Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Sella

Venetian/Italian Ship Collection (With Plans)

Recommended Posts

Sail plans for various ship types. Source: Atlas of Sailing by Gian Maria Maffioletti 1785. Thank you Fluffy Fishy!

 

LVUk78b.jpg

DqqHmiH.jpg

RfNDh4C.jpg

 

Sorry for the logo in the way but it was the only place that had the pictures in decent resolution. 

 

yV2N4Hg.jpg

5H9ERyG.jpg

H0gmPYJ.jpg

adIlJKn.jpgwDl9pLg.jpg

pWtt2VF.jpgjIa193S.jpg

WZ9tVvP.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Polacca

Generic 18th century Venetian Polacca, able to be used as a half galley.

hk3j2ot.jpg

Edited by Fluffy Fishy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genoese Pinque 1800
(Plan obtained from a reprint of plates selected from Souvenirs de Marine, compiled by the French Admiral François-Edmond Pâris)

 

AC28ABD2-DB8F-40FF-888B-A2C4E75259D4_zps

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pallade and Venere

dyL4ayX.jpg

1ae19304b04fcd7d7377f83714ac9fb8.png

35d6daee46cff0d00929e78ff5ba914b.png

Information thanks to Sella22, Thank you friend :)

 

 

That´s...interesting.

 

Here´s the plan of the swedish af Trolle and Sprengtporten, both built in the 1760s:

 

JSRf7tb.jpg

 

The only difference I can see is that they replaced the the beakhead bulkhead with a round bow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That´s...interesting.

 

Here´s the plan of the swedish af Trolle and Sprengtporten, both built in the 1760s:

JSRf7tb.jpg

The only difference I can see is that they replaced the the beakhead bulkhead with a round bow.

 

Oh wow.. They are almost identical. How could this be? Fluffy you better provide us with a decent explanation :P

 

 

 

Genoese Pinque 1800

(Plan obtained from a reprint of plates selected from Souvenirs de Marine, compiled by the French Admiral François-Edmond Pâris)

AC28ABD2-DB8F-40FF-888B-A2C4E75259D4_zps

 

 

Here is a drawing of a genovese pinco:

 

Pinco%20genovese%20-2.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not surprising that ships start to look more similar as we get to modern times, more mathematic lines start to really take over from the more traditional family secret style of building. You could probably find tons of examples of ships that look very identical but these days there's not much difference beyond the 8 or so basic hUll designs. Then again it could be to do with journeyman shipwrights travelling around Europe. I am fairly sure this period was fairly liberal to where venetian ship builders could travel and learn their skills, I will have to look for more information on the two sister ships later :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the have differences in dimensions? Could we have the dimensions of the "swedish version" Malachi? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure :)

 

length p/p:                    121 (swedish fod)

 

breadth moulded           32'

 

depth in hold                 15' 11''

 

length to breadth ratio:  3.78125

 

 

Initially designed for 24 swedish 8-pounders, but carried 24 12-pounders.

 

Don´t know the conversion rate form swedish fod to piedi or how the venetians measured the length of a ship, though. There a couple of ways to define the perpendiculars (intersection of LwL with stem/stern post rabbet  , intersection of upper gun deck with stem/stern post rabbet, lisse d’hourdy with the stern post rabbet etc.) and the breadth (breadth inside or outside of planks).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So from the pictures above we have:

 

1 piedi= 34.773 cm

 

 

Lenght: 122 piedi or 42.42306 meters

 

Lenght of keel: 105 piedi or 36.51165 meters

 

Moulded Beam : 32 piedi or 11.12736 meters

 

Draft: 14,25 or ~ 4.96 meters

 

Height keel to upper deck: 23,75 piedi or 8.2585875 meters

 

Ratio: 3.8125

(pretty close if you ask me)

 

 

I would have converted the sweedish fot as well but i am not sure if wikipedia is telling the truth: fot – Foot, 1/2 aln. Before 1863, the Stockholm fot was the commonly accepted unit, at 29.69 cm.

Edited by Sella22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29.69 cm = 1 swedish fod is correct.

 

121 swedish fod are 117' 10'', the length in piedi converted to feet is 139' 2''. But I very much doubt they built a vessel carrying 24 8-pounders with the dimensions of a large 12-pounder frigate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish i could tell you more. Maybe she was carryin a heavier armament before caprtured and the French decided to change it? 

 

In Venetian service she carried 24x 20 pdr. But the venetian pound is different. I can't really compare them with British or French guns because i don't know their differences because i am a dummy. (I asked about it here: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/13437-questions-for-the-historians/?p=246224but i am a dummy and tables work better for me :P )

 

b76fc81eb98b3bf70d06f230e9d1a144.png

e38a86907fe2cf0ef903ff1099f20f3f.png

 

Maybe Fluffy can tell us more if his book mentions something.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 But I very much doubt they built a vessel carrying 24 8-pounders with the dimensions of a large 12-pounder frigate.

 

 

Rough translation from the book vascelli e fregate della serenissima:

 

One of the characteristics that always characterised the Venetian navy  was the logistics and supply capacity of the fleet employed at sea. Even in 1784, when the campaign against Tunis started, there were two auxlliary ships  in order to ensure that the fleet was on full operational capacity by means of rapid and continuous supplies.

 

 
 Τhese two ships were built with the "ordinata doppia" technique and, therefore, were classified in the arsenal as of  "nuova costruzione-new construction ". (They were equipped with a battery with twelve doors but, not having the upper battery)***, the overall weight of their broadside was slightly lower than that of the normal light frigates as they carried only twenty-four cannons twenty pounds(venetian measurement). They were constructed, in addition, with a proportionally larger width than the other light frigates, for which they could take on a greater quantity of supplies and parts. Their function was of "support ships" for the fleet, therefore they had a very different size and performance, (the conceptual philosophy that had produced a hundred years before the third rank "transport vessels hybrid" of the class of  Monton d'Oro) ***.

 

 
 
 
 
 
Note  ***:
 

 
*dont really know what it means here, google translate f*cked me
 
original text starts two paragraphs from the end:
0oPwHcG.jpg
XRKZf3L.png
 

 
 
 
These frigates had not the higher battery so that their weight of broadside was slightly lower than that of the normal light frigates. They also had a greater width, for which they could sling a considerable quantity of supplies and parts compared. Their function was therefore to "support vessels" for the fleet.

 

 

Nam1HkN.jpg

 
I hope i answered your doubts  :D
 
 
Thank you Fluffy Fishy for the help!
Edited by Sella22
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Size comparison between a Venetian first rate and the British first rate HMS Victory, I am unsure quite which first rate it is, I have strong a feeling its the San Lorenzo Zustinian, but sella will no doubt do his magic and tell us :)

H9sbwrL.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes me wonder what Venice's territorial coverage was, who their normal opponents were, and what other factors influenced their shipbuilding to the degree that their first rates would be so small. Also is that a first rate comparison in similar years or were they build decades apart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging by the square tuck stern and style of the head/quarter galleries....late 17th century?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes me wonder what Venice's territorial coverage was, who their normal opponents were, and what other factors influenced their shipbuilding to the degree that their first rates would be so small. Also is that a first rate comparison in similar years or were they build decades apart?

 

Its fairly clear who Venice's opponents were, the last major conflicts of the Venetian Republic were; The Fourth Ottoman-Veneto war (1570-73), The Fifth Ottoman-Veneto war 1645-69), the Sixth Ottoman-Veneto war (1684-99) and the Seventh Ottoman-Veneto war (1714-18) I personally don't really count the Napoleonic Invasion as a major conflict, it was too short. During this period Venice was propped up mostly by Austria and Spain, but also by the Papal states. The Venetian navy had shrunk quite a staggering amount through the fifth and sixth Veneto-Ottoman wars, Did I say Veneto-Ottoman wars enough :D?

If you want an interesting comparison you can compare the Venetian Navy to the Dutch navy, both have a rating system geared towards smaller ships, both due to the shallow nature of their home ports. The main restriction of Venetian ships was the depth of the Arsenal watergate during the period, although they did sometimes contract shipbuilding out to larger shipyards situated on the Adriatic side of lido or other towns in Venetian territory. I have posted a map earlier on in the thread showing a map of the Arsenal.

 

So really what the purpose of the Venetian navy was at this point was mainly a deterrent, there was still a sense of invincibility given to them by the lagoon, but as Napoleon showed, once guns could fire the mile and a half over the lagoon the protection had lost its meaning. I can go into more detail if you like but I hope this helps :)

 

Judging by the style of the head and quarter galleries....late 17th century?

 

The Zustinian Class was used from 1690 to 1746, The design was modified slightly 3 times over the period of use but one of the plans is posted in the previous page of this thread if you want to look in more detail :)

Edited by Fluffy Fishy
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured the Ottomans had something to do with it. I just didn't know about the layout of the Arsenal. Thanks for the info Fishy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone wants some more specialist info or a chat I will gladly talk in a PM, so the conversation doesn't get too off topic here. If it is something that can be posted here with relevance I will possibly throw it up here too but I am more than willing to talk to people about almost anything Venice, so feel free to ask :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone wants some more specialist info or a chat I will gladly talk in a PM, so the conversation doesn't get too off topic here. If it is something that can be posted here with relevance I will possibly throw it up here too but I am more than willing to talk to people about almost anything Venice, so feel free to ask :)

 

You could always do like I'm doing and post in History subforum. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

about Fama (post #2): How is she a frigate? She's basically a 64-gun 3rd rate SoL.

Sorry to drag up a post from the past but the venetians tended to use smaller, lighter ships, they didn't really take the SoL concept that other nations used, their naval doctrine coming from centuries of galley supremacy tended to blend much better with the more frigate style tactics of the golden age of sail. If you look at their hull shapes they do tend to resemble super large frigates rather than ships of the line, their rating system also represents a lower Tier system much like the Dutch, where the largest ships, the primo rango rating is between about 60-84 but it's rare for, especially in this period for venice to construct ships above 70 guns, let alone 84.

Venice did make some super huge ships in the past, the grande galleone for example was a 140 gun car rack, built in the mid 1500s but their dockyards and naval success had always relied on a backbone smaller ships, this period is no different. I would rate them more like a super heavy frigate than a ship of the line :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Venetian Frame Design

I have been trying to do a little mini project by myself recently about the construction methods and different designs used in Venetian framing, the project is mostly centred around a couple of charts in Vascelli e Fregate della Serenissima by Guido Ercole but I am hindered by my inability to speak italian and pressues on time, I will still try to finish off my mini project but I sadly cannot see it happening in the near future. Meanwhile I thought I would share a little bit of the information and the charts I have so far. I do hope to translate more of the text over time :)

1666-1775

The design was modified over time with successive ship classes, the design was strengthened during the construction process of the Aurora in 1696 and there were further modifications during the designs of Lorenzo Zustinian, Leon Trionfante, San carlo Borromeo which changed how the overall thickness and how the framing was allowed to flex and strain with the rise and fall of the waves but for the most part this distinctive design was kept to for the century period. The roots of this design comes much more from the influence of galley building, it created a fast ship that would flex and heel fairly frequently, it also had the benefit of having uniform parts that could quickly be made to replace damaged or worn parts. The main drawback to this is due to the live nature of the ships they had to spend more time in maintenance and had to be more scrutinised by the tests undertaken by the various officials responsible for how seaworthy the Venetian Fleet might be at any time.


FHxqW4M.jpg

Orj06vK.jpg

 

1775-1797
The design became more like standard framing practise, the lower funds available to the Venetian state meant that high maintenance ships were too costly, while the designs still favoured fast nimble ships, which is where you see the Venetian take on what is commonly known as super frigates develop, the latest Fregete Grossa designs, the Fama and the "1780" would encompass this less unusual framing method but a variety of timbers were used in the framing process to give it an almost composite bow effect where the ship could still flex and bend to create high speed but had a less maintenance heavy lifespan.

OefWLLo.jpg

lkMKH4g.jpg

I will keep trying to find the time to give this the proper research and translation it needs, when I can do it I will likely repost it to the history forum with more details. but I thought it would be a nice point of reference here for now :)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

La Gabriella

17th century Galleass, although I admit out of the range of the game the ship is stunning, one that Guido Ercole points out having had a design way ahead of its time, the model is one that not only sits in pride of place at the Venetian Naval History Museum but also one that Guido Ercole keeps in his personal collection. The ship itself fought in various skirmishes as part of the 5th Venetian Ottoman war, including supporting the siege of Candia but most notably the battle of the Dardanelles in 1656 where she gained a distinction of service. The thing that draws me to post the ship here is the out of time hull and its affect it has on the design of later ships coming from Venice. Sadly La Gabriella predates the Arsenal records I have so I am unsure on the exact date she was constructed but its some time between 1630 and 1645 as she was available for duty at the start of the war. She marks a series of Galleass that are remembered with abject fear within the Ottoman Fleet, not quite as famous as those at Lepanto but still well known as a fierce ship.

I take particular interest in the hull shape, most notably the bow, even as a shallow drafted ship it has some concepts in the design that as far as I am aware don't appear again until the mid 18th century, the slightly later designs of Galleass were different, mostly due to the way Venetian shipbuilding worked and how lines were still kept as a closely guarded family secret and passed down from master to apprentice in ways that had started to decline elsewhere in Europe by this point as the Naval arms race escalated.

My personal Opinion is also that the ship is stunning, but  then I do have a soft spot for Galleys. :)

Vi0vFDY.jpg

g3TqLdg.jpg

e6ZGHzr.jpg

fZ5GXpx.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...