On the sea you have to circumvent Africa though.
SOmetimes meeting bloodthirsty pagan pirates in their fast boats on your way
SOmetimes meeting bloodthirsty pagan pirates in their fast boats on your way
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
If you're going by land to India you have to go through the Middle East, Persia, and the Northwest Frontier. Any of those are a great opportunity to die of exposure and/or be ambushed and robbed.
Of the two, sea travel is by far superior to land, at least until railways arrived in force.
Of the two, sea travel is by far superior to land, at least until railways arrived in force.
I will be very boring and say that there was so many variables during the age of sail that speed varied immensely amongst ships of the same type.
Speed was probably less related to ships proper than to the myriads of sails and rigging variation that a skilled captain could order to exploit any burst of wind-but they required a ship in fine condition and a fit crew.
For examples related to the OP, a frigate armed as dispatch boat would go for top speed. But even at times of war, pretty much any other ship would try to juggle between crew exhaustion, speed, and riggings condition (especially the always short on crews and supplies French and Spanish navies)
Speed was probably less related to ships proper than to the myriads of sails and rigging variation that a skilled captain could order to exploit any burst of wind-but they required a ship in fine condition and a fit crew.
For examples related to the OP, a frigate armed as dispatch boat would go for top speed. But even at times of war, pretty much any other ship would try to juggle between crew exhaustion, speed, and riggings condition (especially the always short on crews and supplies French and Spanish navies)
Last edited:
as all other says, it depend on whih ship you want to use, 6-7 knots on avage are ok for warships, which were build for speed and firepower, and around 4 knots for merchant ships. fell free to add or remove 1-2 knots based on ships condition (rigging status, crew and capain skill, hull condition - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Careening and others) and on route they traveled - did they used https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_winds route for majority of route or not ?
and of course, all depends on time peiod you set your story, the earlier times, the more priitive navigation was and the closer to land ships traeled, increasing voayage times.
and of course, all depends on time peiod you set your story, the earlier times, the more priitive navigation was and the closer to land ships traeled, increasing voayage times.
Note that combat speed is way slower than normal speed. A first rate ship in combat in the 1750is expected to go 5 - 6 knots, to which you can add 1 knot if the hull is in copper (all the newer British ships had this by the 1770ies, the French lagged behind and the other nations did not have the tech).
With all due respect, Joshua Humphrey's USS Constitution - launched in 1797 - is still afloat and capable of sailing around the world today because the keel of 'Old Ironsides' triple-layered oak hull was sheathed in copper (forged by Paul Revere), so I'm unsure what you mean by other nations not having the tech when the OP stated specifically his tale is set around 1800.
Last edited:
'Not having the tech' is incorrect. Not being willing to bear the cost is more like it. It was developed in the 1750's and by the1780's or so it was a pretty mature technology. It was very expensive to copper bottom a ships hull. Not only is the sheer volume of metal itself expensive, but installing it is/was also, and if it was done improperly it could cause problems. The other issue is that there are other ways to get around having a copper bottom. In ships that don't see a lot of hard service, you can drydock them on a regular basis, or you can clean the hulls regularly. For ships that spend most of their time in northerly areas like Europe, marine growth doesn't develop very quickly or the same degree that it does in warmer waters anyway. Copper bottomed ships didn't really become a shining advantage unless they spent a lot of times in the tropics. By the 1760's and 1770's the UK faced a situation that most other nations didn't; They were importing nearly 100% of the wood for their ships - they were spending a lot of time in the tropical west indies, and India, and their naval forces were getting stretched thin by multiple simultaneous wars leading to shortages of time for maintenance. This combination of factors made the very large initial investment of coppering their ships worthwhile for them, but often not for other navies. It was worthwhile for the US too. Their ships were expected to be long range commerce raiders, spending long periods of time in the west indies out of contact from maintenance facilities. They didn't have much in the way of maintenance facilities to go back to anyway.
Your post is absolutely correct, but Narwhal's quote was 'other nations lacked the tech'.
To illustrate your point, When Humphrey's designed and built 'Randolph' during the War for Independence, it's not that he didn't have the technical knowledge, it's a lack of copper and money to make anything other than a light frigate for protecting and raiding commerce. (Not that it would have helped when the Randolph's captain mistakenly took on a Ship of the Line single handedly and had her magazine detonated by a point blank broadside).
Ah for some reason I forget the "1800 part" and remembered "Age of Sails", of which the climax is in my opinion the 1750 - 1800.
Even then, the Spanish best ships of the Napoleonic era - the Santa Anna class, launched in 1784 - did not have iron hull ; so in a given fleet of the very early 1800 it is very well possible that a large chunk of your navy or all of it does not have iron hull yet if you are not UK or France or USA.
There is a reason Old Ironsides was called that way
.And yes indeed, iron hull goes faster because all sort of stuff don't grow on them so you don't need to clean up your hull quite as often. A freshly launched ship with a wooden hull would I assume go as fast as the exact same ship with an iron hull. After a campaigning season, not as much.
Keep in mind that the 4 main navies (French, English, Dutch, Spanish) had to defend properties all over the globe.
Last edited:
(Ok, both the wrong Tsar and the wrong date for Russian naval power, but I felt Peter looked the angriest)
Beg your pardon, when was there ever a Russian naval power in the pre-dreadnought era that ventured further than their two lakes (Baltic and Black)?
During the Napoleonic Wars the Russian fleet was the third largest in the world for a time. Russian naval power very much slipped off after that though, and even in the pre-dreadnought/dreadnought era the Russian navy was pretty low key compared to some.
Ah for some reason I forget the "1800 part" and remembered "Age of Sails", of which the climax is in my opinion the 1750 - 1800.
Even then, the Spanish best ships of the Napoleonic era - the Santa Anna class, launched in 1784 - did not have iron hull ; so in a given fleet of the very early 1800 it is very well possible that a large chunk of your navy or all of it does not have iron hull yet if you are not UK or France or USA.
There is a reason Old Ironsides was called that way
And yes indeed, iron hull goes faster because all sort of stuff don't grow on them so you don't need to clean up your hull quite as often. A freshly launched ship with a wooden hull would I assume go as fast as the exact same ship with an iron hull. After a campaigning season, not as much.
Keep in mind that the 4 main navies (French, English, Dutch, Spanish) had to defend properties all over the globe.
I think we have a bit of a question of definition. For a very long time, more and more iron is incorporated in shipbuilding to reinforce and strengthen wooden hulls. But, true iron-hulled ships do not appear until the middle of the 19th century and do not become the dominant ship building technology until later.
As an example, the naval battle between the ironclads Merrimack and Monitor provides a nice backdrop. Merrimack is a modern, wooden hulled, 6-screw steam frigate of the US Navy that is captured by the Rebels. It is cut down, covered in iron plates, armed with cannon, and outfitted with an enormous ram. The US navy knew the Virginia was under construction and were greatly concerned. Out of desperation they approved the construction of Monitor, an iron-hulled steam ship with a cheesebox shaped rotating turret that many people in the Navy Department didn't think would even float. They fought to a draw in a battle that lives in the annals of history.
USS Constitution, 'Old Ironsides', was made of wood. She was one of six heavy frigates of innovative design designed to serve as a capital ships. Humphries, her designer, utilized an innovative construction technique utilizing two layers of oversized southern oak which gave her tremendous protection for her size and class, and allowed her to carry far heavier armament than her peers. Having strong masts and a keel that was sheathed in copper, she was yar for her size. She got her nickname on her first cruise when she encountered the Royal Navy frigate 'Gurriere'. After maneuvering for the favor of the wind, Constitution demasted Gurriere while most of Gurriere's shots bounced off Constitution's hull. An American sailor exclaimed 'Huzzah, her sides are made of iron!', leading to the nickname. After a few more encounters, the Royal Navy ordered frigate commanders not to engage Constitution or her sisters one-on-one.
She remains the pride of the US Navy to this day.
Last edited:
I doubt iron would have made a very good sheathing material as evidenced by the fact they continued to occasionally copper bottoms even in latter half of 19th century (e.g. Centurion class or HMS Inconstant). If I recall correctly sheathing did cause a slight reduction in speed with clean bottom in that era, though they had to use (perhaps a bit bulkier) iron-wood-copper sandwich to ensure the iron and copper/bronze parts didn't interact.
As measured by hull count of battleships and armoured cruisers, they were still the third largest navy on the eve of Russo-Japanese War.
Russia send a fleet to the Mediterranean to help the Greek against the Turk in 1827. That forced the British and France to join them too or else Russia will take all the glory and influence!
The movement of a third of the Baltic fleet, including most of its fighting arm, from the Baltic around the Cape of Good Hope and through the Strait of Malacca to East Asia would also count as venturing far beyond the Baltic and Black Seas. Of course, such a long journey with no ability to use neutral ports for basic maintenance left the ships hopelessly fouled and low in both supplies and spirits (literal and figurative), significantly affecting their performance at Tsushima, but the fact that they were even able to make such a journey says quite a bit about their ability to project power beyond their home ports.
Interestingly, I poked around a little bit, and the first person to discover Antarctica was also from Russia: Fabian Gottlieb von Bellingshausen, a Baltic German.
Interestingly, I poked around a little bit, and the first person to discover Antarctica was also from Russia: Fabian Gottlieb von Bellingshausen, a Baltic German.
Crew quality affected speed greatly. French and Spanish ships spending time in port (and who had their best sailors drafted as artillerymen or soldiers) usually lost sails, spars and sometimes masts when they came out. The Royal Navy estimated it could take months at sea to work a ship's company up to their high standard.
Well, bearing in mind the final outcome, I'd rather call it not power, but rather dick waving projection...
I'm don't entirely disagree, albeit with the caveat that I'd consider most exceptional mass deployments like this (the US Great White Fleet, for instance), a similar thing. If the Russians had conducted this operation in peacetime, it'd be considered a point of pride in their ability to maintain global deployments and project power abroad. Still, the question wasn't asked whether these were typical, but whether they had ever happened at all.
Of course, this phrase also brings up the...interesting mental picture of the ultimate result when they tried to stick it in the Strait of Tsushima and instead got it chopped off by the Japanese.