hauled performance than in the game, in essence making it very hard for the leeward ship to crawl upwind and force an engagement.

This gives the upwind/windward/weather gauge ship(s) control over if and when the engagement happens and it also enables the upwind ship to maneuver into a favorable position. In theory stern camping or forcing at least one rake due to potential energy/speed advantage of the upwind ship like in the game can work, though there aren't that many documented cases of this really happening (HMS Java vs. USS Constitution being an example [Java still lost this])

Leeward has the advantage of higher gun elevation due to heel - for all the good that does, however, I think the main point is that (providing your rigging is still in good shape) faster ships can disengage at will.
Imagine the typical scenario of British against French line engagements where the French fleets often picked the downwind position (but not always! - sometimes days of maneuvering to grab the weather gauge preceded battles). If the upwind ships want to disengage and run away they would need to go through the leeward line which would potentially be devastating if the engagement was going so badly that you needed running in the first place. You are committed to fight to the end in the upwind position.

[DFIL3]

7 minutes ago, Surcouf said:

Small contribution. I'm sorry in advance for the translation from French to English. I hope it's still understandable!

When windward of the enemy it is easier to come alongside him when the right moment presents itself.
If the wind is fresh gale, the waterline is less exposed to the balls, and in the gundeck you are not bothered by the smoke. But if the fight is unfavourable, it is not easy to break up. We're also more exposed on the quarter deck and the forecastel because of the heel. And if we to take of the masts, the sails hide the whole the gundeck when to the mats fall.
It is also more difficult to reload the guns because once fired it falls back into the ports. If the wind is too strong, it is sometimes not possible to use the first gundeck.
If the ship is a to be brought by the lee, we quickly fall under the enemy who can easily a racking fire.

When you leeward, it's easier to escape the fight. But we're a lot bothered by the smoke from the shots that hides the enemy from you. There is a greater risk of burning the boat because of the burning debris coming back on board.
The waterline is more exposed to balls. And if you are in a very close fight and by still gale and on the wind, it is difficult to point the guns to fire into the hull.

Yes, thank you Surcouf!

I  agree that when you are leeward, you have the smoke flying to you, even in Naval Action, and  it closes the vision, it blinds you and it makes things  better for the enemy on the windward side  who can see you quite  better  because he doesn't have the smoke but you do.

But if   you fire at very close range, the smoke doesn't matter:)

[Tom Farseer]

1 hour ago, Hethwill said:

Why to be windward of the enemy is decisively better ?

What make it so decisive ?

What impact does it have on the different aspects like gunnery, wind management, space and distance ?

And, the opposite.

What makes being leeward a decisive worst option ?

What impact does it have on gunnery, if any ?

What would be the critical wind positions to make a difference ?

Thanks a ton.

• Having the weathergauge (=being windward of enemy) generally gives you control of the combat distance. Unless the enemy sails a Schooner or overall more weatherly ship they can only choose to maintain the same distance or lengthen it. Only you can choose to shorten the distance.
• If a leeward enemy wants to effectively use both broadsides they have to tack (which often takes more time than wearing through) or loose ground. The windward party can instead wear through a few times and generally has more room to maneuver.
• Being windward also makes you less vulnerable to leaks below the waterline because of heeling, while in turn giving you more opportunites to shoot leaks into leeward enemies.

[Miaowi]

Two square-rigged ships, one to weather (windward) of the other, the windward ship can turn and run downwind toward the leeward ship. The leeward ship cannot easily (if at all) head for the windward ship.

The windward ship can therefore dictate the range and speed of the engagement. 

[Hethwill]

Why did Rodney attack from leeward in Cape Saint Vincent then ?

Effects on gunnery ? Smoke ? 

Wind shadow has little to no effect on a squadron in line engaging the enemy so the control of speed and distance.... maybe not be true.

This is not a 1v1 scenario.

 

[Surcouf]

Did he have any choice? (position, wind, coast, marine current...)
Sometimes you suffer without a choice. But that doesn't mean we make less.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

According to ye olde Wikipedia, Rodney was in command of a superior force and was pursuing Lángara.  Rodney's fleet overtook Lángara and engaged from a leeward position to deny Lángara the opportunity to duck into a friendly port and therefore escape .  That leeward position also denied Lángara's larger vessels from utilizing their gundeck due to heel and the seas at the time - I'm not sure if that was also a consideration or just a happy accident as a result of denying Lángara the ability to shelter under shore guns.

[DeRuyter]

3 hours ago, Hethwill said:

Why did Rodney attack from leeward in Cape Saint Vincent then ?

Effects on gunnery ? Smoke ? 

Wind shadow has little to no effect on a squadron in line engaging the enemy so the control of speed and distance.... maybe not be true.

This is not a 1v1 scenario.

 

I think @Snoopy posted the advantage/disadvantage in fleet combat nicely. In general the British preferred to be the aggressors and control the engagement, as Nelson later said that a captain cannot go wrong by placing his ship alongside the enemy (paraphrase). Since the French preferred to disable the enemy and fire high the leeward position was fine for their tactic, of course it also allowed disabled ships to drop out of the formation, or for the formation to retreat. As @Henry d'Esterre Darby noted there were exceptions depending on the fleet positions or strategic situation. 

[Surcouf]

It's all about strategy, it's a balance between the pros and cons depending on the weather and the location of the battle, but also the surprise of being discovered and therefore suffering the choice of the attacker. So there is strategy but not only this.

And at the sea, nothing is easy, especially with a squadron

[Xemko]

Quote

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF FLEETS TO WINDWARD AND TO LEEWARD.

http://archive.hnsa.org/doc/steel/part11.htm#pg381

I find this to be an interesting read on the topic.

 

Probably already been posted in the forum.

[Norfolk nChance]

@Hethwill

 

Nice OP and thought it seemed somewhat loaded Sir. lol

 

Quotes already given answer the OP. An additional point is if close in the windward ship takes the wind from the Leeward. Takes the wind out of their sails. Look up modern race sailing tactics here.

I assume your real question follows...

“Why did Rodney attack from leeward in Cape Saint Vincent then?”

 

I assume you mean the Battle off Cape St. Vincent 16^th January 1780... ‘The Moonlight Battle’

https://morethannelson.com/moonlight-battle-16-january-1780/

https://www.britishbattles.com/war-of-the-revolution-1775-to-1783/battle-of-cape-st-vincent-1780/

 

The Royal Navy was introducing the system of sheathing the bottoms of ships with copper, thereby preventing fouling and the consequent loss of speed.  All of Rodney’s ships were ‘copper-bottomed’.

The Spanish ships were much slower.

Rodney’s orders to his Captain’s were to OVERTAKE the Spanish ships on the LEEWARD side, thereby interposing between them and the safe port of Cadiz.

This forcing the much slower and weaker crewed Spanish fleet no choice but to engage.

 

Good question

 

Norfolk