Might I recommend to all RBD'ers . . .

Might I recommend to all RBD'ers . . .

Occhi
Occhi

November 17th, 2003, 2:50 pm #1

. . . Master and Commander the film? Russel Crowe does well as Captain of the Ship, "Lucky" Jack Aubrey.

While I have not read OBrian's book -- silly me, my mother and any number of you good folks highly recommend them -- and while I understand that the film is a collage of about three of the Jack Aubrey stories, I found it refreshingly direct, reasonably accurate insofar as the Naval Warfare depictions, well shot (some inside scenes filmed on the USS Constitution in Boston Harbor) and reasonably well paced, directed, and acted.

All in all, a nice action adventure, a reasonable ketchup count given that Wooden Ships and Iron men battles were taking place, and NO STINKING, SILLY, 2000+ era Hollywood SAPPY ROMANCE!

Yes, there is no female romantic lead, which is, for this story, perfect. It is also historically accurate insofar as a British Man Of War at sea during a war is concerned.

Not every movie needs romance, although it can be a tail well presented in some stories.

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

Yes, that horrid pun was intentional, given the proliferation of buns all over the screens of Hollywood for the past few years . . .
Quote
Share

Lissa
Lissa

November 17th, 2003, 7:38 pm #2

...the lesser of two weevils?

Also, I thought HMS Surprise was a Frigate, not a Man-o-War (which makes more sense to use the Constitution than using the Mary Rose if Surprise was a Man-o-War).
Quote
Share

Occhi
Occhi

November 17th, 2003, 8:22 pm #3

I need to re-check, but as I recall, the progression from Frigte to Ship O' The Line rating for frigate was somewhere between the 40's and 50's of guns. In the 50's and 60's, and beyond, you had Ships of the Line. Wasn't HMS Victory a '74?

Both classes of vessel were Men O' War, but I should indeed, for best correctness, have used "Frigate" since Aubrey's ship was indeed a Frigate.

All that aside, John Paul Jones once said:

"Men mean more than guns in the rating of a ship."
Quote
Share

Joined: March 5th, 2001, 7:01 pm

November 17th, 2003, 8:34 pm #4

Hi,

HMS Victory was a three decker (first rate) with, IIRC, 115 guns. The concept of "classes" (or standardization) was just getting started. A "standard" British ship of the line was 72 guns on two decks. I believe that was a "third rate" ship. Second rate were the bigger two deck ships and the smaller three deck ships. The French tended to cram more guns on their ship, as did the Spanish. The Dutch were about the same as the English.

The American frigates (44 guns) were a bit bigger than the norm. OTOH, I think "frigate" was more of a generic term back then and referred to a ship large enough for independent command or fleet scouting duty but not big enough to fight in the line of battle.

For more, I'll have to do some research (or find my copy of the WS&IM game. AH used to be pretty accurate

--Pete
Quote
Like
Share

Lissa
Lissa

November 17th, 2003, 8:41 pm #5

I need to re-check, but as I recall, the progression from Frigte to Ship O' The Line rating for frigate was somewhere between the 40's and 50's of guns. In the 50's and 60's, and beyond, you had Ships of the Line. Wasn't HMS Victory a '74?

Both classes of vessel were Men O' War, but I should indeed, for best correctness, have used "Frigate" since Aubrey's ship was indeed a Frigate.

All that aside, John Paul Jones once said:

"Men mean more than guns in the rating of a ship."
Not sure where the distinction really changes, it may be more ordered toward number of gun decks (as Connie has but 1 and Mary Rose has 3). And if I remember correctly from being on board the Constitution (was on deck and below just a little over a year ago... ), she has 18 or 20 guns per side. Can't remember the exact number of guns per deck on Mary Rose, but it's a lot...
Quote
Share

Lissa
Lissa

November 17th, 2003, 8:46 pm #6

Hi,

HMS Victory was a three decker (first rate) with, IIRC, 115 guns. The concept of "classes" (or standardization) was just getting started. A "standard" British ship of the line was 72 guns on two decks. I believe that was a "third rate" ship. Second rate were the bigger two deck ships and the smaller three deck ships. The French tended to cram more guns on their ship, as did the Spanish. The Dutch were about the same as the English.

The American frigates (44 guns) were a bit bigger than the norm. OTOH, I think "frigate" was more of a generic term back then and referred to a ship large enough for independent command or fleet scouting duty but not big enough to fight in the line of battle.

For more, I'll have to do some research (or find my copy of the WS&IM game. AH used to be pretty accurate

--Pete
Frigate was part of the fleet and acted as more of an outrider to relay information back to the fleet in order to let them know if enemy fleets had been found as well as for anti-piracy and commerce duties.

Cruiser was able to be totally independent and was known for commerce raiding. They were typically fast, well armed, and able to travel pretty much anywhere since they could stow enough supplies to get several months without hitting ports.

Man-o-war/Ship of the Line were the battleships of their day. They were relatively slow, but could give out and take a pounding.
Quote
Share

Occhi
Occhi

November 17th, 2003, 8:58 pm #7

Evolved from the Nelsonian Frigate.

Put another way, cruisers grew from their frigate roots into something a bit more robust, and they were indeed scouts, but never the the heavyweight fighters that Ships of the Line were. That "fusion" happened in the early 1900's when the Battle Cruiser and the Battleship started to look a bit more like one another in terms of sheer hitting power, though the Dreadnaughts tended to stand out yet again as in a class by themselves.

I think Pete raises a good point about mixing eras, which I appear to have done, which not make the terminology any easier to distill.
Quote
Share

Occhi
Occhi

November 17th, 2003, 9:05 pm #8

Not sure where the distinction really changes, it may be more ordered toward number of gun decks (as Connie has but 1 and Mary Rose has 3). And if I remember correctly from being on board the Constitution (was on deck and below just a little over a year ago... ), she has 18 or 20 guns per side. Can't remember the exact number of guns per deck on Mary Rose, but it's a lot...
Constitution was a 44. However, I appear to have been mistaken. She appears to have been either a 32 or a 34, depending on how you chose to rate her.

http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/fac ... diron.html

Armament: 32 24-pounder long guns;
20 32-pounder carronades;
and, two 24-pounder bow chasers.

Boats: one 36-ft. long boat; two 30-ft. cutters, two 28-ft. whaleboats; one 28-ft. gig; one 22-ft. jolly boat; and one 14-ft. punt.
Quote
Share

Lissa
Lissa

November 17th, 2003, 9:12 pm #9

Evolved from the Nelsonian Frigate.

Put another way, cruisers grew from their frigate roots into something a bit more robust, and they were indeed scouts, but never the the heavyweight fighters that Ships of the Line were. That "fusion" happened in the early 1900's when the Battle Cruiser and the Battleship started to look a bit more like one another in terms of sheer hitting power, though the Dreadnaughts tended to stand out yet again as in a class by themselves.

I think Pete raises a good point about mixing eras, which I appear to have done, which not make the terminology any easier to distill.
From that era, late 18th century, early 19th, I remember three classes of ships (the ones I mentioned). Pretty much the roles were as I mentioned, the Frigate was an outrider/commerce enforcer, Cruiser went everywhere and was a raider, and the Man-o-War/Ship of the Line was the Battleship of the day.

There's actually a couple of excellent series that History puts on every once in a while. One covers the era of sailing (the whole WH&IM) as well as the history of the Battleships (starting with Mary Rose and going forward to the Iowa class and talking about everything inbetween).
Quote
Share

Occhi
Occhi

November 17th, 2003, 9:32 pm #10

Hi,

HMS Victory was a three decker (first rate) with, IIRC, 115 guns. The concept of "classes" (or standardization) was just getting started. A "standard" British ship of the line was 72 guns on two decks. I believe that was a "third rate" ship. Second rate were the bigger two deck ships and the smaller three deck ships. The French tended to cram more guns on their ship, as did the Spanish. The Dutch were about the same as the English.

The American frigates (44 guns) were a bit bigger than the norm. OTOH, I think "frigate" was more of a generic term back then and referred to a ship large enough for independent command or fleet scouting duty but not big enough to fight in the line of battle.

For more, I'll have to do some research (or find my copy of the WS&IM game. AH used to be pretty accurate

--Pete
I knew this would happen. I still don't remember stuff as well as previously. :-P Am I really getting old, or is it Occheimer's disease from all those years of caffeine abuse?

From the Royal Navy's own site:

http://www.hms-victory.com/factsandfigures.htm

Lower gun deck: 30 x 32 pounder
Middle gun deck: 28 x 24 pounder
Upper gun deck: 30 x 12 pounder (long)

88 so far

Quarter gun deck 12 x 12 pounder (short)

100

Forecastle 2 x 12 pounder (medium)
2 x 68 pounder carronade

104

Victory most certainly was a First Rater, in any case.

Scratches head

Where did I get '74 from? The old rule of 72 min with two bow cannons? Who knows?
Quote
Share