Patch 26. Spanish Frigate Diana, BR rebalance - Diana is a timed reward.

[Rolando]

25 minutes ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

The real Connie ... She and her sister ships were capable of up to 14 plus knots.

According to all sources, 13 knots, as the fastest of the sisters-ships of USS Constitution - USS President, was easily caught by Endymion (14.4 knots maximum)

[Sir Malachy Karrde]

5 hours ago, Malachi said:

Bullshit post of the month. Quite the feat, given the competition. Congratulations, Sir.

Read Six frigates by Ian Toll and get back to me.

[Malachi]

None of the nonsense you posted is in that book IIRC, read it a while ago. And I think I'd remember something as stupid as 'creating the razée' as response to the American 44s.

[Lovec1990]

I think in game Constitution should have base speed 11,9xkn i do not think it would be wise too make connie too fast she already has strongest armor among frigates

[Sir Malachy Karrde]

8 hours ago, Malachi said:

None of the nonsense you posted is in that book IIRC, read it a while ago. And I think I'd remember something as stupid as 'creating the razée' as response to the American 44s.

Within a few months of the guerrierre striking to the Connie, the British razee'd several smaller ships of the line and laid down several new frigates that were much heavier than the traditional ships that were in service prior to that event. That was an oh shit moment for the British navy. They certainly didn't change their frigate building doctrine in response to the French. Any lackwit can look at the data and come to that conclusion, why is it so hard for you?

read this article: https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=100&ct=4

take note of this line "built to be powerful enough to outgun and outsail enemy warships."

Edited September 17, 2018 by Sir Malachy Karrde

[Sir Malachy Karrde]

14 hours ago, Rolando said:

According to all sources, 13 knots, as the fastest of the sisters-ships of USS Constitution - USS President, was easily caught by Endymion (14.4 knots maximum)

There was one that I read hit 14 during sea trials, I'm not sure which off hand. I don't think she had all her guns shipped At the time if I remember correctly. 

 I know the connies modern crew has had her over 13 knots. The us navy has her listed as 13+ on their website about her. https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=100&ct=4

Edited September 17, 2018 by Sir Malachy Karrde

[Sir Malachy Karrde]

8 hours ago, Lovec1990 said:

I think in game Constitution should have base speed 11,9xkn i do not think it would be wise too make connie too fast she already has strongest armor among frigates

12 base would be adequate, maybe 12.1 or 12.2. That would leave the trinc and endy their speed advantage, while making the Connie truer to form.

[Malachi]

Ok, let´s break this down. First you wrote:

19 hours ago, Malachi said:

In order to combat this revolutionary frigate concept, the Royal Navy ended up completely re envisioning their frigates and cut down some lineships to create the razee.

Then this:

5 hours ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

Within a few months of the guerrierre striking to the Connie, the British razee'd several smaller ships of the line and laid down several new frigates that were much heavier than the traditional ships that were in service prior to that event.

So, the RN razeé´d three 74s in 1813. They simply revived the concept of cutting down unsatisfactory/worn-out ships of the line, just like they had done in the decades before. E.g. Anson, Indy, Magnanime, all cut down in the mid-1790s. Just with 74s instead of 64s this time, simply because the RN had an ample, uncommissioned supply of this type of ship.

And they build four frigates to the 'old' design of the Endymion and two slightly larger 24-pounder frigates, all of them of fir. But they also happily continued to order dozens of 18-pounder Lively-, Leda- and other class vessels. Not quite the 'completely re envisioning'  and 'change of building doctrine' you wrote about, n'est-ce pas?

19 hours ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

She and her sister ships were capable of up to 14 plus knots.

 

14 hours ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

Read Six frigates by Ian Toll and get back to me.

Just had a look, highest quoted speed in the book for the Connie is 12.5 knots.

5 hours ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

Any lackwit can look at the data and come to that conclusion, why is it so hard for you? 

Well, while I don´t know which 'alternative' data you were looking at, my suggestions is to get some books which weren´t written with a stars-and-stripes bias cranked to 11.

5 hours ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

take note of this line "built to be powerful enough to outgun and outsail enemy warships." 

Took note, smiled and carried on.

 

Edit:

Wait a sec...you´re the same guy who produced pearls of wisdom like these:

On 12/7/2017 at 1:47 AM, Malachy said:

After the napoleonic wars, British naval power receded dramatically to the point when ww1 kicked off, it was barely an afterthought. While that was happening the "anemic" us navy was flexing its muscles and projecting its power further afield. The US navy had the most state of the art and modern warships of the era and us naval technology was superior to anything anyone else fielded at the time. And by the civil war, after getting their arse handed to them twice, they were wise to leave well enough alone. During the war of 1812, the British were quite apprehensive about the capabilities of the new super frigates, and rightly so. The admiralty was pissing their pants when they discovered the capabilities of the Connie and her consorts. You don't totally restructure your shipbuilding philosophy and modify your current ships just for the fun of it. The Ghent treaty came too early for me, I would have liked to have seen some more action between our two nations. 

On 12/7/2017 at 2:38 AM, Malachy said:

The British lost the war of 1812. It was their own fault it got started. If you can't handle the heat you shouldn't piss off more people than you can handle. You don't capitulate to all demands when suing for peace when you win lol. And after early successes, the British army again lost its US campaign.  The British lost the revolutionary war with the US as well FYI. Hence twice. I'll give them one thing, they were smart enough to see the writing on the wall and get out of the war with the US as fast as possible. Had it continued, superior US warships would have continued to pick off British warships and merchantmen one at a time,  and at the time there was also talk of taking the island colonies from England as well. The US intervention in Ww1 and again in WW2 is the only reason the English aren't speaking German now. The napoleonic wars was the beginning of the end of the British empire and their navy declined with them. From the early 1800s on, not a single navy in the world had state of the art warships like the US fielded. Even the British attempts after the war weren't nearly as powerful as the US counterparts... I.E. the trincomalee was supposed to be a heavy frigate. She's not even close to as powerful as American heavy frigates heh. 

 

Oh my.

Edited September 17, 2018 by Malachi

[Fluffy Fishy]

10 hours ago, Malachi said:

Just had a look, highest quoted speed in the book for the Connie is 12.5 knots.

Well, while I don´t know which 'alternative' data you were looking at, my suggestions is to get some books which weren´t written with a stars-and-stripes bias cranked to 11.

That is very interesting, I have long had suspicions that the 13kn often stated as constitution's top speed was rather dubious, I'm also interested to know if the 12-13kn quotations are her flying studdings too.

I just struggle to beleive a ship built as heavily as she is with such weighty woods would be nearly as spritely as people often beleive her to be, especially considering how much mass she had in the water, sadly however I haven't seen data either way to confirm or deny my suspicions. I have however seen quite a few reports looking at her and her two sisters disappointing speed and handling during their first years of sailing and how much work went into improvong both these characteristics.

The more I look into her performance and architecture the more i doubt her status as a frigate at all and the more she looks like a new breed of 50 gun ship with more modern dimensions ironing out some of the flaws of the old 50s similarly as do the ships who follow her style into the 19th century.

Edited September 17, 2018 by Fluffy Fishy

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Constitution in game has such a nice feeling in the acceleration and coming to a halt. One has to anticipate the moves, reduce to battle canvas, etc.

All other ships should have a similar feeling instead of having the odd "rocket" feeling and brakes.

That is a BIG difference.

[z4ys]

12 minutes ago, Fluffy Fishy said:

That is very interesting, I have long had suspicions that the 13kn often stated as constitution's top speed was rather dubious, I'm also interested to know if the 12-13kn quotations are her flying studdings too.

I just struggle to beleive a ship built as heavily as she is with such weighty woods would be nearly as spritely as people often beleive her to be, especially considering how much mass she had in the water, sadly however I haven't seen data either way to confirm my suspicions. I have however seen quite a few reports looking at her and her two sisters disappointing speed and handling during their first years of sailing and how much work went into improvong both these characteristics.

The more I look into her performance and architecture the more i doubt her status as a frigate at all and the more she looks like a new breed of 50 gun ship with more modern dimensions ironing out some of the flaws of the old 50s similarly as do the ships who follow her style into the 19th century.

However, most of us more accustomed to units of feet and knots are probably more familiar with the Froude Number's close relation - the Speed/Length Ratio.

 

Quote

 

The Speed/Length Ratio

S/L Ratio = hullspeed (in knots) divided by the square root of the waterline length (in feet)

 

 

This discovery enabled Froude to compare the performance of boats of different length. For example a 25ft sailboat moving at 5 knots would have the same S/L Ratio at a 100ft patrol boat steaming along at 10knots, and consequently both would develop the same resistance per ton of displacement at those speeds.

That makes it even possible to theoretically calc Hull speed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull_speed

 

But be careful:

Quote

Wave making resistance depends dramatically on the general proportions and shape of the hull: many modern displacement designs can easily exceed their 'hull speed' without planing.

These include hulls with very fine ends, long hulls with relatively narrow beam and wave-piercing designs. Such hull forms are commonly realised by some canoes, competitive rowing boats, catamarans, fast ferries and other commercial, fishing and military vessels.

Vessel weight is also a critical consideration: it affects wave amplitude, and therefore the energy transferred to the wave for a given hull length.

Heavy boats with hulls designed for planing generally cannot exceed hull speed without planing.

Light, narrow boats with hulls not designed for planing can easily exceed hull speed without planing; indeed, once above hull speed, the unfavorable amplification of wave height due to constructive interference diminishes as speed increases. For example, world-class racing kayaks can exceed hull speed by more than 100%,[1] even though they do not plane. Semi-displacement hulls are usually intermediate between these two extremes.

Ultra light displacement boats are designed to plane and thereby circumvent the limitations of hull speed.

 

Edited September 17, 2018 by z4ys

[Malachi]

27 minutes ago, Fluffy Fishy said:

That is very interesting, I have long had suspicions that the 13kn often stated as constitution's top speed was rather dubious, I'm also interested to know if the 12-13kn quotations are her flying studdings too.

Well, @NorthernWolves tracked down a log entry of Connie with 15 knots (in the Med in the late 1820s, IIRC). Might be worth it to track down the armament and rig changes she had back then to qualify that somewhat. Rig materials and techniques evolved over time, so higher speeds were possible, even for 'older' vessels. For comparison, british 32-pounder frigates of the time made 16 to 17 knots.

Edited September 17, 2018 by Malachi

[z4ys]

2 minutes ago, Malachi said:

Well, @NorthernWolves tracked down a log entry of Connie with 15 knots (in the Med in the late 1820s, IIRC). Might be worth it to track to the armament and rig changes she had back then to qualify that somewhat. Rig materials and techniques evolved over time, so higher speeds were possible, even for 'older' vessels. For comparison, british 32-pounder frigates of the time made 16 to 17 knots.

sailing with the tide?^^

[Sir Malachy Karrde]

3 hours ago, Malachi said:

Ok, let´s break this down. First you wrote:

Then this:

So, the RN razeé´d three 74s in 1813. They simply revived the concept of cutting down unsatisfactory/worn-out ships of the line, just like they had done in the decades before. E.g. Anson, Indy, Magnanime, all cut down in the mid-1790s. Just with 74s instead of 64s this time, simply because the RN had an ample, uncommissioned supply of this type of ship.

And they build four frigates to the 'old' design of the Endymion and two slightly larger 24-pounder frigates, all of them of fir. But they also happily continued to order dozens of 18-pounder Lively-, Leda- and other class vessels. Not quite the 'completely re envisioning'  and 'change of building doctrine' you wrote about, n'est-ce pas?

 

Just had a look, highest quoted speed in the book for the Connie is 12.5 knots.

Well, while I don´t know which 'alternative' data you were looking at, my suggestions is to get some books which weren´t written with a stars-and-stripes bias cranked to 11.

Took note, smiled and carried on.

 

Edit:

Wait a sec...you´re the same guy who produced pearls of wisdom like these:

Oh my.

It's obvious you don't have a clue. Its also obvious that you are a Brit fan boy. And thanks for finding the dates for the razee ships for me. I never said the Brits were original in their response to the US heavy frigates and unfortunately, we never got a chance to see if their response would work, as the war ended before any further engagements.  So you keep reading your revisionist EU drivel, I'll keep reading history. And you need to re read Toll's book again, just read for content this time. You are on my ignore list now with all the other ignoramuses.

I love to read these forums and watch people who think they know something spout their ignorance. Especially people who have never sailed anything more than pixels attempt to portray themselves as sailors. 

I actually served on the crew of the Constitution for six months during my navy days, and was an intelligence officer for six years after that.  I also have a Masters of Military History and wrote my final paper on the naval war of 1812. On top of that, I have a doctorate of Intelligence Studies, which is not relevant to this discussion. 

PS: you try to say the Connie only was an 11 to 12 knot ship, when the US navy website lists her at 13 plus, I've sailed on her when she was pulling 13.2 in a light breeze, and then in a post to someone else, state a log entry someone else found of her doing 15 knots. Seems you are just butt hurt because an American super frigate was better than anything the Brits came up with to combat her. 

Edited September 17, 2018 by Sir Malachy Karrde

[Malachi]

13 minutes ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

It's obvious you don't have a clue. Its also obvious that you are a Brit fan boy. And thanks for finding the dates for the razee ships for me. I never said the Brits were original in their response to the US heavy frigates and unfortunately, we never got a chance to see if their response would work, as the war ended before any further engagements.  So you keep reading your revisionist EU drivel, I'll keep reading history. And you need to re read Toll's book again, just read for content this time. You are on my ignore list now with all the other ignoramuses.

 

This response gave me a good laugh, thanks for that

First time I've been called a brit fanboy, too. Feels dirrrrrty ^^

Edited September 17, 2018 by Malachi

[LeBoiteux]

5 minutes ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

It's obvious you don't have a clue. Its also obvious that you are a Brit fan boy. And thanks for finding the dates for the razee ships for me. I never said the Brits were original in their response to the US heavy frigates and unfortunately, we never got a chance to see if their response would work, as the war ended before any further engagements.  So you keep reading your revisionist EU drivel, I'll keep reading history. And you need to re read Toll's book again, just read for content this time. You are on my ignore list now with all the other ignoramuses. 

Dear Sir Karrde,

Malachi (the real one, the one without y 😉) is one of the few on NA forums who really knows what he talks about when it comes to naval history, ships...

Please, stop being rude/aggressive. If you want to have a debate with such a good educated fellow, read and learn, be humble and objective.

Debates about Naval history are interesting only when ppl are educated and nice.

Have a nice day, Gentleman. 🙂

PS : I guess I should not have interfered, but sometimes...

[Sir Malachy Karrde]

Just now, LeBoiteux said:

Dear Sir Karrde,

Malachi (the real one, the one without y 😉) is one of the few on NA forums who really knows what he talks about when it comes to naval history, ships...

Please, stop being rude/aggressive. If you want to have a debate with such a good educated fellow, read and learn, be humble and objective.

Debates about Naval history are interesting only when ppl are educated and nice.

Have a nice day, Gentleman. 🙂

PS : I guess I should not have interfered, but sometimes...

He may think he's an expert, but as far as I'm concerned, he's got a long ways to go. He knows enough random facts and decent sounding fictions to make himself sound good. I'm done with him now, I don't have time for arrogant fools. 

[Malachi]

40 minutes ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

actually served on the crew of the Constitution for six months during my navy days, and was an intelligence officer for six years after that.  I also have a Masters of Military History and wrote my final paper on the naval war of 1812. On top of that, I have a doctorate of Intelligence Studies, which is not relevant to this discussion. 

This is getting better and better...I'm pretty sure the people at Trump University were very proud of you, getting a master and all that

Edited September 17, 2018 by Malachi

[Percival Merewether]

41 minutes ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

PS: you try to say the Connie only was an 11 to 12 knot ship, when the US navy website lists her at 13 plus, I've sailed on her when she was pulling 13.2 in a light breeze, and then in a post to someone else, state a log entry someone else found of her doing 15 knots. Seems you are just butt hurt because an American super frigate was better than anything the Brits came up with to combat her. 

The HMS Bellona was capable of hitting 13kts too, some 74's went even faster than that - maybe we should take a look at all ship speeds and see how well the Connie will do. 

[Licinio Chiavari]

In the end... This should be a playable Age of sail WarGame.

Realism argument cant be used only when useful... On the contrary again, maximum close haul for all square sails should be 80° at best and tack into the wind should require like 5+ minutes.

What matter is balancing the game using history/realism as inspiration: so a schooner has to go close haul far better than a Frigate.

And therefore, Constitution being underused in PVP hunting is a fact. The reason is the too low base speed.

So she needs a buff... But not making her too fast to the point of cancelling the use of other frigates. Plain simple.

[z4ys]

Just now, Percival Merewether said:

The HMS Bellona was capable of hitting 13kts too, some 74's went even faster than that - maybe we should take a look at all ship speeds and see how well the Connie will do. 

theoretical speed of conni is 18,5kn

theoretical speed of bellona is 16,4kn

theoretical speed of victory is 18,7kn

v [kn] = 1,34 * (waterline length[ft])^(1/2)

 

 

 

 

[StaleMemes]

Malachi vs Malachy,

A bunch of malarkey if you ask me.

Only one ship rules the sea,

And the pickle it do be!

Edited September 17, 2018 by Capt Aerobane

[Grundgemunkey]

1 hour ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

It's obvious you don't have a clue. Its also obvious that you are a Brit fan boy. And thanks for finding the dates for the razee ships for me. I never said the Brits were original in their response to the US heavy frigates and unfortunately, we never got a chance to see if their response would work, as the war ended before any further engagements.  So you keep reading your revisionist EU drivel, I'll keep reading history. And you need to re read Toll's book again, just read for content this time. You are on my ignore list now with all the other ignoramuses.

I love to read these forums and watch people who think they know something spout their ignorance. Especially people who have never sailed anything more than pixels attempt to portray themselves as sailors. 

I actually served on the crew of the Constitution for six months during my navy days, and was an intelligence officer for six years after that.  I also have a Masters of Military History and wrote my final paper on the naval war of 1812. On top of that, I have a doctorate of Intelligence Studies, which is not relevant to this discussion. 

PS: you try to say the Connie only was an 11 to 12 knot ship, when the US navy website lists her at 13 plus, I've sailed on her when she was pulling 13.2 in a light breeze, and then in a post to someone else, state a log entry someone else found of her doing 15 knots. Seems you are just butt hurt because an American super frigate was better than anything the Brits came up with to combat her. 

I doubt you ever served in any Navy  and certainly not as an officer

Having served in the Royal Navy for 12 years . The British and American armed forces certainly show each other more respect than your showing on this thread

ps

The last time the constitution sailed under her own power was 1997 ,,, first  time in 100 years ,,

" The ship got underway at 9:57 a.m. with tugs attached to her sides and 285 people on board, including special guests, such as the 58th, 59th, 62nd and 65th former commanding officers of Constitution; Rear Adm. Richard Breckenridge, Commander, Submarine Group Two; Rear Adm. Ted Branch, Commander, Naval Air Forces Atlantic; Vice Adm. William French, Commander, Navy Installations Command; retired Navy Capt. Thomas Hudner Jr., Medal of Honor recipient; and Dr. Phil Budden, Britain's Consul General to New England.

At 10:27 a.m., Budden and Bonner tossed a wreath into the ocean to honor and remember Constitution's battle with the HMS Guerriere.

When the ship arrived at President Roads, a body of water of Boston Harbor, the crew then set three sails from Constitution's main, mizzen and fore masts, and at 12:25 p.m., she detached from her tugs and sailed west under her own power for 17 minutes. She sailed at a maximum speed of 3.1 knots, at an average of two knots, and at a distance of 1,100 yards.

"As the ship's sail master, I felt a combination of pride and relief that the hundreds of man hours of training and planning over the past year all came together, and we were able to accomplish this goal," said Boatswain's Mate 1st Class (SW) Conrad Hunt. "I'm really proud that I can say I was a part of this historic occasion."

After tugs reattached to Constitution's sides, the ship headed to Fort Independence on Castle Island, where thousands of spectators waited to watch Constitution fire a 21-gun salute toward the fort at 1:14 p.m. Fort Independence is a state park that served as a defense post for Boston Harbor at one time.

Finally, the ship returned to her pier at 2:05 p.m. and everyone departed once the brow was safely set and the ship was clean. Constitution re-opened to the public for tours of the ship's history at 4 p.m. "

think your full of something

 

 

Edited September 17, 2018 by Grundgemunkey

[Sir Malachy Karrde]

22 minutes ago, Grundgemunkey said:

I doubt you ever served in any Navy  and certainly not as an officer

Having served in the Royal Navy for 12 years . The British and American armed forces certainly show each other more respect than your showing on this thread

ps

The last time the constitution sailed under her own power was 1997 ,,, first  time in 100 years ,,

" The ship got underway at 9:57 a.m. with tugs attached to her sides and 285 people on board, including special guests, such as the 58th, 59th, 62nd and 65th former commanding officers of Constitution; Rear Adm. Richard Breckenridge, Commander, Submarine Group Two; Rear Adm. Ted Branch, Commander, Naval Air Forces Atlantic; Vice Adm. William French, Commander, Navy Installations Command; retired Navy Capt. Thomas Hudner Jr., Medal of Honor recipient; and Dr. Phil Budden, Britain's Consul General to New England.

At 10:27 a.m., Budden and Bonner tossed a wreath into the ocean to honor and remember Constitution's battle with the HMS Guerriere.

When the ship arrived at President Roads, a body of water of Boston Harbor, the crew then set three sails from Constitution's main, mizzen and fore masts, and at 12:25 p.m., she detached from her tugs and sailed west under her own power for 17 minutes. She sailed at a maximum speed of 3.1 knots, at an average of two knots, and at a distance of 1,100 yards.

"As the ship's sail master, I felt a combination of pride and relief that the hundreds of man hours of training and planning over the past year all came together, and we were able to accomplish this goal," said Boatswain's Mate 1st Class (SW) Conrad Hunt. "I'm really proud that I can say I was a part of this historic occasion."

After tugs reattached to Constitution's sides, the ship headed to Fort Independence on Castle Island, where thousands of spectators waited to watch Constitution fire a 21-gun salute toward the fort at 1:14 p.m. Fort Independence is a state park that served as a defense post for Boston Harbor at one time.

Finally, the ship returned to her pier at 2:05 p.m. and everyone departed once the brow was safely set and the ship was clean. Constitution re-opened to the public for tours of the ship's history at 4 p.m. "

think your full of something

 

 

That was the first time she set sail after her refit. She's been under sail many times since, 2012, 2013, and 2016 being some of the most recent. She's also been taken out by cadet classes a few times as well. There are videos of some of the cruises she's made on YouTube. She usually sails around August 19th. Although has sailed on other dates as well.

Edited September 17, 2018 by Sir Malachy Karrde

[Grundgemunkey]

6 minutes ago, Sir Malachy Karrde said:

That was the first time she set sail after her refit. She's been under sail many times since, 2012, 2013, and 2016 being some of the most recent. She's also been taken out by cadet classes a few times as well. There are videos of some of the cruises she's made on YouTube. She usually sails around August 19th. 

i got my info from

https://ussconstitutionmuseum.org/2017/12/21/sail-big-sh

also says she was in dry dock from 2015/17 ... yet you say she was sailing in 2016 ??

 

Edited September 17, 2018 by Grundgemunkey