Log in

View Full Version : British Navy Classes



lonewolf371
01-03-2005, 05:52
I'm bored at the moment, so I decided to write this, to centralize my thoughts and ideas about the royal navy, about which I recently have read much about.

The royal navy was organized into a class or rating system in the mid-17th century, after the 30 Years' War. It is by this system that the majority of ships of not only Britain, but also the entire world were judged. The system looked much like this:
Ship of the line
1st Rate, Guns: 100 or more, Gun Decks: 3 + forecastle and quarterdeck, Crew: 850 to 875, Displacement: >2000
2nd Rate, Guns: 90 to 98, Gun Decks: 3 + forecastle and quarterdeck, Crew: 700 to 750, Displacement: about 2000
3rd Rate, Guns: 64 to 80, Gun Decks: 2, Crew: 500 to 650, Displacement: 1300-1600
Frigate
4th Rate, Guns: 50 to 60, Gun Decks: 2, Crew: 320 to 420, Displacement: about 1000
5th Rate, Guns: 32 to 40, Gun Decks: 1, Crew: 200 to 300, Displacement: 700 to 1450
6th Rate, Guns: 20 to 28, Gun Decks: 1, Crew: 140 to 200, Displacement: 450 to 550
Sloop-of-war
Guns: 16 to 18, Gun Decks: 1, Crew: 90 to 125, Displacement: 380
Gun-brig and Cutter
Guns: 6 to 14, Gun Decks: 1, Crew: 5 to 25, Displacement: < 220
Displacements are in tons, taken from this link: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/rate.htm

The jobs and positions for each ship varied. Generally ships of the first and second rate were kept at home for use in the "line" or the line of ships used in a battle. The line was a common tactic at the time, it provided a continuous stream of fire. In battle, ships would usually line up in a large single-file line. The center of the formation would contain the largest and strongest ships, with the edges having lighter and faster ships. Thusly, the flag-ship was generally at the center of the formation. This line would proceed parallel to the enemy line. The two lines would sail by each other and unleash fire upon each other.

The ships of the time, being wooden, were very hard to sink, in opposition to what we think of them today. Generally the act of winning a battle depended on one of three outcomes:
1) The ship would be disabled so it couldn't move or so mangled so it could no longer fire.
2) The ship would surrender its colors after seeing that a battle was lost.
3) The ship would be forcefully boarded and captured.

This part is speculatory:
Judging from normal actions I believe that the first one would have occured most often in Europe itself, when massive ship formations firing at each other would have made a boarding difficult. The second one would have happened in frontier territories and colonies, where one-on-one ship fights were common. There, the quickest and most profitable way to win a battle would be to capture an enemy ship. The second way would have been used evenly in both areas. The fact that wooden ships were so hard to sink could be one of the many reasons why large well-built ships tended to change hands so often during the age of sail.

The first three rates, the ships of the line, were only heavily concentraded in Europe itself. Abroad in colonies or frontier territories it was often considered too risky to use a 1st rate or 2nd rate ship in battle on a large scale. Instead, often a 2nd or 1st rate ship would serve as a flagship in a colonial fleet. The backbone of the colonial fleet would be 3rd rate ships backed by a large array of frigates. This would be one of the reasons why the 74 gun ship of the line was the most popular heavy ship in Europe in the age of sail.

The purpose of frigates was almost strictly colonial. They were useful as heavy pirate-battering ships, designed to destroy larger pirate fleets and forts with sheer firepower. Against other nations in war, the frigate was too light to be used in heavy battles. Instead, they themselves would often serve as pirate vessels or they would scout enemy fleets, returning the locations of the enemy to aid the main body of heavy ships.

Sloops-of-war, gun-brigs and cutters were the true core of colonial and pirate fleets. They were small, fast and could easily overpower merchant vessels. They could operate quickly and attack merchant vessels before help could arrive. Therefore, they were the favorites of pirates, smugglers and nations trying to prevent piracy and smuggling. Sloops-of-war and cutters were the largest parts of the early American fleet, due to the fact that the need to prevent piracy was so great. In the American fleet, frigates served more of the role as the heavy ships. In Europe, small ships were completely useless in the line of battle. A larger ship could overpower them in seconds and generally European waters were patrolled much more heavily by heavily armed vessels than frontier colonies in places such as the carribean.

Questions, comments, corrections?

nokhor
01-03-2005, 16:07
thanks for the info, i never knew why ships of the line had the name they did. how big were these fleets? how big would a home defense fleet be compared to say a colonial fleet by the same power?

Mouzafphaerre
01-03-2005, 23:31
-
Thanks as an enthusiast of naval history and gaming. :bow:

A friend of mine is a true "amateur expert" in these matters. I'll let him know about the thread and maybe he decides to come and join the ORG mayhem. ~;)
-

Tribesman
01-04-2005, 02:28
http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/INTRO.HTM
A complete listing of Royal Naval Sailing Ships , from the biggest LineShip to the smallest hired cutter or pilot boat ,together with their service histories .
There is a lot of them , in 1815 the navy had 574 frigates alone , of which 206 had been captured from other nations , plus 193 ships rated above 74 and god knows how many smaller vessels .
The debts for raising this huge navy meant that the interest payments alone took 56% of the national budget .

lonewolf371
01-05-2005, 02:49
Yes, I'm pretty sure that in many cases the combined fleets of many nations on paper were quite large. However these nations were spread out over the entire globe, as was their fleets. The French at the battle of the Nile had 13 ships of the line and a number of frigates. At Trafalgar, the combined French-Spanish fleet had about 33 ships total (I'm pretty sure about that, I might have to double check it).

Baiae
01-05-2005, 11:36
At Trafalgar, the combined French-Spanish fleet had about 33 ships total (I'm pretty sure about that, I might have to double check it).

That's about right, both fleets had around 33-34 ships.

In reply to the original post, you're mainly right but there are a few points I'd like to make.

1) Ships surrendering was pretty common in fleet actions, and boarding was also used. For example I think three or four ships struck their colours at St. Vincent and one was taken by boarding. Also, while it was rare for ships to sink, some did explode after being set on fire, for example L'Orient at the Nile.

2) Frigates were havily used with the main battles fleets in order to escort merchantmen and destroy commerce. In fleet actions they would act as scout and also stand off the main battle line in order to repeat the Admiral's signals.

3) Battle fleets often had small ships attached to them to act as couriers, relaying messages between the fleet and the Admiralty. There were also used for blockade and escort duties.

Red Peasant
01-06-2005, 16:29
http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/INTRO.HTM
A complete listing of Royal Naval Sailing Ships , from the biggest LineShip to the smallest hired cutter or pilot boat ,together with their service histories .
There is a lot of them , in 1815 the navy had 574 frigates alone , of which 206 had been captured from other nations , plus 193 ships rated above 74 and god knows how many smaller vessels .
The debts for raising this huge navy meant that the interest payments alone took 56% of the national budget .

Thanks for the link Tribesman, there are some fabulous stories in there.
:bow:

lars573
01-07-2005, 01:08
I have a couple of things to share they come from here http://www.napoleonguide.com/navyind.htm and are all in reference to the napoleonic period.

http://img1.exs.cx/img1/7098/royalnavyshipstats9ih.jpg


http://img1.exs.cx/img1/2981/napoleonicerafleetsizes8km.jpg

nokhor
01-07-2005, 05:57
thanks lars573, i was surprised that holland had far fewer ships of the line than denmark, sweden or portugal since the dutch were such a mercantile power during, unless napoleon had incorporated theirs into the french fleet by that time?

lars573
01-07-2005, 06:31
Well considering that about 1810 the british nuke Coppenhagen to stop Napoleon from getting his hands on the danish ship of the line it's safe to assume he'd already grabbed the dutch ones. The benelux area having been under french control since about 1796. But on the other hand the dutch fleet could have had 4000 frigates and they wouldn't be mentioned on that chart too.

Baiae
01-07-2005, 10:30
i was surprised that holland had far fewer ships of the line than denmark, sweden or portugal since the dutch were such a mercantile power

I can't be sure without refering to my books but I thought that Dutch naval power had been pretty much shattered by the Royal Navy during the Anglo-Dutch wars and at the battle of Camperdown