sup /k/,
i reading a history of the US navy and the book says that the US frigates pretty much cockslapped everyone they fought. why did american frigates slap the shit out of the british and french frigates?
apparently they were larger and faster. 44 guns vs 30ish guns. they also had more crew, 500 vs 250ish. also the crews were superior, being hand chosen from merchant fleets, whereas british crews often had criminals, children, and slaves in their crews.
American ship builders were apparently the best in the world during the age of sail. how did they achieve a larger, faster, more robust frigate?
>>30385139
I don't know exactly, but I'll put a dollar on wood quality and quantity.
They were designed to fill an intermediate niche that other navies didn't have, heavier than a frigate and faster than a ship of the line. Beat up anybody weaker than you and run from anybody stronger. Glorified piracy really.
>>30385139
tomahawks
>>30385139
US Frigates were very very slightly smaller than a 5th Rate, and had the advantage of being made with excellent materials by rather good shipwrights. Other ships in the region weren't as good because it wasn't a major theater to deploy heavier ships in and getting proper ships of the line into the Great Lakes was a pain in the ass.
>>30385139
US built hueg frigates because they couldn't afford a balanced blue water navy. They were the forerunners of desperation strats seen in the likes of the pocket battleships.
US navy was capable of commerce raiding, but powerless to stop the Brits from sailing up and down the US coasts as they felt like.
>>30385281
>into the Great Lakes
What are you talking about?
>>30385139
this is what I heard, and I am completely uncertain if it is bullshit
"Old Ironsides" got it's name because of the Oak that made up it's hull, apparently (I think it was post oak) is incredibly dense compared to normal wood of the time, or stronger, and they had cannonballs bouncing off the motherfucker
imagine
how
terriffying
>be brit
>pressganged sailor
>fight rebellious tax evaders
>not worried, dank sailing tradition
>go to push some dirt farmer's gay ship's shit in
no.jpeg
>cannonballs bouncing off, one of them takes your m8 jmmy scrimmy scrum scrum's head off
>it proceeds to gape not only your anus, but the anus of another ship of an equal class at once
>admiralty later sends out letters telling you to "watch the fuck out"and "stay away"
>>30385318
Specially selected Oaks. Super thick and made from fuck wide oak trees. Plus heavier than normal armament and speed for a ship of that size.
>>30385318
No, the wood was simply thicker and better reinforced.
>>30385307
Kinda. They were designed to pick off lone frigates while avoiding groups and ships of the line, so by forcing the Brits to group up they reduced the amount of territory they could effectively cover.
>>30385372
I think only the USS Constitution was the most rapey of all six original ships. That ship and three others had successful careers. Only two had less than stellar fates.
First, they were Live Oak. Live Oak is an evergreen tree from the south that produces disturbingly tough wood. There are, in fact, special Live Oak forests managed specifically for keeping the "Connie" afloat. Second, the quality of sailors. Furthermore, the frigates were larger than European equivalents, and they carried more and larger cannons.
The U.S. Navy had a problem: too many qualified sailors were applying. Given that in 1812 pretty much anything manufactured had to be imported to America, there were plenty of sailors. To add to this, the Britbongs were never really satisfied with losing America, and the Royal Navy had a habit of illegally stopping American merchantmen to "search" them, sometimes abducting the sailors into their own crews. This was one of the primary causes of the war.
The Royal Navy, for all of its well-deserved reputation, often had undermanned ships with crews that had been press-ganged into service at various British ports. At the time the British officers were rather disrespectful to their men, meaning that the men didn't feel as much love towards their superiors. By contrast, Americans embraced egalitarianism. While seamen were expected to treat officers as superiors, the officers were quite cordial and friendly in return. As a result, there were quite a few British seamen and soldiers who deserted in Canada to come to America.
>>30385253
Some of them were actual pirates. Washington gave letters of marque to them to go fucking nuts on the Brits.
>>30385541
hi rich
>>30385253
>They were designed to fill an intermediate niche that other navies didn't have, heavier than a frigate and faster than a ship of the line. Beat up anybody weaker than you and run from anybody stronger. Glorified piracy really.
ahh neat.
>>30385578
Who's Rich?
>>30385139
Because they were powered by pure freedom rather than wind.
>>30385139
Several reasons:
>In a time when England had cut down just about ever mature Kentish oak for shipbuilding (ditto the rest of Europe), the US had access to excellent, old growth white pine, longleaf pine, white oak, and, most importantly, southern live oak. They could build thicker with longer continuous timbers throughout the entire design.
>They were massive. I mean fuckhuge for frigates. In dimensions, bracing and hull thickness they were practically razee'd 4th rates.
>Because they were built this way, they had excellent, low centers of gravity/weight distribution. This made them superlative sailers, be they close hauled, beam reach or running before the wind.
>The construction also allowed for heavier armaments; again, the gun and weather decks were outfitted more like 5th or 4th rates than 6th rates.
For all these reasons they were EXCELLENT for their intended purpose of commerce protection, raiding, privateering and smaller scale stand up fights. Nothing the US ever built was going to stand up to a British line squadron, so they chose to build ships that could kick 8 shades of shit out of two of any ship that could catch them while being more than fast enough to run from anything bigger.
They actually started a European shipbuilding trend. After they were commissioned, you started seeing a lot more oversized new build frigates and cut down (razee'd) older 5th and 4th rates, all designed to cover more ground and still kick ass. Especially with the British, as they were stretched so thing with the Napoleonic wars and all their other commitments. Before this, the British had a systemic shortage of frigates going back decades, but after the US showed the utility of moderately armed heavily built fast sailors, the British started hanging on to and new building frigates and focusing less on ships of the line for new builds.
This thinking eventually evolved into the armored cruiser and then battlecruiser concepts.
>>30385541
>Live Oak is an evergreen tree
what the fuck?
>special Live Oak forests managed specifically for keeping the "Connie" afloat
Nope. Plenty of live oak to go around, and Connie gets only old growth replacement timbers (150+ years old). They do plant and maintain several dozen live oaks for every one they harvest, though.
>too many qualified sailors were applying.
Nope. They were trying to legitimize a large and growing privateering corps in the hopes that they would not turn to piracy and cripple American trade, and protect American merchantmen at the same time (especially as the British were pressing sailors directly off of US decks at the time).
>there were plenty of sailors.
A huge fraction of those sailors were formerly pressed British sailors who had jumped ship for America, which then offered far better pay and conditions.
>sometimes abducting the sailors into their own crews.
Don't forget outright hanging about one in four of the former British sailors who had run.
>>30385912
They do keep their leaves until the spring, drop them, and then start growing new ones immediately. While not strictly evergreen in the scientific terminology, they are considered by many horticulturists to be a type of evergreen. And the U.S. Navy does own considerable Live Oak forests.
And all the monographs on the naval war that I have read have basically stated the same thing: Naval Recruitment offices were unable to find ships for all of the applicants. Yes, you are correct that many U.S. seamen were former Limeys who jumped ship at the first chance, but the majority came from America's own merchant fleets.
>>30386040
I believe live oak is the only broadleaf evergreen around.
Also, one note on live oak's strength--the energy content of a pound of live oak firewood is *just* shy of that of coal. That's how dense it is.
American Live Oak wood is one of the best woods to use to build ships.
>>30386382
Didn't know about the "energy" aspect. I definitely believe it. And no, it isn't the only broad-leaf evergreen. Olive is one, too, as well as just about anything tropical.
>>30385266
>yfw a wooden sailing ship carrying a variety of missiles and drones can be relevant and even effective today against contemporary naval forces
>>30385578
LOL. That wasnt me, Nick, but id have said the same thing, brah. Still holds. American squids are hard as fuck and smart.
>>30385912
Fuck off.
To be more specific: When someone renounces their citizenship to become an American, we take that shit seriously. Whether the crown recognizes it or not, those are Americans now, with full rights, privileges and protections that any American can and should expect.
So fuck off.
>>30385541
>To add to this, the Britbongs were never really satisfied with losing America, and the Royal Navy had a habit of illegally stopping American merchantmen to "search" them, sometimes abducting the sailors into their own crews. This was one of the primary causes of the war.
this isnt entirely accurate, the US merchant marine was a common hiding place for british naval deserters and recapturing them was a legitimate cause for stopping and searching provided that only deserters were taken (which was mostly the case.
the US argued against all logic that once they had taken US citizenship the deserters were free of their prior obligations, this in spite of the fact that to this day they dont accept such arguments for US deserters
>>30387869
I recall reading something about a USMC lance corporal that deserted to join the FFL and was told that he would be immediately arrested and tried for desertion if he returned to the US.
I still want to see a National Treasure sequel where Nic Cage steals the USS Constitution
>>30385266
That's fucking glorious.
>>30386731
It's true, it's right behind Locust in terms of energy.
Also, cool bit of trivia, the wood used to renovate the steeple of the Old North Church in Boston was originally meant for the USS Constitution.
