USS Randolph 1776

[Waldemar]

 

This is most probably the only US ship (frigate) from the Revolutionary period for which original plans have survived. Admittedly, they are available online, but the quality is not the best, as it appears to be essentially a scan of aged microfilm of not very good sharpness, so a lot of the detail is blurred. Does anyone have a better copy than the one available on the archive website?

 

In addition, does anyone have and can provide a good quality scan of a page from the Joshua Humphreys' notebook concerning this very frigate? Granted, this page is already transcribed and available (as is the entire manuscript), but I would nevertheless like to verify the numerical data, which is quite easy to get wrong in the process.

 

Besides, what does the term ‘hanging gundeck’ mean? The stated value on the transcribed page is 1 foot 7 inches.

 

 

The copy of the draught itself available at:

https://www.history.navy.mil/our-collections/photography/numerical-list-of-images/nhhc-series/nh-series/NH-65000/NH-65618.html

 

 

And reproductions of both mentioned above items:

 

 

 

 

[trippwj]

2 hours ago, Waldemar said:

In addition, does anyone have and can provide a good quality scan of a page from the Joshua Humphreys' notebook concerning this very frigate? Granted, this page is already transcribed and available (as is the entire manuscript), but I would nevertheless like to verify the numerical data, which is quite easy to get wrong in the process.

I can vouch for the accuracy of the transcription. The numbers were checked by three people during the transcription and publication process. The original photos of the pages are not publicly available (ownership issues). If there are specific values you question I will check with the lead transcriotionist and see if she can relocate the original image.

[Waldemar]

 

14 hours ago, trippwj said:

I can vouch for the accuracy of the transcription [...].

 

Thanks, Wayne. Nonetheless, I'm already having some doubts as I've noticed in several places in the document that ‘foremast’ has been reworded to ‘foremost’ (and the other way round) and in addition, for Randolph itself, the distance between decks seems to not match the draught (5‘ 2" versus 5‘ 7").

 

And, almost forgot, the Randolph is listed in the title as a 23-gun frigate instead of 32-gun one.

 

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by Waldemar

[Tony Hunt]

I think Howard Chappelle redrew this plan and published it in one of his books - probably The American Sailing Navy?

[Waldemar]

 

Thank you, Tony. Yes, I have this publication in my home library, as well as probably all of Chapelle's other major works. Indeed, there is a wealth of interesting, important and useful information about this frigate (actually the whole frigate series) contained therein. Nevertheless, I intend to do something that even Chapelle himself did not do, which is to reverse-engineer the design of the Randolph, and to do this I need a copy of the original design in the best possible quality, as opposed to later redrawings which necessarily distort the original somewhat and, worse, somehow lose very important details found on the originals. By the same token, British-made plans of these early American ships are also unsuitable for my purposes.

The point is that I have some observations about the presumed design method used (in a conceptual sense) and I would like to take a closer look at this for confirmation (or otherwise) of these presumptions. They may explain why the American designs were marked by such a specificity of shape rather than another. 

 

[Waldemar]

 

22 hours ago, trippwj said:

The original photos of the pages are not publicly available (ownership issues).

 

The document is available online for anyone interested (see link below), just only up to page 162 of the manuscript. In a malicious twist of fate, the page with the data for Randolph 1776 is already on the next, first page of the non-accessible part of the whole document, that is 163–164. And the archive wishes USD 37.50 for making one scan of this double page available. Funny.

 

Historical Society of Pennsylvania: DAMS : Volume/Folder : Principal Dimensions [1719-1828] [10581]

 

Under the circumstances, I won't even bother to approach the other archive (the navy) for a better copy of the original ship's plan anymore, and I think I'll give up on this project altogether. It's a pity, because the results and conclusions of this investigation could be really interesting, and actually unknown or unrealized until now. More precisely, I already have near certainty about the design methods applied in early American ships, nevertheless, adequate input material is obviously needed to present this adequately.

 

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Waldemar