Constitution class Hvy Frigate posibley the first Battlecrusier

[Mailman653]

I think this goes in the Monastery?

[Martok]

It does indeed. Moved.

[Hosakawa Tito]

This book: 6 Frigates by Ian Toll, describes these innovative warships and their construction & use during the Barbary Wars & War of 1812. The British concept of how a Frigate should be constructed, armed, and employed was an accepted "apex of excellence" by the global military powers at the time, and deservedly so. The Continental design changes, materials used, and heavier armament used was predicted to be a disaster by the leading shipbuilders of that time period. Their builders/designers; Humphreys, Fox, and Doughty, were a compromise of larger size & length to carry more & heavier guns along with Fox's technical improvements. The material used for the hull, bracing "knees", etc. was Live Oak, a heavier/denser/uniquely grained wood that was far superior *thus the nickname Ironsides* than the English Oak used by the Brits. The use of 24 pounder main guns and 32 pounder carronades was also much different than the Brit use of 18 pounders on their lighter Frigates. "Pocket Battleships" indeed.

[Mailman653]

I've been wanting to read that book, but I always forget the tittle.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

They outgunned anything they couldn't outrun, for the most part (one of them, the United States, was a total lemon of a sailer).

They could, indeed, have fought a British 64 with a good likelihood of success, but please recall that the British were phasing that class out themselves at the time -- they were aware of its limitations in the Napoleonic era.

The USN's "44's" ran from British "64's" anyway, despite having a weight of metal that might have let them win -- it would have been a horrifically tough fight and possibly Pyrhhic.

[CBR]

Well technically battlecruisers were of similar weight to contemporary battleships. Constitution might have been close to a 64 but that was no longer the standard Ship of the Line when she was built.

The French had experimented with some 24 pounder frigates before that but Constitution was certainly the heaviest and a very successful design.


CBR

[Hosakawa Tito]

The US Navy didn't hesitate to engage British Frigates in one on one engagements and won or forced a stalemate in most of them, much to the total surprise of everyone. In fact, it was predicted by all that the US Navy would be destroyed very quickly, and the land army invasion of Canada would be a piece of cake in comparison. Funny how the exact opposite turned out to be the case. With the huge numerical advantage of the Royal Navy the US could not afford to lose even a single Frigate, and no one ever thought the US Navy had a prayer against the Royal Navy juggernaut. They employed the few they had to commerce raiding instead and preyed upon the rich cargo vessels returning from the East & West Indies, usually quite near British home waters. British attempts to blockade the US Frigates in their home ports was largely unsuccessful, too much coast line to cover. Even when they did manage, it didn't last for long.

The Brits did experiment with arming their Frigates with 24 pounders and found that for their lighter built ships 18 pounders were a better match. The 24's made their Frigates too top-heavy in rough seas, and some times they couldn't even risk opening the lower gun deck ports without swamping the ship. The heavier recoil also caused stress damage to the ship's support structure. I'm sure they concluded that the US was going to learn those lessons the hard way and were totally unprepared, and psyched out by the battering to their expected invincibility. The Brit captains who lost these engagements had their careers ruined by the perception that they were either cowards or inept in losing what was at first perceived to be a fight between ships of equal fire power. Only later in the war did they realize that the US Frigates had a big advantage over theirs, and adjusted their tactics accordingly.