BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
I know that feeling, I've got four volumes on the English Civil War waiting for me, they seemed a good idea at the time but now the just seem daunting 
HMS Victory (pre-Nelson ship) found
- Thread starter HoHun
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Ferdinand Foch
Staff Sergeant
Jeez Bt, hope that they are in new english at least.
BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
It's actually a reprint of a Victorian issue (which I didn't realise at the time I bought 'em - they were just cheap), the language is a bit archaic, but I'm 30 pages in now and it isn't too bad.
Ferdinand Foch
Staff Sergeant
Oh, thats great to hear BT. Kinda reminds me of when I read "The Old Regime and the French Revolution" by Alexis de Toqueville, though. I managed to get through it in about a week, but I think I only picked up half the information in it, I just couldn't understand what he was talking about a lot of the time.
- Thread starter
- #25
Hi Bombtaxi,
>But Victory is a 104 gun ship of the line, the superdreadnought of her day. Sending Constitution against her would have been suicidal, to say the least.
Hm, if we consider a one-versus-one with room to manoeuvre, the greater speed and manoeuvrabilty of the Constitution might enable it to win anyway by avoiding to sail into the beaten area of the Victory's broadsides.
There was a good tactical simulation on the C=64 that went by the name of "Broadsides", and the Victory vs. Constitution duel was the default battle.
If both players knew what they were doing, the chances were roughly even ... the Constitution had to get in close and keep behind the stern of the Victory, raking it with cannon fire while keeping out of the broadside of the ship-of-the-line. Whenever the Victory managed to bring its guns to bear despite the Constitution's attempts to out-sail her, the British player would aim at the rigging with chain shot, hoping to damage sails, yards or masts to hamstring the Constitution. If he succeeded, the US player had inevitably lost the duel, but if he missed, the Constitution would usually slip into a position astern of the Victory again very quickly from where the American ship could do a lot of damage and often even win the battle.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
>But Victory is a 104 gun ship of the line, the superdreadnought of her day. Sending Constitution against her would have been suicidal, to say the least.
Hm, if we consider a one-versus-one with room to manoeuvre, the greater speed and manoeuvrabilty of the Constitution might enable it to win anyway by avoiding to sail into the beaten area of the Victory's broadsides.
There was a good tactical simulation on the C=64 that went by the name of "Broadsides", and the Victory vs. Constitution duel was the default battle.
If both players knew what they were doing, the chances were roughly even ... the Constitution had to get in close and keep behind the stern of the Victory, raking it with cannon fire while keeping out of the broadside of the ship-of-the-line. Whenever the Victory managed to bring its guns to bear despite the Constitution's attempts to out-sail her, the British player would aim at the rigging with chain shot, hoping to damage sails, yards or masts to hamstring the Constitution. If he succeeded, the US player had inevitably lost the duel, but if he missed, the Constitution would usually slip into a position astern of the Victory again very quickly from where the American ship could do a lot of damage and often even win the battle.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
A small cruiser had neither the firepower or manpower to take a 104 gun triple decker, regardless of maneuvering ability. Victory would sail away intact and under her own flag - the best result a lone cruiser could expect to realise against her would be to still be afloat, IMHO.
- Thread starter
- #27
Hi Bombtaxi,
>A small cruiser had neither the firepower or manpower to take a 104 gun triple decker, regardless of maneuvering ability.
Hm, wasn't the contemporary term "frigate", or am I mislead by the German terminology here?
But with regard to the duel ... well, I didn't think the manoeuvres evident in the simulation game were unrealistic when compared to the track diagrams reproduced in books on the historic frigate duels, so I wouldn't dismiss the possibility to outmanoeuvre a ship-of-the-line. Lack of firepower ... it seems that 24-pounder long guns as employed on the Constitution made an important part of ships-of-the-line's broadsides as well, so I think she would be able to damage the Victory. She wouldn't match a ship-of-the-line on a broadside basis, but she might be able to hit with more broadsides and thus make up for her lower firepower.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
>A small cruiser had neither the firepower or manpower to take a 104 gun triple decker, regardless of maneuvering ability.
Hm, wasn't the contemporary term "frigate", or am I mislead by the German terminology here?
But with regard to the duel ... well, I didn't think the manoeuvres evident in the simulation game were unrealistic when compared to the track diagrams reproduced in books on the historic frigate duels, so I wouldn't dismiss the possibility to outmanoeuvre a ship-of-the-line. Lack of firepower ... it seems that 24-pounder long guns as employed on the Constitution made an important part of ships-of-the-line's broadsides as well, so I think she would be able to damage the Victory. She wouldn't match a ship-of-the-line on a broadside basis, but she might be able to hit with more broadsides and thus make up for her lower firepower.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
Bill G.
Banned
The USS Constitution could take the HMS Victory. It wouldn't be easy and it would be a long battle.
The USS Constitution can NOT trade broadsides or grapple and go hand to hand between the crews. Even with her "iron sides", she would be beaten.
Like it has been said, the USS Constitution is a more maneuverable and faster ship. It would have to be able to get behind HMS Victory. Then it would have to match Victory tack for tack slowly getting closer to the rear. One in range, the USS Constitution would place shots at the water line and rudder control ropes of HMS Victory.
Sailing ships of this era had little to no water tight compartments. So a series of hits at the water line can cause a very serious problem. If enough water enters the hull, the ship can not maneuver sharply without the fear of the ship listing and taking more water in through open gun ports.
If HMS Victory lost the use of its rudder, it would be doomed. The USS Constitution could easily pump broadside after broadside into the all but defenseless stern. Sooner or later, enough water line hull hits would be made to sink HMS Victory.
Chain shot is a short range weapon. So the USS Constitution must not allow itself to get caught by a short range broad side. The Royal Navy was masters in the use of chain shot.
At long range, the hull of the USS Constitution can stand up to HMS Victory for short periods.
But a lot would depend on the weather at that moment.
It would take a very bold Captain of the USS Constitution to make this attack. His one huge advantage is with minimal sail damage, he always has to option to break off the attack. HMS Victory can not refuse the fight.
Well, that is my view. I know I have restated some prior posts. I guess for that I am just agreeing!
Bill G.
The USS Constitution can NOT trade broadsides or grapple and go hand to hand between the crews. Even with her "iron sides", she would be beaten.
Like it has been said, the USS Constitution is a more maneuverable and faster ship. It would have to be able to get behind HMS Victory. Then it would have to match Victory tack for tack slowly getting closer to the rear. One in range, the USS Constitution would place shots at the water line and rudder control ropes of HMS Victory.
Sailing ships of this era had little to no water tight compartments. So a series of hits at the water line can cause a very serious problem. If enough water enters the hull, the ship can not maneuver sharply without the fear of the ship listing and taking more water in through open gun ports.
If HMS Victory lost the use of its rudder, it would be doomed. The USS Constitution could easily pump broadside after broadside into the all but defenseless stern. Sooner or later, enough water line hull hits would be made to sink HMS Victory.
Chain shot is a short range weapon. So the USS Constitution must not allow itself to get caught by a short range broad side. The Royal Navy was masters in the use of chain shot.
At long range, the hull of the USS Constitution can stand up to HMS Victory for short periods.
But a lot would depend on the weather at that moment.
It would take a very bold Captain of the USS Constitution to make this attack. His one huge advantage is with minimal sail damage, he always has to option to break off the attack. HMS Victory can not refuse the fight.
Well, that is my view. I know I have restated some prior posts. I guess for that I am just agreeing!
Bill G.
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Messy1
Master Sergeant
USS Constitution was made and designed for slugging it out with ships much larger than herself, now having said that, I am not saying she could stand toe to toe alongside HMS Victory or similar ship, but using her advantages, and not being drawn into a side by side shootout, it is possible. The thinking was that although the US could not compete directly in the quantity of large fighting ships due to cost, they could compete by making a smaller but still tough ship, that was fast and highly maneuverable . At the time of her design, USS Constitution was revolutionary, she was equipped with much larger cannon than was standard at the time for a comparable ship of the same size. Her crisscrossing main hull supports added incredible strength, which allowed her to carry much larger cannon than a similar size ship, and still be a fast, highly maneuverable. This is all from memory, so please bear that in mind.
