Jump to content

Recommended Posts

(Inserted) While this topic started as a question about barrel length, it has ended up being a research project in order to construct as accurately as possible 3D models of Victory's primary 32-, 24- and 12-pounder guns. You may want to skip down to later posts as the thread evolves, and I'm happy for anyone to contribute information to this project.

 

I'm building the Corel HMS Victory Cross Section, trying to put some extra detail in (iron plates for ballast, more "furniture", etc. My son has both a filament and resin 3D printers, so he's made some detail parts.

 

I've had some problems getting the cannon to look the way I like, and after researching, realized that the supplied cannon of 35, 30 and 25mm in length are absolutely not to scale, using any source at all. And since I can't buy cannon that are quite right, and as I'm a retired engineer with a son with a 3D printer, I figured I'd draw them up myself and have him make them. The question is:  What size?

 

I bought John McKay's book The 100-Gun Ship Victory and it has excellent 1/48 scale views of the three cannon sizes within the cross-section (12, 24 and 32-pounders). I figured I'd enlarge those to an easily-measured size, and use it for making the CAD model, then print them the same size. Great. But in the process of other research, I find that most ships-of-the-line cannon of a 32 pound size should be 9' 6" long. This is confirmed by a number of sources, including House of the Orange Monkey. And in fact, it appears all 3 sizes of guns are 9' 6" long. Well, McKay's book scales them as 10' 7" for the 24 and 32s, and right at 10' for the 12 pound. The 12-pound MEDIUM gun used on the forecastle scales 9' 6" long and the 12-pound Short gun on the quarterdeck scale close to 8' 6" long.

 

Anyhow, can anyone confirm the actual barrel length of the Victory's 3 main long guns?

 

Also, the scale drawings show the carriage for the 32s and 24s as being identical, in design and size, yet the tables I've seen show different sizes for them (always scaled to the barrel length). I've been looking at this table:

 

image.thumb.png.eb6bf72d9e4fa3a28b3f79b719689362.png

and it includes a lot of great information, but NOT the length of the barrels, except related to the Length to Caliber Ratio, which is stated nowhere. Does it vary with bore? It would vary with Long, Medium and Short, but I see no values to accompany the tables.

 

Also, how are cannon lengths calculated? In the above, would that be dimension A, or dimension F? As, for a 32-pounder, D is 2.25 x 6.105" = 13.7", adding that to 9' 6" comes up to my measured 10' 7" (?).

 

Anyhow thanks in advance for any ideas, and MERRY CHRISTMAS!  🙂

Edited by rraisley
Changing path of topic.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Raisley 

It depends on the year. 100 gun ships, including  Victory, carried 42 pounders at one time. She had 32 pounders 9 1/2' long available in 1778 and finally brought on board in 1779 to replace 42 pounders (Caruana The History of English Sea Ordinance Vol 11, page 234)

24 pounders only came in three lengths, 10, 9 1/2, and 9 feet. At the time of Trafalgar I believe Victory carried long 24s thus 10 feet long,  on the middle deck (Lavery  Ships of the Line)  and short twelve pounders on the upper gun deck and QD (8 1/2 feet).  She had two medium  length (between 9 feet and 10 feet) 12 pounders on her forecastle as well as two 68 pounder carronades (Lavery  Ships of the Line) 

 

Hope this is of some help.

 

Allan

Edited by allanyed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for answering. I'm modeling the era where the lower deck had 32-pound long guns, the middle deck 24-pound long guns and the upper gun deck 12-pound long guns. That's all that is shown in the cross section. My problem is I see lots of documentation that the 32-pounders were 9.5' long, yet McKay's fine book shows them as 10.62'. And it shows the 24-pounders as being the exact same length (just smaller in diameter). This conflicts with the published values of 9.5', yet McKay is the bible, right?

 

McKay also shows the diameter of the barrels as being larger than the chart above, even when using the Double Fortified diameter values.

 

Is it possible that cannon length refers to the A value on the chart above, and not the F value which includes the B dimension of the base and button? If so, that would explain the length McKay shows for the 32-pounder. And as the barrel lengths are the same, the 24-pounders must be 9.5 feet long too, measured to A.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right in that the notional length of 9’ 6” refers to length ‘A’, from the muzzle to the reinforcement ring on the breech, to which you add length ‘B’, this is why guns of differing weights of notionally the same length actually vary in length.

 

The drawing you show is for an Armstrong pattern gun, an earlier version to what Victory currently mounts which are all the later Blomefield pattern - the main distinction is that the Blomefield’s have the thimble or loop for the breaching rope cast in to them.

 

The Board of Ordnance records held in the National Archives at Kew (ADM 160/154) has a full list of guns that were allocated to Victory upon recommissioning in April 1805, they don’t list the make or pattern but they do give the individual gun weights and cast numbers and from this information they can be tested against the nominal weights for the standard patterns.  This shows that the lower deck 32-Pounders of 9’ 6” were all Blomefield pattern manufactured by Samuel Walker & Co. of Rotherham, the middle deck 24-Pounders of 9’ 6” were all Armstrong pattern manufactured by Alexander Brodie at his Calcutts Ironworks, Upper Deck long 12-Pounders of 9’ were a mixed bag, suggesting a mix of Armstrong and Blomefield pattern, they were predominantly manufactured by Samuel Walker & Co. - these are all Blomefield (24 Nr.), and the 8 Armstrong were possibly also by Brodie but noted as ‘Solid’ which means they were cast solid and bored out (up to 1779 all cannon were cast with a central plug as the basis for the bore), the specific mention of ‘Solid’ denotes  these were very early bored-out guns.  At this stage Victory had 32Nr. long 12’s, 30Nr. were on the upper deck and 2Nr. as forecastle bow chasers. She also carried 10Nr. short 12-Pounders of 7’ 6” on the Quarterdeck of Armstrong pattern all manufactured by Walker & Co.

 

This was before Victory gained the 68-Pounder carronades and the number of guns conforms precisely to the establishment for First Rates.  At Trafalgar there is some doubt as to how things changed as in August 1804 Victory took delivery of the 68-Pounders from HMS Kent, she also acquired 2 Nr. additional 24-Pounders all in exchange for 6 Nr. 12-Pounders (probably the long ones) - this is mentioned in Hardy’s log. What is not clear is if during August / September 1805 whilst in England for a mini refit, and all the guns removed, whether her armament was restored to account for the additional 24’s and the missing 12’s, that is subject to further research.

 

Gary

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to Gary's great information, I would not consider McKay the authority on ordinance.   He appears to have used the 20 caliber rule for determining the length of the 32.  This was typical in determining the length of the barrel with the exceptions of the 32 pounder and 3 pounder.   For the 32, the 20 caliber rule would have the barrel at 10.62  feet as McKay gives which would have been far too heavy (the History of English Sea Ordinance, Caruana, page 220).    For English sea ordinance, if there is a bible, I believe it would be the two volumes by Caruana.

Allan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much, everyone. I was heading toward the "length" being just to the breech, rather than overall, and this confirms it. The only other discrepancies I see between "standards" and McKays drawings are:

 

The 32-pound and 24-pound use EXACTLY the same size carriage, which is not standard as far as I can tell.

 

All the barrels are shown "fatter" than one the Hahn table. Dimensions for G & I:

 

Hahn Standard:  G = 2.75 x C,    I = 2.75 x C

Hahn Double Fortified:  G = 3 x C,   I = 2.875 x C

McKay 32-Pound:  G = 3.30 x C,    I = 2.10 x C

McKay 24-Pound:  G = 3.4 x C,    I = 2.14 x C

McKay 12-Pound:  G = 3.64 x C,   I = 2.36 x C

 

Were there even heavier/thicker cannon than the Double Fortified ones that could explain it?  Nelson did have the latest and greatest, I think, what with Flintlocks and all.

 

I know I'm getting nit-picky on this stuff. But when I'm taking the time to ACCURATELY model the cannon and carriages in full size, and then create resin 3D models for my model as well as maybe larger ones for my desk, I'd like them to look as accurate as possible. I'm even trying to research the size and shape of the reinforcing bands, the muzzle end flare, etc. A lot of the old books referenced at this site show them in fold-out sheets, but they've been copied without being folded out, so are difficult to tell. I thought sure I'd find a blueprint of an exact copy of at least one of the guns, that someone has documented to make a large scale, firing replica of, but no luck so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Raisley,

You are not being nit picky, you are trying to be accurate, good for you!!   The length of a 24 gun carriage for the 1791 pattern was 6 feet 0 inches based on a drawing by Shuttleworth in the R.A. Library.  The length of a 32 pounder carriage was 6 feet 8 1/2 inches.   See Caruana volume II pages 376 and 378.  The 32 pounder drawing is from a contemporary drawing in the British Library.  The 24 was 4' 4" wide at the rear truck axles.  The 32 was 5' 0" wide at the rear truck axles.  The carriages were not the same size for both 24s and 32s based on the research of Caruana. 

Allan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked in the book I have by Arthur Bugler O.B.E and he has the drawings of 12 pounder Short 8'-2", 12 pounder Medium 9'-2" and 12 pounder Long 9'-8" 24 pounder 10'-3 1/2" and 32 pounder 10'-3 1/2"

32 & 24 pounder gun carriage 6'-2 1/2" long, and both the same width, 12 pounder gun carriage long and medium are the same at 5'-6 1/4" and short 5'-0 1/4" all the same width

12 pounder (long) 30 in number upper deck

12 pounder (medium) 2 in number forecastle deck

12 pounder (short) 12 in number quarter deck

24 pounder 28 in number middle deck

32 pounder 30 in number lower deck 

I also have a drawing from the book on the 68 pounder Carronade and the carriage

This would be as the refit of 1805 (Trafalgar condition)

 

 

mK5SHs.jpg

 

If you would like anymore info send me a pm

I am no expert on this subject just giving you some dimension from another books information.

 

Regards

Richard

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I drew up the 32-pounder barrel in Fusion 360, using parameters to change the -pound size, and using McKay's book enlarged for size and shapes. I think it came out reasonably well thus far and detail is reasonable, considering it will be 1.3" (33 mm) long. I noted above that the McKay barrel diameter is substantially larger than even Hahn's table for Double Fortified diameters.

 

I then used Hahn's table and drawings to do the carriage. Surprisingly, there are a couple of things missing on the drawing: Location of the cannon trunnion, which I scaled from McKay's drawings. The other was the width of the sides of the carriage which includes the angle of the sides. I assumed that the square portion of the axles would be flush with the side at the widest portion (rear) of the axle cutouts in the side.

 

Overall, I think it's coming well. However, as I did the barrel and carriage in separate files, and only recently put them together, I really think the barrel diameter is too small for the carriage. So, I'm left with the question: Did Nelson have super fat/strong barrels and widen the carriages to fit? Or is McKay's drawing wrong, and Nelson had standard cannon diameters, probably the Double Fortified version?

 

As before, if anyone has details or information showing actual barrel flare, breech doming, reinforcing band size & configuration, or anything else relating to this, I'd love to have it. I'm drawing the gun up "full size", and will be making some for my Victory cross section in 1:98, but also want to make a desktop version about 6" long. And I hate to put the time into drawing something that is a "guess" in many ways.

32-Pound Angle.png

32-Pound Top.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming you are looking for a drawing of a Blomefield pattern 32 pounder, 9' 6" (56cwt) barrel there is a 3"=1' scale drawing on pages 260 and 261 in Volume II of Caruana's books on ordinance.   The only obvious differences are you show five reinforce rings, instead of the standard four on a Blomefield 32 pounder,  There are also a few other minor differences, but you are pretty close.   I would not use McKay as a guide for cannon, but that is only my take.  Lavery shows essentially the same drawing of the breech and muzzle.  These were taken from contemporary drawings at NMM so I would consider these as more accurate if there are differences with McKay and Hahn.  The drawing in the Arming and Fitting by Lavery gives dimensions of all parts.  I would love to post a copy but there are copyrights involved.  

Allan

Edited by allanyed
Link to post
Share on other sites

In an effort to create accurate guns for my Corel 1/98 scale Victory cross section, I've been doing a lot of research and have used various tables and drawings I've found on the Net to make a 3D model in Fusion 360. I made a VERY nice looking model (shown below) only to find that while it matched many sources in dimensions and layout, it did not match the 32-pounder on the HMS Victory. I do have some specific information on the Victory's guns:
 

Page 104+ of Longridge's The Anatomy of Nelson's Ships

Pages 96 and 97 of McKay's Anatomy of the Ship: The 100-Gun Ship Victory

A scan of a page with cannon and carriage dimension restoration details (source unknown)

Scans of the barrel details and dimensions for Blomefeld cannon that I feel good about and think should work.

 

Could you at MSW, with your wealth of detail and knowledge and construction and, yes, even computer-aided drawings, assist me in obtaining more information necessary to construct a final and accurate 3D model of these guns? Of the carriages in particular. I can improvise such details as Capsquares and such, but particulars about the Axtrees, Bolster, Stool Bed, Quoin, Transom, Bolster etc. dimensions, usage and arrangement, along with hardware and such would be extremely helpful. Yes, I can make a basic block that will match published dimensions, but I'd like to have it as through and accurate and complete as possible.

 

In appreciate of this information, I would make the 3D model and various 2D views available to anyone who would like them. I can't do DXFs with this software, but PNG files can be imported or resized as desired.

 

Responses are welcome here. Any information you would like to give me but prefer not to post or make generally available please email to rraisley@bellsouth.net. I will NOT give any of this information to anyone else, but use it only for my needs for this project. Thank you in advance.

 

Here are shots of my model of the barrel (close I think) and carriage) definitely wrong, to see what I'm trying to do, but more accurately.Cannon.png.cf90e56c2d4dfc32d04328b200c0cfd2.pngCarriage.png.f95c8e6ce38e2112c45167f56914cab9.png

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

After going down a couple dead ends, I worked up a nice looking but inaccurate 3D model of the Victory's long 32-pounder. I am therefore going to start over to "do it right", and have requested anyone's help and knowledge in doing so at a new topic here:
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mtaylor said:

There's no need to start a separate topic as all that does is scatter the research and discussion all over the place.  To that end, I've merged your "new" topic with this one.

 

I was a bit upset until I saw that you did include the content of my other thread. Is there any way to change the title of this one, to better represent its current goal?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, rraisley said:

I was a bit upset until I saw that you did include the content of my other thread. Is there any way to change the title of this one, to better represent its current goal?

Yes, go back to the first post and edit it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick,

Per our earlier conversation, at the time of Trafalgar, the carriages, at least for the 32's and  24's would have likely been the 1795 design which had cleats on the sides and breasts on the front edges of the  brackets.    Perhaps other members can shed some light on this.  I have attached the portion of the painting The Death of Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar by Daniel Maclise that shows these items.  These are addressed with some detail in The History of English Ordnance, Volume II, pp 379-80

Allan

1051745840_1805carriagepainting.JPG.de61c910f1ffc377342bda24ef95439d.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • rraisley changed the title to HMS Victory CAD Model Research Project
Posted (edited)

While I was really pleased with the carriage I posted above, based on the drawing by Harold M. Hahn, I have found no confirmation that this exact design was used on the Victory. Several designs are currently on the Victory and on land offboard, with specific information on dimensions and such. In fact, other than photographs, I only have two sources for what the 32-pounder carriages actually looked like:

  • HMS Victory: Her Construction, Career and Restoration by Alan McGowan: Dimensioned drawings with construction details for the 24 & 32-pounder and also the 12-pounder are shown. The drawings aren't complete, but give quite a bit of information and many important dimensions.
  • The 100-Gun Ship Victory by John McKay: This book has good 1/48 scale views of all gun sizes.

I've made CAD drawings from the McGowan book, and then compared the result with the drawings in the McKay book, and found extremely good correlation between the two. About the only difference noticeable is that the McKay's 32-pounder carriage scales about 1.5" shorter than McKay's drawing indicates. But two fairly complete sources, both specific to the Victory, is a good start. Lacking anything else, I will proceed with this project using these sources.

 

I call on you, if you have any additional information, agreeing with or contrary to the above sources, relating to the Victory's guns, would you please notify me. You can post here for all to see (I'd like this to be a group project, or at least one in which the group agrees), then great. Or if you don't want information displayed publicly, you can email me at rraisley@bellsouth.net. I promise not to distribute information given me in confidence without permission.

 

While details of these specific guns are great, most important at this time is getting the shape, size and components of the carriage down correctly. I'd love to hear as soon as practical of any additional information that would help me. I will try to post drawings or images of my work as I go along to keep you up to date. And I'll be asking many  more questions I hope you will be able to help me with.

 

Here's what I have so far, based on the combination of McGown and McKay information:

 

image.png.95648b471dfd3e0d750281a31255d283.png

The squares in the above drawing are 10" x 10".

Edited by rraisley
Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I have completed the carriage model posted further above, which I believe to be a quite accurate model of the Hahn carriage, including most hardware. I can post 3-views of it in any scale, or post a 3D model in the file formats shown below:

image.png.b51e5e18161f293df21bf5d5718343e0.png

While the STL file can be used to make a 3D model, I can tell you from experiences that it is too detailed with loops and such for a small scale printout, even for a quality resin 3D printer, which my son has. 1/48 scale /may/ work. 1/98 does not. 1/72, doubtful. Although it could be simplified by taking off the problem areas, like the loops and long, thin bolts.

 

Everything is drawing full size, so all drawings and models can be scaled to any size and scale.

Sorry, but I cannot supply DXF files; Fusion 360 is unable to create them, and I cannot take the time to do annotated drawings. Especially of something I'm not using.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have completed the 2D drawing of the carriage for the Victory's 32- and 24-pounder guns. This view and dimensions will be used to extrude/produce the side brackets and the appropriate angle, with all cuts being perpendicular to the barrel, or parallel to the trunnion. The 2 sources I am using do not include the small 1/2" step down from the top before the radius to the topmost step, so I have not included it here (even though Hahn and many Victory photos show it). Here is the sketch dimensioned full size:

 

image.png.89dbaf6eb9ca42d5634f54a2f61227bc.png

I will be constructing the model with the side brackets being 2 pieces, split along the line shown above, from the first step, parallel to the top. I will also be placing 1/2" chamfers all around, with slight rounding in other places, and make the brackets 5 1/2" thick.

 

As stated above, if anyone has additional information, especially contracting information, concerning this project, carriage in particular, you can save me a lot of time by responding sooner rather than later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Morgan said:

Just for information the drawings in McGowan were also provided by McKay, the book really being a collaboration, differences in size between the two publications may simply be down to printing.

Good to know. Makes sense. So, are there any other sources for accurate dimensioned or scale drawings for the main Victory guns?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've completed a basic 3D model of the assembly.  Lots of detail to add, but this is what I've got for the basic shape and size. I'll show a couple 3D views and attach a PDF drawing which when printed full size will give views at 1/24 scale for detail. Please let me know what you think, good or bad, as to the accuracy of the drawings.

image.png.d2676b2ef4ae6a385f1ffc76a4fd3e97.pngimage.png.03f98b42d64eacae6022bed78411a802.pngimage.png.d2676b2ef4ae6a385f1ffc76a4fd3e97.png

 

New Design 1-24.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that the Hahn drawings are pretty "general" and not specific to any ship.  His drawings for the cannons and carriages were developed for his models and methods.   There are differences between what he drew for plans and the real vessel as he did take artistic license.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mtaylor said:

I would say that the Hahn drawings are pretty "general" and not specific to any ship.  His drawings for the cannons and carriages were developed for his models and methods.   There are differences between what he drew for plans and the real vessel as he did take artistic license.

Yes, I get that.  Turns out (and many may already know this) but Harold M. Hahn was/is a highly skilled modeler during the sixties to near 2000. His drawing on carriage dimensions was, I am certain, based on John Robertson's 1775, London book The Description of Ship-Guns and Sea Mortars. In it is a larger table with identical dimensions to Hahn's for a carriage whose proportions were based on the caliber size of the gun. The intent was to establish standards for manufacture, although they were obviously not universally (or even often?) adopted. Some of the nicest models I've seen seem to follow this drawing, however, and that is what I used for my first 3D model and pics early in this topic.

 

The Victory's cannon, as described by McKay and Bugler (whose sources I am using) describe much lower profile carriages, with smaller wheels, lower brackets, axtrees mounted deeper into the brackets. Those are the sources I am using for my Victory Gun Project, and will continue to until/unless I receive information that is contrary to those sources. The current Victory had no cannon on it when refit in 1920 (I believe), but no doubt some original guns were saved and mounted, in addition to guns from other sources as well as reproductions. How many of those look like originals (from whatever era being modeled), I have no idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those interested in the exact profile, we have come up with the following sketch showing the side view profile of the 32- and 24-pounder brackets for HMS Victory's main guns. As mentioned above, this is based mostly on Bugler's dimensioned drawings made during refit of the Victory, confirmed with McKay's drawings, which appear almost identical, and should represent actual gun measurements of Victory weapons "at some time". I can't be specific as to era or manufacture, only that people working on Victory felt this the best representation of this gun, so that's what we're going with. Corrections are always appreciated, but before-the-fact corrections are always appreciated more than after-the-fact. 😉

 

This drawing does not show the axtrees or other details, not the cutouts in the axtrees for such items, but we wanted to get a firm outline before doing down this new path:

 

image.thumb.png.df30811decdc69ea91f0061374be292a.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lieste said:

Is that for 24lb? To fit around the 5.82" trunnion (assumed same as bore, as this is normally what is quoted).
The 32lb should thus be suited to house a 6.41" trunnion. (12lb 4.62")

The thickness of cheeks is also described as one bore.

The carriages on the Victory are described in Arthur Bugler's HMS Victory: Building, restoration and repair, Chapter 5, Restoration details: as identical for the 32- and 24-pounders, but quite different for the 12-pounder. Both 32- and 24- are noted as having 6" trunnions, and a complete description mentions the cheeks as being 5.5" thick.

 

Yes, I know those dimensions are different than the "standard" proposed by John Robertson in 1775 and most often used in modeling, but all dimensions and arrangement are based on actual measurement of guns from the Victory in 1922. Apparently the Victory's guns were quite different than those normally modeled. But this is the only document, dimensioned, fully-described and drawing source for Victory's guns, at any period.

 

As stated many times, if you or others have other information specific to Victory, I'd love to see it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2021 at 10:53 AM, rraisley said:

By the way, I have completed the carriage model posted further above, which I believe to be a quite accurate model of the Hahn carriage, including most hardware. I can post 3-views of it in any scale, or post a 3D model in the file formats shown below:

image.png.b51e5e18161f293df21bf5d5718343e0.png

While the STL file can be used to make a 3D model, I can tell you from experiences that it is too detailed with loops and such for a small scale printout, even for a quality resin 3D printer, which my son has. 1/48 scale /may/ work. 1/98 does not. 1/72, doubtful. Although it could be simplified by taking off the problem areas, like the loops and long, thin bolts.

 

Everything is drawing full size, so all drawings and models can be scaled to any size and scale.

Sorry, but I cannot supply DXF files; Fusion 360 is unable to create them, and I cannot take the time to do annotated drawings. Especially of something I'm not using.

Can you export in native dwg. files for AutoCAD? I would greatly like to have your files for working with and analysis.  My email is QRRanger@aol.com. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...