Now that would have been a sight to behold!Originally Posted by Nightmoss
Now that would have been a sight to behold!
Glad to provide!
It's almost two centuries too early for our time frame, but I still find it interesting.
I think the recoil and the splintering are very informative for folks like us - gives us a bit of feel for what the seamen of the time experienced.
“You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation.” ― Plato
In addition to the stats comparisons has anyone commented on the scale accuracy of the USS Constitution? Specifically, is the ship really in scale to any of the Hebe class SGN 105 ships? Putting them side by side, the Constitution absolutely dwarfs any of them. The 'footprint' of this ship looks more like a SOL than a frigate on the SoG bases.
Awww man! Now I really want this ship!!!
The scale is fairly accurate. USS Constitution does dwarf a Hébé class frigate. The stats on Constitution's size make her considerably larger than the Hébé class frigate. I have the 1/1200 GHQ models of Shannon, which is basically the same as Hébé class, and Constitution and the same difference in size is evident.
Would have really loved to have been there for her Boston sail. Stowaway, perhaps?
I haven't looked at it closely, but based on a cursory examination of wiki (and acknowledging all its weaknesses, as well as the variation in how these ships were measured) it seems in the general ballpark of accuracy at least...
HMS Terpsichore (32) - 682 tons, 126' ("overall") x 35'
HMS Leda (38) - 1071 tons, 150' ("gundeck") x 40'
HMS Bellerophon (74) - 1612 tons, 168' ("gundeck") x 46'
USS Constitution (44) - 2200 tons, 207' ("head to taffrail") x 43'
Bigger than Bellerophon 74, what were the two ships shot weights like, compared?
The American 44s, although longer than the 74s, were designed as frigates. They were not designed to have multiple gun decks packed with guns. The 74 still threw a much heavier broadside. The 44s were designed to be fast, able to out run SOLs but not out gun them, while being better armed and tougher than most other frigates of the day.
Did the US build any SoL's?
Thanks for the replies (Bobby, Fred, etc.). What prompted my question was the discussion somewhere on the forums about using a Hebe class frigate as a standin for either HMS Java or HMS Guerriere? I've not set up a solo game with either the Constitution or Victory, but when I pulled out HMS Sybille and set it beside the USS Constitution I was really surprised at the size differential. None of the 'historical' paintings I've seen shows the Constitution as being drastically larger than the Java or Guerriere, but the difference in the SoG models is readily apparent.
Yes, we did, but they'll never show up in Sails of Glory as they materialized after the cut off date that Ares is using to define their gaming time frame.
Some photos and lithos here on a kitbash I did for the USS Pennsylvania.
http://sailsofglory.org/showthread.p...light=uss+ohio
There were American 74s being built during the War of 1812. USS Independence was completed during the war but was blockaded in port. She did see service in the Second Barbary War in 1815. USS Washington was also being built.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Independence_(1814)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Washington_(1814)
The U. S. built other SOLs after the War of 1812 like Jim shows.
Actually three that hit water before End of Game: America (gifted to the French after AWI to replace a brand-new French 74 lost running aground in one of our harbors, soon found a White Elephant), and the two super-74s Independence and Washington (both launched 1814, but not fully fitted out or deployed in combat before Cutoff--in this game, since we frequently don't have access to "completion" or "fit-out" dates we usually go by date launched).
Constitution's BSW once upgraded to her peak in August 1812, which I assume to be the 1812 stat-set, comes surprisingly close to the throw weight of a 74--it's like 600-some-odd pounds as opposed to 781 for a British "standard load", and more than a typical 64.
If memory serves I was the one who spoke up about the Hebe as Guerriere and Java--HMS Java was built as a French Pallas-class if memory serves, which was an evolution of the basic Hebe design, and Guerriere was very close dimensionally--I have reservations about her as a "sculpt stretch" still, but I've moved it into the "recommend proceeding with caution, but might work" column of the Reprint Candidates doc I maintain for Ares while I try to find draughts of her to compare to her contemporaries. (So far, no joy anywhere. :( )
So nothing like the Victory or Orient then?
Just USS Pennsylvania, 140 guns, was ever built.
This list sums it up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ed_States_Navy
Steve, Independence and Washington probably could have gone toe-to-toe with Victory or Orient--I wouldn't have wanted to be on *either* side of such a fight because it probably would have been Mutual Assured Destruction.
Comparison Table--note, Independence armament data is sketchy, the early USN was nowhere near as assiduous about doccumenting things as the Royal Navy; while nominally rated a 74, she carried a total of ninety guns, all 32# of various types; Victory data is her 1783 heaviest documented load
Ship Length Beam Lower GD Middle GD Upper GD Quarterdeck Forecastle BSW # 1814 US Independence 190' 10" GD 54' 7" ?x32# n/a ?x32# Columbiad 16x32#crde 8x32#crde 1440 1765 UK Victory 184' 51' 7.5" 30x42# 28x24# 30x12# 10x12#
2x24#crde (roundhouse)
6x18#crde (roundhouse)2x32#crde
2x12#1328
The blank row is for an Ocean--once I recheck my notes for the heaviest Potentially In Game of the class, I'll add that data later.
Yes DB, I'm sure you're the one who answered my original query. So, do you still think I can put HMS Sybille against the USS Constitution as a Java vs. Constitution or Guerriere vs. Constitution substitute, statistically speaking?
As Java, I'd have no hesitation whatsoever--as Guerriere, my reservations are "visual" rather than "statistical", but given French practices of the time I'm probably just being overconservative. Purely for playing it out, you'd be fine.
Given the low numbers used to represent firepower, allowing very little variance for minor differences, HMS Sybille can pretty much be used as a stand in for most 18 pounder frigates with 32 pound carronades of the period.
I was giving that a bit of thought also. Presumably from the waterline the difference is not as clear, and of course the apparent sizes would also vary immensely depending on relative positioning.
I wonder if you FELT like your ship was way bigger when you were on the quarterdeck of Constitution, or it was impossible to sense that...?
"Welcome aboard HMS _Compensating For Something_...."
Has it ever been documented if painters embellished or positioned ships in their paintings as ways of making statements - similar to how some world maps have been drawn?
“You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation.” ― Plato
Again, thanks all for the feedback. Artistic license must be part of the equation as I've found few paintings or images of the Constitution appearing overly large against these two opponents. Perhaps scale in paintings is not the same as in miniatures?
USS Constitution vs. HMS Java (My current PC wallpaper)
USS Constitution vs. HMS Guerriere (I think the artist got the wrong British ensign on this one?)
Based on what I've seen I think it's quite likely.
Oi! Its not us Limey's that build everything bigger.
HA! HA!, Some are just born that way! :)Oi! Its not us Limey's that build everything bigger.
It is quite normal for a ship designed for speed to be longer than a ship designed for "hitting." Consider, for example, the British or Japanese WWI era battlecruisers (Repulse and Kongo). Despite carrying 14" guns and quite a bit less armor, they were significantly longer than either the Japanese Nagato, American Standard, or British Queen Elizabeth type battleships.\
As paintings are all we have to go off of, but also generally do not show relative scale that well (and as American painters originally might not have been interested in showing or may even have been unaware that the Constitution had a significant size advantage on the British 38s), I would wager a lot of people do not realize how big (for a frigate) the Constitution really was.
I think we all can agree that in those early years the star-spangled upstarts did have something to prove on the world stage, though.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Stanfield.jpg -- look closely at _Victory_'s hull [the ship just right of center]; there is a broken mast-and-spar section covering part of the hull; the artist put that there to indicate the part of _Victory_ where Nelson died....
That's an interesting observation, Chris - not exactly embellishment but definitely purposeful painting to convey meaning. I think it highlights the importance of reading art properly.
“You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation.” ― Plato
[nod] There's a lot more "symbolism" in old artwork than most people realize; but since it's not "our" symbolism, it can be hard to recognize.
Folks may want to check their HMS Victory maneuver decks as someone on BoardGame Geek is reporting an error on the No. 2 and No. 8 cards. Full sails is showing the shortest movement distance while backing sails is showing the longest distance. Too late to check mine but I'll see what's up tomorrow.
Yup that is the case. Real attention to detail by whoever spotted it...
Yes. Mine too.
I'd guess all have the same misprint.
Agreed. Looks to be a complete misprint run on the Victory decks.
Good news comrades.
The deck should be playable at all.
Ordered the HMS Victory today morning. (Couldn't resist with the anouncement of Santa Ana)
Do any other first rates use the "I" deck, or is that unique to Victory?
So far it's unique, as is L for Constitution.
So, what are J and K gonna be?
You tell us, inside man!
I've been wondering this for a while. When they first showed pics of the bases that revealed the deck ID's it sure made me think the 2 different variants of each ship would have their own deck [I/J victory and K/L constitution]. That didn't happen, leaving me scratching my head...
I woulda made 'em I and J, myself... Ares has a strange history of leaving holes for things, like WGF101-104 being left vacant for the Series 1 reprint. (Me, I'da set aside the first 1xx and 2xx blocks for Series1-4 complete and 301 for a hypothetical balloon reprint.)
On that note: the wikipedia pages for the Bucentaure (French 80) vs the Constitution are staggering to look at. The Bucentaure displaced 1600+ tones whereas the Constitution displaced over 2000!Beware of Wiki (unless its Wikileaks then its all true). Lots of good stuff there, but also lots of stuff that, being polite, is not quite as well researched or balanced as it could be. I'm generally happy using it as a jumping off point to more reliable sources if its something I'm particularly interested in. But some pages have turned into real battlegrounds of opinion (often throwing fact to the winds as contributors fight endlessly through revision and counter revision), and the "talk" pages of many make for extremely entertaining reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Constitution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French...entaure_(1803)
Connie was just a bigger ship unless someone got something wrong... I'm truly curious if those stats for Connie are accurate, because it just looks wrong to me
The other thing is, whose ton is it: Short Imperial, Long Imperial, French Royal, Metric? It's similar to other dimensions when people only say X Feet while a Spanish codo, Spanish Burgos foot, French pied du roi and British Imperial foot will all give dramatically different length while at the same number.
This is part of why when I'm doing research for Ares, I usually just convert everything to metrics...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks