Reccomended reading?

[Diamondback]

Other than the various Osprey New Vanguard volumes, are there any really good info resources about vessels of the Napoleonic era, something like what the four Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships volumes are for the 1861-1995 era?

I'm looking for something with comparative specs, and names and dates in service, the kinds of things we could use to figure out the highest-population and most-needed classes, notable members of those classes and potential repaints for future printings. (Let's be real, I don't expect to ever see the complete Order of Battle for Trafalgar from Ares, but if we can help with their preliminary research then we can put the ball for delays squarely in management and accounting's court, or the factory's.)

[Coog]

The American Sailing Navy (details are in book reviews) covers primarily American ships but it is full of the type of information in which you're interested. Also Roosevelt's The Naval War of 1812 (also in book reviews) gives a lot of comparisons between American and British ships as well as comparing some French ships (not to mention all the captured French ships in the British Navy.) Wikipedia has a lot of information on ships, including classes of the period. There are some good references at the end of their articles like this one:

Rif Winfield, British Warships in the Age of Sail, 1793–1817: Design, Construction, Careers and Fates, 2nd edition, Seaforth Publishing, 2008. ISBN 978-1-84415-717-4.

[Berthier]

Check out
http://sailsofglory.org/showthread.php?26-Best-Research-and-Hobby-Links
http://sailsofglory.org/showthread.php?59-Napoleonic-naval-Library

Hope these links help :)

[Diamondback]

Thanks, guys. I poked Andrea too, and he also suggested threedecks.org as a useful resource. Though his note was a little confusing... what Ares calls the "Concorde" class, he linked me to the Wiki page on the Hortense class, none of which were named Concorde that I can find, and while the Arrogant class is specifically cited as tooled the only one listed at Three Decks is HMS Cornwall. (Wikipedia ID's eleven more, plus an identically-dimensioned ancestor Bellona-class.)

It is interesting to note how many of the Temeraire family ALONE played "Musical Flags", Genereux in particular being the object of an apparent "One Flag Capture The Flag" game between the French and Royal Navies, so I would be surprised if these sculpts DON'T show up under other flags someday--so far on this one class alone, I've found members sailing under French, English, Spanish, Dutch and Austrian flags and I'm barely started. And there's a complication... we need to know which of the five Temeraire variants was sculpted. Plus the fact that a lot of these ships played Musical Names too... I'm not sure if Three Decks treats each name like a separate ship or what, but there's some conflict between them and the Wikipedia list.

Basic Temeraire: ~172-175' gundeck, ~149-155' keel, ~44'6" beam
Stretch Temeraire:
Cassard large: ~175' gundeck, ~45'6" beam (intend was to upgun with 24# instead of 18#, going by lack of repeats unsuccessful)
Suffren short: ~172' length (uncertain if gundeck or OAL), 44'6" beam, ~22' draught, 65cm chopdown, I'm guessing from "Stretch", at demand of Marine Minister Forfait, another technical failure
Pluton small: ~180' gundeck, 177'7" waterline, ~47' beam, 9" shallower draft than Temeraire std
Then there's the British Pompee- and America-class copies...

Do I need to start a series of posts about the various classes we know are being sculpted so we can start laying things out and trading ideas? I'm already off on a tangent here...

[Berthier]

One of the problems with ship class is that they were not always built in the same shipyard and variations did exist between yards. Secondly, I'm not sure but I seem to remember reading somewhere that there was also some variability in how they measured ships- ie keel length, beam, length of gun deck, length at waterline (fullen laden or empty?) etc. Thus all ships of a class could probably be considered siblings but not necessarily with the same two parents!

[Diamondback]

Good point, Daniel. The main thrust of my thinking is to try to figure out, within the limits of 1/1000 scale, how many potential repaints each sculpt offers and what all related designs each can pass for--on the Temeraire variants (Commerce de Bordeaux) I'm seeing around 10-15' of length variation on the gun-decks, which translates as about a 1/8" length difference on miniatures from CdB (which appears to be a 172' gun-deck) to sister Lion (184'5" gun-deck).

Depending on detail differences, the Arrogant-class (HMS Bellerophon) sculpt can also perhaps pass for its ancestors of the Bellona and descendants of the Ramillies classes. Out of three Concorde-class 5th-rate 32-gun frigates, two were captured by the RN IIRC, so while the first release would account for the entire class as-built I would expect to possibly see the two captures as future printings.

Based on what we know, for ships that played Musical Names (CdB alone went through two renamings), would we expect to see variant cards with alternate names at some point, full repainted repops or just a footnote about "at time of such-and-such battle this ship had been renamed _____"?

[Cmmdre]

The American Sailing Navy (details are in book reviews) covers primarily American ships but it is full of the type of information in which you're interested. Also Roosevelt's The Naval War of 1812 (also in book reviews) gives a lot of comparisons between American and British ships as well as comparing some French ships (not to mention all the captured French ships in the British Navy.) Wikipedia has a lot of information on ships, including classes of the period. There are some good references at the end of their articles like this one:

Rif Winfield, British Warships in the Age of Sail, 1793–1817: Design, Construction, Careers and Fates, 2nd edition, Seaforth Publishing, 2008. ISBN 978-1-84415-717-4.

Upon your recommendations I read these books or at least acquired them for reference. Solid advice Bobby. Really excellent resources to have on hand. :hatsoff:

[Diamondback]

Boudriot's The History of the French Frigate 1650-1850 has its share of glitches and even contradicts ITSELF in places, and is an incomplete list, but it still provides a good start on most of their frigates and helping to classify them.

[Cmmdre]

Boudriot's The History of the French Frigate 1650-1850 has its share of glitches and even contradicts ITSELF in places, and is an incomplete list, but it still provides a good start on most of their frigates and helping to classify them.

Very expensive as well.
http://www.amazon.com/History-The-French-Frigate-1650-1850/dp/B003CN80MC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1372541063&sr=8-1&keywords=Boudriot%27s+The+History+of+the+French+Frigate+1650-1850

5717

[Devsdoc]

Hi All,
At this scale I would be looking at size and rate. Not names or class. For 3rd rates is it a 64, 74, 76, 80 or 84 gun ship, that is important. The British (As Rod Langton says) had 74 Common 168-170ft 28x18 lbs. guns. on the upper gun deck. 74 Middling 173-175ft 28x18 lbs. guns. on the U.G.D. 74 large 176-185ft 30x24 lbs. guns on the U.G.D. Frigates are more open to size. 5th rates could have 32 to 44 guns and 6th rate could have 20 to 30 guns. All I need to know is the rate. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th or non-rated, for movement and firing, and/or the weight of the broadside she fired. I think the names and dates on the bases and ship logs for SOG ships are too detailed, to much information for this scale and the models as I have seen and played with. Do not look to deeply into this at this scale. At this scale a 74 is a 74, it matters not if she is called Orion, Thunderer, Defiance, Defence or Bellerophon. Only that she is a Common 74. the name only I.D.'s her.
Be safe
Rory

[Volunteer]

Rory,
Good advice for gamers my RN friend. However, as primarily a modeler first and a gamer second, (not to mention being a history fanatic), I am actually interested in the details like name and class.
Regards,
Vol

[Diamondback]

To a pure gamer, a hunk of cheese with three toothpicks stuck in the top could be called a "ship", all they really need is clear indications of where they're measuring from and to; on the other end of the scale, a pure modeler only cares about the accuracy with which the physical miniature represents its historical counterpart.

While most of us are between these scales, I'd bet Vol and I are probably closer to the "modeling purist" end. Not criticising anyone for their place in the sprectrum, just trying to remind folks that different priorities and goals mean different needs in the miniature.