Jump to content

Welcome to Model Ship World
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

American sailing warships with no plans or records

John Adams Alliance General Greene Enterprise Congress

  • Please log in to reply
283 replies to this topic

#281
CharlieZardoz

CharlieZardoz
  • Members
  • 792 posts
  • LocationQueens New York

I suppose it was to help the ships appear more like menacing warships since the US fleet was so much smaller than the British or French the idea of making our small fleet look more imposing must have been a factor. I mean the Continental navy was comprised largely of sloops and galleys, then we upgraded to schooners then brigs then sloops, building what was essentially affordable with a few superships scattered about. Regarding Enterprize I imagine she must have looked something like Prince De Neufchatel by the time of 1815-1820 after all her rebuilds. Could be wrong on that but with so many possible changes I could imagine the two might have looked similar.


  • mtaylor, uss frolick and Canute like this

#282
Talos

Talos
  • Members
  • 216 posts

I suppose it was to help the ships appear more like menacing warships since the US fleet was so much smaller than the British or French the idea of making our small fleet look more imposing must have been a factor. I mean the Continental navy was comprised largely of sloops and galleys, then we upgraded to schooners then brigs then sloops, building what was essentially affordable with a few superships scattered about. Regarding Enterprize I imagine she must have looked something like Prince De Neufchatel by the time of 1815-1820 after all her rebuilds. Could be wrong on that but with so many possible changes I could imagine the two might have looked similar.

 

You also have the problem of finding enough commands for the higher ranking officers too. Can't have a Captain commanding a brig, after all. But certainly a large part of it is small fleet syndrome: they'll never have the numerical advantage, so each hull has to be as useful and powerful in that class as they can be. That's a big part of the reason for the 44s in the first place.


  • trippwj, mtaylor, uss frolick and 2 others like this

#283
Story

Story
  • Members
  • 8 posts

How about the USS Repulse, 8 gun xebec originally built in 1775 for the Pennsylvania Navy and loaned to the USN in April 1777?

Failed to make the run past Philadelphia in November 1777, scuttled.

No Further Information.


  • trippwj, mtaylor, uss frolick and 1 other like this

#284
trippwj

trippwj

    Scullery Maid

  • Members
  • 3,491 posts
  • LocationEastport, Maine, USA

Let me just interject a word of caution concerning the semantics of the time.  It is important to keep in mind that for the period under discussion (1770 - 1840), the term "Sloop of War" had absolutely nothing to do with the rig the vessel carried.  A "Sloop of War" was anything smaller than the smallest rated war ship (generally a 20 gun 6th rate).  In the American nomenclature, the early definition was quite similar.  The rig was immaterial - there were Brig Sloops of War, Schooner Sloops of War.  During the period of interest, terminology concerning the rig was much less precise and varied regionally.  Standardization would have to wait the development of the more bureaucratic navy during the mid 19th century.


  • mtaylor, uss frolick, Talos and 2 others like this

Wayne

Neither should a ship rely on one small anchor, nor should life rest on a single hope.
Epictetus





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Welcome GUEST to the Model Ship World Community.
Please LOGIN or REGISTER to use all of our feautures.