That is the only problem I now have Vol. Finding what stats a schooner of 28 guns should have on her ship log card. Larger than a Sloop but smaller than a Frigate, and of course much more frail in structure even than the sloop.
Rob.
American Schooner stats.
That is the only problem I now have Vol. Finding what stats a schooner of 28 guns should have on her ship log card. Larger than a Sloop but smaller than a Frigate, and of course much more frail in structure even than the sloop.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
And that in a nutshell is the problem DB. Any ideas? because I am stumped.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Rob, do you have a specific ship you're trying to mimic with your schooner? I'd look to Sixth Rates as an approximation, the French built a lot of two-masted brig-corvettes in that general rating IIRC but those were all square rigs.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
I am doing three schooners for my American Med squadron DB.
Enterprise when she had the 12 x 12 pdr guns on one side of the ship log and with the 1811 set of 2 x 9 pdr and 14 x 18 pdr guns with 80 crew. I also noticed that her tonnage went up to 165 from 135 at that time.
Also Vixen with 111 crew and Nautilus with her 103 crew.
If you can help I would be grateful.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Ooh, that's gonna be sticky... don't forget that Enterprise was rerigged as a brig sometime before the War of 1812. Size is smaller than a Swan, not sure if construction materials will make up the difference. Twelve 12's is about half the broadside of an Amazon, maybe start the Gunnery track halfway between Swan and Amazon with faster decay.Originally Posted by Bligh
You could probably get away with treating Enterprise, Experiment, Vixen and Nautilus all as near-sisters. IIRC, one of those three was ordered with the intent of a straight second copy of the design, but the plans were missing or destroyed even then so they tried to wing it taking the basic specs and working up an "improved version."
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Thanks DB, I will run with the halfway house idea and cut back on the strength of the bulwarks with faster decay as you suggest.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Again, don't treat that as a finl answer, but more a prototype for test and eval, "fling it at the wall and see if it sticks." In terms of length and beam, Enterprise is the very floor of anything Ares might even theoretically do.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Her gun fit seems to be 6lb (with carronades a replacement 1:1 with 12lb carronades as a schooner), after conversion to a brig a larger fit of weapons (2 9lb, plus 14 carronades in 18lb)
Changes the math a LOT--12x 6pdr is a little weaker than a Swan. More so when you take the secondary batteries into account.
Last edited by Diamondback; 04-27-2021 at 14:03.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
It does make a difference, but it may be overstated looking at shot weight for the type of action privateers take part in (overhauling and disabling the rigging of a fat and slow merchant, with insufficient guns and crew to adequately defend and manoeuvre) - the ability to cut rigging is based on shot diameter (6lb is 79% of a 12lb, rather than the 50% of shot weight ratio).
Penetration and range for that 'equivalent' penetration both also scale with diameter for an equal velocity at the muzzle, the effect of muzzle velocity reduces the 12lb carronade's advantage over a 6lb gun for penetration to only *over* 750yds, with the gun performing better for penetration in close.
Both the 6 and 12lb options are sufficient to take a ship or brig of a similar size, but neither is really adequate to fight larger frigates or ships of the line except *possibly* to disable rigging enough to make a run for it.
I only know that she had 12 12 pdrs from 1803 which is the period that I am most interested in as my interest only extends to the period of the first and second actions at Tripoli.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
I don't see them as guns though - carronades were what I copied into my spreadsheet when I compiled a chart of significant vessels.
This is what ThreeDecks and Silverstone say. Here's everything I have on navalized Baltimore schooners, sorted by datapoint date with the Swan baseline for comparison...
Ship Length Beam Tonnage Crew Armament 1766 Swan baseline 29.29 7.96 300bm 125 16x6 + 12x1/2# swivel Enterprise & Experiment 1799 25.65m 6.78m 135bm 70 12x6 Nautilus 1803 sch 26.52 7.01 ? 103 14x6 Enterprise 1803 sch 25.65m 6.78m 135bm 70 12x12crde Vixen 1803 sch 25.35 7.07 185bm 111 ? Enterprise 1805rb sch 28.27 7.24 165bm 70 12x12crde Vixen 1804 brig 25.35 7.07 185 111 12x6 Nautilus 1804 brig 26.52 7.01 ? 103 12x6 Vixen 1806 brig 25.35 7.07 185 111 12x18crde Nautilus 1810 brig 26.52 7.01 ? 103 12x18crde + 2x9? BC Enterprise 1811 sch 28.27 7.24 165bm 70 14x18crde + 2x9# BC Enterprise 1812 brig 28.27 7.24 165bm 70 14x18crde + 2x9# BC Nonsuch 1812 priv sch 26.? 6.4 154bm 110 12x12crde Chasseur 1812 priv sch
(model for "Pride of Baltimore I & II")35.2 8.1 356bm 160 16x12 Nonsuch 1812 sch 26.? 6.4 154bm 61 14x? Lynx 1812 priv sch 29.7oa 7.3 223bm 40 6x12 Dolphin 1812 priv sch ? ? 161bm ? ? Racer 1812 priv sch 30.36 6.83 230bm 30 4x9crde + 2x12# BC Grampus 1812 priv sch 32.31 7.77 278 60 ? HMS Emulous 1812 brig 26.52 7.01 ? 103 12x12crde + 2x6# BC HMS Musquidobit 1813 sch 29.7oa 7.3 223bm 50 8x18crde + 2x6# BC HMS Dolphin 1813 sch ? ? 161bm 100 10x12crde + 2x9# BC HMS Shelburne 1813 sch 30.36 6.83 230bm 30 10x12crde + 2x6# BC Spitfire 1814 sch 32.31 7.77 278 60 6x32#crde + 2x32# + 4x9# Torch 1814 sch 32.31 7.92 252 60 10x18#crde + 1x18# BC + 1x4# BC Spitfire 1816 sch 32.31 7.77 278 60 4x18#crde + 1x32# + 4x9#
Silverstone commentary:
Enterprise/Experiment: "Successful design, fast, and handy vessels, but not after rebuilding."
Vixen: "[S]imilar to Enterprise. Rerigged as brig at Washington NYd, 1804. Slow, crank and overcrowded after rerigging as brig."
Nautilus: "Very fast. Rerigging in 1810 hurt her sailing qualities."
Based on this list, if I were working this for Ares, and if they were all two-masted models, I would be inclined to tell them to pick whichever one in the middle of the pack they can find a plan for and then just swap masts for various boxes, maybe vary sailing angles or maneuver decks.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
I screenshot that DB for later. Good information!
This is direct from Silverstone.
I may be wrong but as I read it the guns she had in 1803 were 12 x 12 pdrs.
Rob.
Last edited by Bligh; 04-28-2021 at 03:38.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Conversely, I just found this on Wiki.
History United States Name: USS Enterprise Builder: Henry Spencer Cost: $16,240 Launched: 1799 Fate: Lost 9 July 1823 General characteristics 1799 Tons burthen:
135 (bm)
Length:
84 ft 7 in (25.78 m)
Beam:
22 ft 6 in (6.86 m)
Depth of hold:
10 ft (3.0 m)
Sail plan:
Schooner
Complement: 70 officers and enlisted Armament: 12 × 6 pounder guns (2.7 kg) General characteristics 1800 Tons burthen: 165 (bm) Length: 83 ft 6 in (25.5 m) Beam: 22 ft 6 in (6.9 m) Depth of hold: 11 ft 6 in (3.5 m) Armament:
14 guns
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
The typical weight of a 6lb gun is 16-17 cwt (with longer patterns seen on e.g. the quarterdeck of early 1st rates being heavier (up to around 20cwt)).
Ammunition weight is 8lb per shot, powder plus ball.
The typical weight of a 12lb naval gun is 29cwt (with longer patterns up to 34cwt). Ammunition weight is 16lb per shot.
On the other hand, moving to 12lb carronades goes to a 6-6.75cwt ordnance weight (with a carriage which is a higher proportion of the lighter weight. Ammunition weight is 13lb per shot. Remodelling of the lower port cill to mount the fighting bolts is necessary, but the side framing and top cill can be left undisturbed.
(The later fit of guns is an increased burden - there are more guns (14 carronades, plus a pair of guns, compared to 12 pieces), and the weight is higher. 18lb carronades are around 10cwt, and ammunition 19.5lb per shot. 9lb guns 26cwt (in short patterns) and 12lb per shot.
(I am using RN weights as I have data for them which I haven't been able to find in a consistent manner for US equiivalents (but typically when I have both RN and USN weapons there are only small differences for 'similar' weapons).
When you have a change to larger guns it is typical to see a reduction in number (see Lynx, with half the number of 12lb *guns*, compared to similar 6lb vessels, despite being pierced for a larger number consistent with the smaller ordnance or alternative carronade fits which show the 'full' fit of guns.
Note the total loading of the vessel is higher because of the ammunition than the simple comparison of gun weights alone - and the 'remodelled' version was not rated very highly - as quoted above it was slow, crank and cramped, while the earlier 1802/3 rearmament was considered a better suited configuration.
With 50 rpg, the
6lb guns ~234+6/7 cwt.
12lb guns ~439+5/7 cwt.
18lb carronade and 9lb guns ~ 290+33/56 cwt.
12lb carronades ~ 150+9/14 cwt.
(All plus carriages - but this is around 10% at most).
I find the description of handling to be inconsistent with the weight expected to be associated with guns.
This is a better place to continue this discussion, now that it has evolved past the what is on your workbench.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Rob, this means both were built at 12x6. Enterprise got successive upgunnings while Experiment was sold as a merchant at the end of the Quasi-War. Early USN recordkeeping was rather lacking, based on ships of similar size in USN service I would assume those 12's were in fact carronades and somebody was just sloppy.
Also, Wikipedia is poorly sourced and not always reliable, like its assertion that 1806 HMS Revenge is a straight Temeraire copy. No gatekeeping, no SME's, use at own risk.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Isn't the problem really that Ares didn't plan well for ships smaller that 5th rates in the stats? Stating it another way perhaps they didn't design the game for unrated vessels?
Unless you scale it for battles with smaller ships where a 5th rate frigate is the equivalent of a 1st rate.
I find that my handling of unrated ships works fine, is fun and simple.
https://sailsofglory.org/entry.php?86-Weight-of-Shot
That would be a reasonably correct assessment... it's impossible to really have a game that works well across the full spectrum of ship sizes. I think they really slapped Swan in as an afterthought intending it to be Lower Limit, then had a moment of "Oh CRAP!" when they realized just how important smaller vessels were in the War of 1812 and the early USN across the board. (Probably why "Make the Americans Playable" and "Fill Out 1812" got kicked to back burner even before Game As A Whole did"...)
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
As an aside, most Revolutionary to Second Barbary US privateer and naval schooners were generally of the Baltimore Clipper type, which according to Chappelle in 1930 one could easily be forgiven for thinking the hull was a rerigged Mediterranean xebec.
Chappelle's "The Baltimore Clipper: Its Origin & Development" may be of help here; tomorrow morning I'm going to call a librarian I knew many years ago who owes me a favor and see if I can get an interlibrary loan.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
I like your style Dobbs. The Kiss method suits me down to the waterline. I was about to adopt a more crude approach by only issuing half the chits for each broadside, but you gradation method is better by far.
Thanks for that.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
I look forward to seeing what you can dig up DB. Just the bare stats for a ship never give the full story. I like to hear what the men who handled them had to say as well.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
His "The History of the American Sailing Navy" would work well too if you can't find the schooner book.
True, True - an elegant solution but I like that regardless of ship size and the double sized damage of course.
If that is the book by Silverstone it is one which I do have Eric, and very useful it is too.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Turns out only about the first two chapters of Baltimore Clipper have any relevance to us, most of the book is more from the illicit slave trade to Civil War blockade-running until the lineage finally died out. I'd really like to see more about Henry Spencer's shipbuilding on Eastern Shore, since he was the primary builder of USN schooners, both purpose-built and purchased privateers.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
No, he's talking about another book by Howard Chappelle of similar title which I need to look into more.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Exactly. Excellent book and covers all designs and building programs from the Continental Navy through the end of the sailing era. I was lucky and got mine cheap a number of years ago (as you can see the dj is in bad shape).
Just picked it up for £13.50 second hand from Amazon.
Thanks for the Heads up Eric.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Not bad on delivery either. It arrived today, so that should shut me up for a bit. Second hand but apart from that old book smell in perfect nick. Even has a plastic dust jacket cover.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Great buy that looks to be in fine shape!
I just ordered a used copy of Adkins "Trafalgar Companion" from ABE Books for $40 plus $11 shipped to the US. Described as "very good" condition. Fingers crossed! I have seen prices for used copies well over $100 in the US. New forget about it!
I have been kicking myself for not getting a copy back in 05, but I didn't make that mistake in 15 for the Waterloo Companion!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks