Jay Gatsby Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 (edited) A razee will always have a disadvantage compared to the Constitution, because it will have a hull designed for SOL, and you know that the SOLs are heavier than frigates, and then will have a bigger hull and squat, and then a razee will inevitably be less maneuverable than a Constitution. USS Constitution http://www.stephens-kenau.com/userfiles/product/Constitution/Constitution_Stern_View.jpg HMS Indefatigable razee http://www.pellew.com/Exmouth/Exmouth%20007/images/23b.jpg I put Indefatigable as photos just to let you see the type of the hull of a razee is more stocky. Edited March 2, 2015 by Captain Jack Aubrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balck Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Your deductive reasoning or do you have evidence to back this up? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 FYI, Constitution weighs more than most 74-gun ships. Most razee's, on the other hand, were made from 64-gun ships. Shorn of their upper works, they will be considerably lighter than Constitution. The Indy is only a foot wider than Constitution, although her shorter hull and possibly less modern construction are a disadvantage in terms of speed. Being shorter will aid maneuverability, however. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazednConfused Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 why not put HMS Leander in game then? a spar decked heavy frigate like the constitution, with 32 24pdrs and 26 42pdr carronades. Yes indefatigable had problems - ballast issues etc. (sailed like a cockle shell at first) it DID get rectified, becoming a excellent ship - as her record amply proves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gatsby Posted March 2, 2015 Author Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) Your deductive reasoning or do you have evidence to back this up? Is a matter of logic, as a razee has a bigger hull and is also heavier than a constitution, due the hull in excess in the razee, that does not have the constitution if you see the photos, and the constitution is heavier because it has more armor, and I am talking about a razee with the same armor of a constitution. Edited March 2, 2015 by Captain Jack Aubrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elysion Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Isnt this to be expected? A ship built for a purpose is better at that purpose than a ship modified to fill that purpose would be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueMyChin Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Is a matter of logic, as a razee has a bigger hull and is also heavier than a constitution, due the hull in excess in the razee, that does not have the constitution if you see the photos, and the constitution is heavier because it has more armor, and I am talking about a razee with the same armor of a constitution. "a razee has a bigger hull and is also heavier than a constitution"... "the constitution is heavier because it has more armor" A ship would be razeed partly to improve manoeuvrability. Less freebaord would reduce leeway and the decreased weight would also mean less inertia. Depending on what razee you're talking about (they could reduce three-deckers and two-deckers) their performance would vary. As for Constitution, you could argue that she would herself, perform similar to a razeed SOL due to the way she's built (heavy planking, flushed decked) though a little faster due to her length but unless you state which razee you're talking about, you'd be comparing apples to an unknown genus of oranges I'm afraid. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austrum Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) I am assuming your are taking about the HMS Indefatigable so I will comment based on that assumption. If you look at the Constitution and compared it against the 74-Gun Bellona you will find that the Connie is actually the same size or maybe even the larger of the two ships. I was shocked when I noticed this and it was only because I was spectating and watched a Bellona board a Connie. From looking at the two tied up side by side, Connie was several meters longer while the Bellona was wider. This is why the Bellona isn't as fast as the Connie but overall they were very similar in size. Now take a ship smaller than the Bellona, a 64-gun Ardent class, the cut off an entire gun deck and reduced the gun count to 44 total, which is quite a bit less than Connie's 54-Gun total and you have a ship that is probably less massive than the Connie. Also since the Connie was a SoL in frigate form, at least from an armoring standpoint, the Connie is going to weigh a hell of a lot. So that being the case, I would bet the Razze will be slower, but overall more nimble than the Connie. Firepower I am unsure of. The Razee had 26 x 24 lb guns and 12 x 12 lb guns so since GLs seems to allow for a one step up gunning of ships in the game this could technically translate into 26 x 32lb guns and 12 x 18lb guns which might even give it a bit more overall firepower. All and all, I think they will end up being pretty well matched. Edited March 2, 2015 by Austrum 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gatsby Posted March 2, 2015 Author Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) "a razee has a bigger hull and is also heavier than a constitution"... "the constitution is heavier because it has more armor" A ship would be razeed partly to improve manoeuvrability. Less freebaord would reduce leeway and the decreased weight would also mean less inertia. Depending on what razee you're talking about (they could reduce three-deckers and two-deckers) their performance would vary. As for Constitution, you could argue that she would herself, perform similar to a razeed SOL due to the way she's built (heavy planking, flushed decked) though a little faster due to her length but unless you state which razee you're talking about, you'd be comparing apples to an unknown genus of oranges I'm afraid. I'm saying that a razee with the same armature of the constitution would be less maneuverable because it would be heavier, due to the fact that it has a hull largest. Edited March 2, 2015 by Captain Jack Aubrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I'm saying that a razee with the same armature of the constitution would be less maneuverable because it would be heavier, due to the fact that it has a hull largest. But are you still saying that? Because it's incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crankey Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I'm afraid most of your logic is based on error understandibly as there are a lot of innaccurate posts out there both on this forum and others.. The only advantage over other Razee ships would be that normally older ships would be razee'd rather than build one from new. Older ships would sufffer from perhaps smaller calibre cannon, rot, old rigging styles and condition, old hull design etc etc. Constitution was a well designed and modern 74 Razee'd before it was ever launched, it just never set its hull in the water before it was cut down. It was launched as a Frigate but it was in essence a single deck 4th rate. Its footprint is that of a 3rd rate, its rigging that of a large 5th rate, Its armament that of a heavy Razee. Please don't take this the wrong way my US counterparts who are rightly proud of its heritage and battle record, but she was a bastardised ship very well made and crewed, who kicked the living crap out of 2 smaller 5th rate frigates, 2 6th rate (22 gun frigates) and a 14 gun brig. The larger range of her guns and well built SOL strength hull gave her every advantage in a one to one combat with a regular 18 lb'er frigate. She was an excellent ship for the task she had to do. She was the Graf Spee of the time, commerce raid, engage smaller enemy vessels but avoid conflict with larger vessels as she was too precious to be allowed to take too many risks as the US navy did not have the quantity of ships to risk that they enjoy in more modern times.. Sister ships of the USS Constitution were redesigned as more regular sized 5th rates with 18 lb cannon and smaller hull design. oh and link for those who would like to read a little more, There are many many different forums where similar information is available. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Constitution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balck Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Is a matter of logic, as a razee has a bigger hull and is also heavier than a constitution, due the hull in excess in the razee, that does not have the constitution if you see the photos, and the constitution is heavier because it has more armor, and I am talking about a razee with the same armor of a constitution. Except your logic is faulty. Especially concerning the two ships you're comparing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austrum Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I'm afraid most of your logic is based on error understandibly as there are a lot of innaccurate posts out there both on this forum and others.. The only advantage over other Razee ships would be that normally older ships would be razee'd rather than build one from new. Older ships would sufffer from perhaps smaller calibre cannon, rot, old rigging styles and condition, old hull design etc etc. Constitution was a well designed and modern 74 Razee'd before it was ever launched, it just never set its hull in the water before it was cut down. It was launched as a Frigate but it was in essence a single deck 4th rate. Its footprint is that of a 3rd rate, its rigging that of a large 5th rate, Its armament that of a heavy Razee. Please don't take this the wrong way my US counterparts who are rightly proud of its heritage and battle record, but she was a bastardised ship very well made and crewed, who kicked the living crap out of 2 smaller 5th rate frigates, 2 6th rate (22 gun frigates) and a 14 gun brig. The larger range of her guns and well built SOL strength hull gave her every advantage in a one to one combat with a regular 18 lb'er frigate. She was an excellent ship for the task she had to do. She was the Graf Spee of the time, commerce raid, engage smaller enemy vessels but avoid conflict with larger vessels as she was too precious to be allowed to take too many risks as the US navy did not have the quantity of ships to risk that they enjoy in more modern times.. Sister ships of the USS Constitution were redesigned as more regular sized 5th rates with 18 lb cannon and smaller hull design. oh and link for those who would like to read a little more, There are many many different forums where similar information is available. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Constitution Exactly the point I made right above the OPs last post. Constitution is as big or bigger then a Bellona, with almost the same thickness of planking (historically) and that is a 74-Gun Ship. The Indefatigable is a 64-Gun 'Razeed" to be a 44-Gun Frigate size ship. It starts off smaller likely being shorter in overall length although it is likely to be a bit wider since it was originally designed to carry more and heavier guns than the Connie. Overall the Indefatigable should be able to carry a heavier weight of gun for roughly the same overall weight as the Connie so weight isn't going to be the deciding factor. Connie will almost undoubtedly be faster with better race qualities but the Indefatigable may end up more maneuverable and/or carry a bit heavier guns. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 The Indefatigable is not going to be able to mount bigger guns. At least not historically. 64 gunners were armed with 24/18/12 lbs. Sometimes even 24/12/9lb.They are not considered for big fleet actions for good reasons. They were either old, outdated or simply too weak for the line of battle. The Indefatigable's main battery will consist of 24 pounders just as the Consti's. Over all the razee's are barely an even match with the Constitution. But those were the closest you could imagine to put a fight against the American. The 24 pounders are the equalizer. They will be able to penetrate the sindes of the Superfrigate quite reliably. In terms of speeds and maneuverability there is enough good content here in this thread wich sounds resonable for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Connor Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 64s like Indefatigable carried 18 pdrs on the upper deck. When cut down to a frigate the british took too much topweight off her, she was reduced by one full deck along her entire length (including cutting out the center of the upperdeck to give a separate quarterdeck and forecastle), combined with the replacement of the 18 pdrs with lighter 42lb carronades and 12 pdrs (less of them too) plus the complete removal of quarterdeck and forecastle guns and she ended up with a very low center of gravity, negatively affecting sailing qualities. Odd as it may sound to hear, she would have sailed better keeping the heavier 18 pdrs on the weatherdeck, and there's certainly room for them. Later British razees were not cut down so severely, they kept the full length and fully armed upper deck. These later razees were cut down from 74s, so they would actually be more powerful than Constitution, 58 guns with 32 pdrs on the maindeck and 42lb carronades on the upper, but then again they aren't frigates even in razeed form, and the British weren't exactly cutting down their best 74s so they tended to be older ships and not terribly fast. Constitution is rather the opposite to Indefatigable, due to a shortage of 12 pdrs while fitting out she was the only member of the United States class to carry 18pdrs on the weatherdeck, with the overall weight of her hull this made her somewhat crank and she was considered the worst sailor of the class until the 18 pdrs were replaced with 32lb carronades prior to the War of 1812. Congress and Constellation were similarly crank when they were fitted with 24 pdrs on the maindeck, this was one of the reasons they were refitted with 18 pdrs (the other being they were a little narrow for the comfortable operation of this caliber). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austrum Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 The Indefatigable is not going to be able to mount bigger guns. At least not historically. 64 gunners were armed with 24/18/12 lbs. Sometimes even 24/12/9lb.They are not considered for big fleet actions for good reasons. They were either old, outdated or simply too weak for the line of battle. The Indefatigable's main battery will consist of 24 pounders just as the Consti's. Over all the razee's are barely an even match with the Constitution. But those were the closest you could imagine to put a fight against the American. The 24 pounders are the equalizer. They will be able to penetrate the sindes of the Superfrigate quite reliably. In terms of speeds and maneuverability there is enough good content here in this thread wich sounds resonable for me. Well the 32lb guns were just speculation. Kind of figured the fact that it losing all that weight up top would allow for it to be up-gunned rather significantly. I mean correct me if I a wrong but since the hull was designed as a two decker to maintain stability and have it rest correctly in the water you still have to have extra weight somewhere, be it ballast or perhaps heavier guns Either way, the fact that the Indefatigable being barely an even match for a Connie is a good thing because it offers a alternative style of ship that has somewhat similar capabilities to the Constitution and this is a good thing. To be honest, I was not a fan of the Connie mostly because it has a very severe, utilitarian look and what has always intrigued me about the Age of Sail is the beauty of many of the ships utilized. Basically Connie is all function over form which is what I would want if I was a real naval captain in 1812, but for gaming purposes, I prefer form over function. Basically I would rather sail a slightly inferior ship that I enjoy looking at while playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 We have a feeling that USS constitution needs an armor buff. 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austrum Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 We have a feeling that USS constitution needs an armor buff. Probably. She did seem a bit too fragile to me when I was playing her before I got the Bellona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now