location of carronades on a RN 74 gun ship

[AON]

Chapman: Yes, I have that book also, but it doesn't have any detailed info on guns whereas the other does.

 

Walter: Interesting. The forward position has less clearance aft of the gun, so I thought if it did replace a gun it might have gone there. Unfortunately the boy (then man) who was there at the time said all carronades were extra to the full 74 guns.

 

I continue to try to find an image (painting or sketch) that might provide a clue, or better yet, written description to remove all doubt.

 

[Lieste]

It is a rule of thumb given on the 1794/1795 abstract and its notes - as such it is not 'official' nor specific to the ordering.

The carronade is *usually* on a slide fixed to a fighting bolt, and as such it is best fitted to the second place on the forecastle - the gun on a truck carriage is much more easily shifted to a new position...
However, the carronade is generally a lighter ordnance which could relieve strain on the hull... and it is possible to supply a truck carriage with a joint rather than trunnion brackets which can be shifted as a variant carriage, which would allow a carronade to be shifted easily, and there are options to unship a fighting bolt from a slide, and to move the slide carriage to a different fighting bolt. Forward there is less interference between arcs, the carronade muzzle and shrouds/lines, bur once the carronade had been lengthened and the 'outboard' fighting bolt was adopted for most carronades (which should align with the 1798 'general order for quarterdeck carronades'), then the difficulties this caused would be reduced.

The French even preferred to use non recoiling slides (short breechings) soon after the adoption of caronades generally, and the British used both, but I have nothing on which ships or dates that should apply.

Victory, as at Trafalgar had struck or exchanged down it's forecastle 12pdrs and used only the pair of 68s as chase ordnance. These were also the only exposed ordnance on the weather decks, all 8 of the QD decks were under the stairs or the roundhouse deck, and the waist was mostly closed. This is of course a later armament (and not her official one), but there is scope for vessels to both have unique authorised establishments on application and for changes to be made with forgiveness to be asked, rather than permission sought.

A 'typical' 74 is much less well recorded - most continually repeat the 1794 establishment of guns, without adding/substituting the carronades allowed. Almost all fleet lists in common distribution just repeat the 'plain' armament for most ships, even after carronades become common, then widespread for castles armament. Same with frigates which often repeat the 1794 'carronade added' formula, although later fitting also substitute all or almost all spar deck guns by the early C19th.

[uss frolick]

With eighteen long-guns already on the crowded quarterdeck and forecastle, there was no extra room for adding carronades, except maybe on the poop. They sometimes replaced long guns in positions furthest from the chains, so their great flash wouldn't ignite the tar covered shrouds. Where and how many carronades varied greatly from ship to ship, and they increased in number over time. Study the six volumes of William James's "The Naval History of Great Britain" and you'll see what I mean. Their presence was a function of availability and the captain's preference.

[Lieste]

Some of the large ex-French 74s get more - the highest I know of is Spartiate with 24 Ordnance mounted to FC and QtrD. This was a moderately large (1949 tun) vessel, much larger than a common 74 such as Vanguard (1609 tuns)

While there was a period in which supernumerary guns were common, these become less common after the rearmament of 1798, with the exchange of small guns for larger carronades and chase and retreat guns. RH carronades seem to be allowed, but not all designers or captains like them, so 'fitted for, but not with' is quite common. If fully armed a spar deck should be capable of fielding 30-32 ordnance, but this would strongly impair the functioning of the rigging and increase loaded weight if they are of a size to be useful.

32 pdr carronades are a roughly 1:1 exchange for 18 pdr guns for firepower and 12 pdr for total installed weight, so there is a weight penalty moving from 9 pdr to 32pdr carronades* ~ which should drive a moderation in the ordnance numbers.

*The 32 pdr Carronade and slide are lighter than a 6 pdr gun and carriage, but 32 pdr ammunition is much heavier - the lower on-deck weight is useful for stability, but ultimately the whole installed weight eats into capacity. Crew requirements are reduced for the Carronade compared to a gun of equivalent tonnage - which can be used for more resilience to manoeuvre and musketry while at quarters, or to reduce the manning requirements of the fleet, and without any loss in longer range potential - 9 pdr and 12pdr guns lack penetration and meaningful advantages in accuracy compared to the heavier carronades.

[dafi]

On 6/11/2022 at 2:04 PM, AON said:

The blue arrows are the locations of the 9 Pdrs even though the aft gun location has a rail drawn through it.

The blue arrow might be the location for the carronade.

There is one other possible location further aft where you see a similar gap between deadeyes which offers more room between guns than that of the blue arrow between the red arrows.

These two possibilities are speculation on my point.

Coming back to an older entry in this thread: @AON

First line possibly means red arrows 🙂

 

Blue arrows most possibly is the gap for the anchor davit, as the upmost rail passes through and the bolster underneath is visible.

 

XXXDAn

[AON]

Yes. I corrected it just now.

 

[druxey]

The blue arrowed location was for the fish davit, I think.