Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Modern Naval design and the USS Constitution
HeavyD    9/6/2010 3:48:02 PM
If a modern naval architect with sailing ship experience were beamed back to 1794 and turned loose on the design of the USS Constitution, what changes and improvements could be made? 1. Hull design: Would a bow bulb or wings on the bottom of the rudder significantly increase the 13 knot speed? Could the sails be redesigned (all changes must be made with materials of the time) to add more speed or to allow it to sail closer to the wind? 2. Weaponry and gunnery: Could the gunnery be improved - accuracy or rate of fire? Again using tools and materials available at the time could the barrels be rifled or could the shot be improved (explosive or incindiary effect ?!?) For example could a crude turntable allow for the advantages of a turret? 3. Protection: 'Old Ironsides', but could the protection be improved - perhaps weight saving designs could allow for actual armor? 4. Tactics: Are there different tactics that were later developed that could be effective, especially if there were performance improvements in the above (i.e. 'turreted' bow chasers with incendiary shot - do you simply fall in behind and set the enemy alight?)
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
WarNerd       9/7/2010 5:33:34 AM

1. Hull design: Would a bow bulb or wings on the bottom of the rudder significantly increase the 13 knot speed? Could the sails be redesigned (all changes must be made with materials of the time) to add more speed or to allow it to sail closer to the wind?

Ships of that period were routinely 'careened' for maintenance and repairs.  This is a process whereby the ship essentially grounded at high tide, then allowed to roll on its side as the tide went out to give access to the areas below the ship's waterline.  Most modern improvements would not fair well under this treatment.

2. Weaponry and gunnery: Could the gunnery be improved - accuracy or rate of fire? Again using tools and materials available at the time could the barrels be rifled or could the shot be improved (explosive or incendiary effect ?!?) For example could a crude turntable allow for the advantages of a turret?

This is the area where the greatest improvements are possible by introducing rifled guns with explosive projectiles except for one problem.  Unless I am mistaken, the United States did not have the capability to produce cannons domestically.  Once you get around that problem, the rest should be fairly straight forward, after you create a lathe big enough to mill the cannon -- take a cannon, bore it out and insert a rifled liner, and install additional reinforcing bands on the breach.  Introduce pull type ignition primers if not already in use.

The only critical item needed for the explosive shells is the percussion cap to build an impact fuse.  There are several shell designs that can provide a expanding seal to engage the rifling, such as the Read-Parrot, so loading time will not increase too much.
 
Rate of fire will not increase unless you can switch to breach loading, but the fabrication problems may be too much to overcome.
 
Good incendiary fill materials (magnesium, thermite, or white phosphorus) are not available in this period.  Dynamite is possible.  Do not mess with gun cotton, it is prone to self detonation.

3. Protection: 'Old Ironsides', but could the protection be improved - perhaps weight saving designs could allow for actual armor?

At the time America lacked large scale wrought iron production, so actual metal armor is not possible unless you are willing to spend a decade or more designing and building blast furnaces, puddling furnaces, and rolling mills, the critical details of which a naval architect would probably not know.
 
The good news is that the USS Constitution was one of the best 'armored' ships of its day.  The reason was simply that America had access to vast quantities of superior materials in the form of old growth hardwood forests, which by that time were nearly logged out in Europe (and what was left mostly reserved for construction of select warships by royal decree).  The hull of the USS Constitution  was 20% thicker, and more than twice as strong, as ships of her class from other countries.  She got the nick name of "Old Ironsides" after sailors saw several cannon balls literally bounce off the hull during a close engagement with the HMS Guerriere.
 
Quote    Reply

Juramentado       9/8/2010 11:10:19 PM
The easiest answer for you is to read "Six Frigates" by Ian Toll - you'll see that the ship and the armament were already about as cutting edge as it could get given current technology levels in marine architecture and weapons manufacture.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       9/9/2010 2:38:45 AM



1. Hull design: Would a bow bulb or wings on the bottom of the rudder significantly increase the 13 knot speed? Could the sails be redesigned (all changes must be made with materials of the time) to add more speed or to allow it to sail closer to the wind?



Ships of that period were routinely 'careened' for maintenance and repairs.  This is a process whereby the ship essentially grounded at high tide, then allowed to roll on its side as the tide went out to give access to the areas below the ship's waterline.  Most modern improvements would not fair well under this treatment.

True enough. Copper would still be the preferred method of anti-fouling. Modern copper alloys might make copper screws tough enough to pierce southern yellow pine possible and hold the sheeting, so that would be one significant  improvement over iron or brass. Our understanding of wood framing and joining is not that improved, but our glues and sealers definitely are.  We can make the hull much stronger.  As to the  wake line? I don't know. Not much room for improvement.  

2. Weaponry and gunnery: Could the gunnery be improved - accuracy or rate of fire? Again using tools and materials available at the time could the barrels be rifled or could the shot be improved (explosive or incendiary effect ?!?) For example could a crude turntable allow for the advantages of a turret?
 
This is the area where the greatest improvements are possible by introducing rifled guns with explosive projectiles except for one problem.  Unless I am mistaken, the United States did not have the capability to produce cannons domestically.  Once you get around that problem, the rest should be fairly straight forward, after you create a lathe big enough to mill the cannon -- take a cannon, bore it out and insert a rifled liner, and install additional reinforcing bands on the breach.  Introduce pull type ignition primers if not already in use.

1. We have an arsenal and foundry in time for the frigates. in fact we started cannon foundry work in Salsbury Connecticut.
 

2. The US 32 pounder carronades already had pull ignition as the Americans learned cannon making from the British.. .   

The only critical item needed for the explosive shells is the percussion cap to build an impact fuse.  There are several shell designs that can provide a expanding seal to engage the rifling, such as the Read-Parrot, so loading time will not increase too much.

I don't think the Americans of the era can rifle or breech band gun barrels that large, yet. That is some tricky machine tooling and requires a War of 1812 tech base at least. Eli Whitney and Mister Dahlgren aren't ready yet. It may be possible for a modern technologist to teach them how to sweat the bands on and how to make the steel cutter does for the rifling pocess. But how do you shove the sleeve into the barrel (those days the barrels were cored standing straight up).   
 
Rate of fire will not increase unless you can switch to breach loading, but the fabrication problems may be too much to overcome.


Rate of fire depends on how soon you can return to battery after recoil. Put the carriage trucks on rails, and install a mechanical return system. Even with muzzle loaders that doubles your reload times as you waste less time lining up with the gun-ports and waste less effort rolling a four tonne gun back and forth. it also makes for more accuraste shooting in bearing as you have less drift right or left off bearing when back in battery.  

As for muzzle reload, drill the gun crews according to HFE. Set each man and his tools where they are actually needed, to swab, load powder, load shot, ram,  arm the ignition, and shove into battery.          
  
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       9/10/2010 6:57:53 PM


1. Hull design: Would a bow bulb or wings on the bottom of the rudder significantly increase the 13 knot speed? Could the sails be redesigned (all changes must be made with materials of the time) to add more speed or to allow it to sail closer to the wind?

Ships of that period were routinely 'careened' for maintenance and repairs.  This is a process whereby the ship essentially grounded at high tide, then allowed to roll on its side as the tide went out to give access to the areas below the ship's waterline.  Most modern improvements would not fair well under this treatment.

True enough. Copper would still be the preferred method of anti-fouling. Modern copper alloys might make copper screws tough enough to pierce southern yellow pine possible and hold the sheeting, so that would be one significant  improvement over iron or brass. Our understanding of wood framing and joining is not that improved, but our glues and sealers definitely are.  We can make the hull much stronger.  As to the  wake line? I don't know. Not much room for improvement.  

The hull of the Constitution was copper sheathed below the waterline.  Any reduction in fouling from the copper sheathing was secondary to the purpose of protecting against the shipworm, which could sink an unprotected ship in a few years, even less in the Caribbean Sea which was notorious. 
 
The sheathing was imported from England.
 

2. Weaponry and gunnery: Could the gunnery be improved - accuracy or rate of fire? Again using tools and materials available at the time could the barrels be rifled or could the shot be improved (explosive or incendiary effect ?!?) For example could a crude turntable allow for the advantages of a turret?

This is the area where the greatest improvements are possible by introducing rifled guns with explosive projectiles except for one problem.  Unless I am mistaken, the United States did not have the capability to produce cannons domestically.  Once you get around that problem, the rest should be fairly straight forward, after you create a lathe big enough to mill the cannon -- take a cannon, bore it out and insert a rifled liner, and install additional reinforcing bands on the breach.  Introduce pull type ignition primers if not already in use.

1. We have an arsenal and foundry in time for the frigates. in fact we started cannon foundry work in Salsbury Connecticut.


2. The US 32 pounder carronades already had pull ignition as the Americans learned cannon making from the British.. . 
 
 Thanks for the information on the Salisbury foundry, and confirming the use of pull type ignitors. 
 

2. Weaponry and gunnery: Could the gunnery be improved - accuracy or rate of fire? Again using tools and materials avail
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       9/10/2010 9:23:44 PM
when did bore lining becone technically reliable?
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       9/11/2010 7:04:55 AM



1. Hull design: Would a bow bulb or wings on the bottom of the rudder significantly increase the 13 knot speed? Could the sails be redesigned (all changes must be made with materials of the time) to add more speed or to allow it to sail closer to the wind?


Ships of that period were routinely 'careened' for maintenance and repairs.  This is a process whereby the ship essentially grounded at high tide, then allowed to roll on its side as the tide went out to give access to the areas below the ship's waterline.  Most modern improvements would not fair well under this treatment.

True enough. Copper would still be the preferred method of anti-fouling. Modern copper alloys might make copper screws tough enough to pierce southern yellow pine possible and hold the sheeting, so that would be one significant  improvement over iron or brass. Our understanding of wood framing and joining is not that improved, but our glues and sealers definitely are.  We can make the hull much stronger.  As to the  wake line? I don't know. Not much room for improvement.  


The hull of the Constitution was copper sheathed below the waterline.  Any reduction in fouling from the copper sheathing was secondary to the purpose of protecting against the shipworm, which could sink an unprotected ship in a few years, even less in the Caribbean Sea which was notorious. 

 

The sheathing was imported from England.


1. True all. Americans could not meet the sheathing bids so the British won the contract. On the cannon, the Americans did, hence American cannon.

 



2. Weaponry and gunnery: Could the gunnery be improved - accuracy or rate of fire? Again using tools and materials available at the time could the barrels be rifled or could the shot be improved (explosive or incendiary effect ?!?) For example could a crude turntable allow for the advantages of a turret?


This is the area where the greatest improvements are possible by introducing rifled guns with explosive projectiles except for one problem.  Unless I am mistaken, the United States did not have the capability to produce cannons domestically.  Once you get around that problem, the rest should be fairly straight forward, after you create a lathe big enough to mill the cannon -- take a cannon, bore it out and insert a rifled liner, and install additional reinforcing bands on the breach.  Introduce pull type ignition primers if not already in use.

1. We have an arsenal and foundry in time for the frigates. in fact we started cannon foundry work in Salsbury Connecticut.



Article.



2. The US 32 pounder carronades already had pull ignition as the Americans learned cannon making from the British.. . 

 

 Thanks for the information on the Salisbury foundry, and confirming the use of pull type ignitors. 

 

2. Weaponry and gunnery: Could the gunnery be improved - accuracy or rate of fire? Again using tools and materials available at the time could the barrels be rifled or could the shot be improved (explosive or incendiary effect ?!?) For example could a crude turntable allow for the advantages of a turret?


This is the area where the greatest improvements are possible by introducing rifled guns with explosive projectiles except for one problem.  Unless I am mistaken, the United Stat
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       9/11/2010 7:19:08 AM

when did bore lining becone technically reliable?



I believe Whiteworth supplied experimental guns to the Confederacy that used tube liners. There were no really safe ones used prior to that to my knowledge. It really takes good steels to make that concept work. 

Dahlgren and Parrott guns were NOT safe, even though those were among the first built up guns mass produced.  
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       9/11/2010 7:56:54 AM
I believe Whiteworth supplied experimental guns to the Confederacy that used tube liners. There were no really safe ones used prior to that to my knowledge. It really takes good steels to make that concept work. 

I was more interested in the timeframes for alloy/chromium liners rather than the early iron and steel, wire wound developments
 
Quote    Reply

Shawnc    Science Fiction   9/12/2010 2:04:29 AM
The topic has been covered by a number of Science Fiction authors.
 
In Eric Flint's 1632, an entire American coal mining town is mysteriously transported to Germany during the 100 Year War. In following books the Americans rapidly develop river ironclads

In David Weber's Safehold series, a refuge world has been created with the inhabitants deliberately limited to 16-17th century technology. An android avatar of a long dead naval officer awakens and decides to do something about it, and eventually aids a country into transforming it's 16th-century level military towards a mid-1800s technology in the space of a few years.
 
Weber as a military historian tends to include a lot of techno-babble (his readers call it 'Infodump') on military and weapons development, and in this series there's everything from massed galley battles (like the Battle of Lepanto) onwards (it's an ongoing series).
 
In this abstract, two industrialists discuss canon manufacture (this is from the second book of the series, By Schism Rent Asunder):
 
"How are you coming with the production problems on the iron guns?" he asked Howsmyn.

    "Actually, we haven't had anywhere near as many of those as I'd been afraid we might." Howsmyn shrugged. "Not on the cast iron ones, that is. I'm not saying it's as easy with the iron as with the bronze, but our bell-founding techniques have converted remarkably well. I'm starting to experiment with wrought iron, too, but that's incredibly expensive at the moment. It uses an enormous amount more coke, and the furnace time for the repeated firings drives up the cost even more. And then we have to hammer the slag out of the blooms, and even with the new, heavier drop-hammers, that takes an incredible amount of time, which drives costs up still higher. If I can find a way to do all that more efficiently. . . ."
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       9/12/2010 2:57:05 AM


I believe Whiteworth supplied experimental guns to the Confederacy that used tube liners. There were no really safe ones used prior to that to my knowledge. It really takes good steels to make that concept work. 





I was more interested in the timeframes for alloy/chromium liners rather than the early iron and steel, wire wound developments

Maybe this will help.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics