hlg6016
A/C Wings Here
I'm impressed by how well preserved the A/C markings are.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Ship Photo of the Day
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
Historically, weren't frigates also defined by number of guns and caliber (or whatever the correct term was back then), and also possibly draught and number of masts? Admittedly I'm too lazy to look that up now, but figured you would have that info.
That is an accurate historical answer for sailing ships. Frigates were identified by guns and the fact that the main deck was built strong enough to serve as the primary fighting deck (as opposed to older “barks” that carried most of their firepower on the lower deck).
A trip to the USS Constitution is an absolute must for any naval officer (or chief for that matter) in my humble opinion.
In more modern terms, WWI and after, mainly size but also armament. Frigates are smaller than destroyers and usually as a result are less well armed, there is some overlap depending on the country and even politics involved but those are the general criteria.
Yes, during the age of sail there were some pretty clear definitions of frigates, ships of the line, corvettes and others. Here are two pages with ship category definitions back then.
In the USN, DEs/frigates have been single shaft/screw ships since WW2, whereas destroyers have had two shafts.
Pretty much everything I've read about how quad turrets, not that there were many (the King George V's, the Dunkerque's and Richelieu's are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head), was that they never really worked out that well in practice.
Last edited:
When I was on a Knox class frigate we had a tee-shirt that read, “Frigate Sailors do it with One Good Screw!”
When I was a staff Ops Off. at NAVEUR in the early 90s my mobilization billet was actually "Convoy Commander" . What a hoot. Couldn't imagine that. Given how rapidly things were changing in geopolitics at the time, I was never slated for any appropriate training. I did scan a correspondence course though and found the Cold War doctrine still solidly in place. FFs and FFGs absolutely were the escorts for transatlantic seaborne supply.
Good lord, Nelson's flagship looks unweildly.
Looking at that second page, I didn't realize two-masted sloops were a thing. I guess that's the exception that proves the rule.
One of my takeaways from the age of sail is how impressive the amount of firepower carried by ships of the line truly was. Some quick wikipedia research yields that HMS Victory had 104 guns ranging from 12 at the small end up to 32 pounders. In comparison, the entire allied army at Waterloo fielded 156 guns, I assume most of which were not of the caliber of 32 pounders.
I suppose larger guns was always a feature of Naval warfare since the invention of gunpowder, but I never really thought of 1st rate ships of the line as the massive resource investments to be considered "capital ships". Was that moniker used at all in the age of sail? Or did that arrive closer to the 20th century?
I suppose larger guns was always a feature of Naval warfare since the invention of gunpowder, but I never really thought of 1st rate ships of the line as the massive resource investments to be considered "capital ships". Was that moniker used at all in the age of sail? Or did that arrive closer to the 20th century?
“Rating” ships was a British concept. The idea of “throw weight” (number and effectiveness of guns) came a little later but was really hashed out by Teddy Roosevelt (US) and William James (UK).
Patrick O’Brian pokes a little fun at the sloop/ship rating convention in the age of sail RN through the character of Stephen Maturin. Even rating the Leopard (a 4th rate) as a sloop when a lieutenant takes command of her at the beginning of “The Fortune of War”
If you haven’t read the series, do so ASAP.
If you haven’t read the series, do so ASAP.
Having spent A LOT of time watching the Shoes trying to hit (never mind actually sinking) a completely compliant vessel at close range, I have a feeling having all those guns were a necessity for hit percentages.
I'm sure the ship nerds here can answer this question...weren't the guns at the time smooth bore? Seems like that makes accuracy even harder, beyond just dealing with swell and how the ship rides on a given tack.
The typical arrangement was “long guns” (often called “long toms”) that fired a shot weight of between 18 to 36 lbs and shorter “carronades” for the close-in fight. By 1812 a frigate would carry a mix of long guns and carronades arranged to suit the master gunner. For the US, most long guns were 24 lbs. and the carronades 32 lbs. put simply, the 24 would hit the enemy with long-range solid shot until the ships were close then the carronades would “smash” at the enemy hull while the long guns would shift to chain shot, bell shot, rod, and similar to unmask and sweep the enemies spar (weather) deck clear.