Why 278 Men for a Frigate?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 ธ.ค. 2016
- Visualization on the crew distribution of a 36-gun Frigate of the Royal Navy during the Napoleonic Era with further information on the various jobs of the crew members.
» HOW YOU CAN SUPPORT MILITARY HISTORY VISUALIZED «
(A) You can support my channel on Patreon: / mhv
(B) You can also buy "Spoils of War" (merchandise) in the online shop: www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi...
» SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS «
facebook: / milhistoryvisualized
twitter: / milhivisualized
tumblr: / militaryhistoryvisualized
» SOURCES & LINKS «
Lavery, Brain: Nelson’s Navy - The Ships, Men and Organisation 1793-1815
Wikipedia & google image search used mainly to verify / cross-check data and find the correct ship design that was used in the book.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerva...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lively-...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederi...
» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell - Demilitarized Zone
![[풀영상] 2024 김연경 초청 세계여자배구 올스타전 "팀 스타 VS 팀 월드" [유료광고 포함] #김연경 #국가대표 #배구 #배구올스타전 #팀스타 #팀월드](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SUKUgH1ltng/mqdefault.jpg)
TH-cam's ad policies are getting out of hand, thus sadly, I have to adapt my financial strategy if I want to continue this channel.
Please, support properly sourced Military History on Patreon! Every $ helps: patreon.com/mhv/
This was 2 years ago. In your experience, has it improved or gotten worse?
Wow your English has improved by leaps and bounds in the last 3 years!
I am not bothered by mispronunciations due to accent, I admire people who learn multiple languages. What was jarring to me was the way that 'boatswain' and 'forecastle' were pronounced. Maybe this will help: BO-sin and FOKE-sull.
@@johngilmer Boatswain - "Bo-sun"
@@vtrmcs yep, that trips up most people
I had never seen a comprehensive explanation about the crewing/watch system on sailing warships this concise and informative. I hold an inactive Limited Able Seaman's endorsement from the US Coast Guard. I've been studying naval history most of my life (in addition I am major fan of C.S Forester's Hornblower books reading all at least once). I've visited the USS Constitution and like to think I have a fairly decent understand of warships from the age of sail ... until I watched this excellent piece. Very well done!
thank you!
Can you do the same for a modern ship?
David, greetings from the UK. If you love Hornblower, you absolutely must read Patrick O’Briens Master and Commander series They are a stunning read, full of wooden warship lore, but with an underlying seam of subtle humour. I also really enjoyed this video, thanks!
@@martinchamberlain542 Dewey Lambdin's. Alan Lawrie 25 books more boudy 😊
@@martinchamberlain542 I am very pleased that you mentioned these books. I have read them all twice.
Now imagine the crew on a first rate ship-of-the-line, a Man'o'war.
BoarhideGaming That was exactly what I was thinking. How many crew would there be on a Man 'o War/Galleon?
BoarhideGaming about 800 on a 74 gun third rate of the same era
Varies according to each navy and the circumstances, but here are some figures taken from Trafalgar, which pitted 3 of the leading naval powers of World at the time:
British:
74-gun two-decker: between 550 and 700 men.
100-gun three-decker: between 700 and 800 men.
100-gun _HMS Victory_ (British flagship): 821 men.
French:
74-gun two-decker: between 700 and 800 men.
80-gun two decker: between 850 and 900 men.
80-gun _Bucentaure_ (Franco-Spanish flagship): 888 men.
Spanish:
74-gun two-decker: between 600 and 700 men.
100-gun two-decker: around 800 men.
112-gun _Príncipe de Asturias_ (Spanish flagship): 1141 men.
140-gun four-decker _Santísima Trinidad_ (largest ship at the time and the only four-decker ever built): 1159 men.
Richardsen
"Leading naval powers"
-> The French.
Lol.
No but seriously, thanks for the numbers, that is astonishing.
BoarhideGaming The American Revolution was sealed by a French blockade.
Regarding 'Boys' - I was told it was common to pay a Captain of the ship to put your young 6 year old son's name on the sailor list of his ship. Even though the child never step foot on the ship. This way when the child reached 18 years old he was listed as having 12 years sea experience and could get a good job at the Admiralty.
I wouldn't say it was "common" but the aristocracy did, of course, have many ways of gaming the system. What was commonplace amongst the landed gentry was having their son serve as a Midshipman, which was prelude to becoming a Lieutenant. This device served that famous British custom of getting their male child out of the house either by boarding school, foreign instruction, or at sea for years beginning at the earliest allowable age. British fathers of the day were not known for their affections for their male children.
If
12 years of experience in the field by age of 18 to get a job? Damn some things never change
@@stephenryder1995 Don't forget the super common apprenticeships of the time as well
@@master_ace I don’t know about that! There is a milk-man job in my area that says “no experience necessary” 😉
MHV: even though I noticed the mispronunciations - I APPLAUD you for tackling these videos in English.
Trust me, I have worked in Fast Food long enough to know tons of Americans that would fail to pronounce several of these words.
I've worked on replica ships of this type (though much smaller). This video is spectacularly done! Thank you for the time you took to make this a visually stimulating and historically accurate representation of a man of war. Thoroughly impressed!
thank you! Pinned!
That's why I subbed to this guy awhile back. He does an excellent job explaining stuffs and has graphics to go along with it to make it even more fun to watch
I have some questions about replica sailing. How is it done? Where can you find it? And is it very expensive?
No I meant sailing in replica ships. I thought thats what you were talking about, But did you mean small models:P
I mean in actual ships in real life, sometimes I see people go on those, kinda was a dream of mine
"Replicas" are vessels built to represent historic vessels or types. Endeavor is a replica of the Endeavor, but she's probably better termed a "reproduction." Niagara is a reproduction of the brig that fought in the Battle of Lake Erie. Pride of Baltimore was a replica of the Baltimore Clipper type, not of a specific vessel that existed.
Then there are "traditional" vessels, schooners and such that are "traditional" sailing vessels, usually gaff-rigged, maybe wood, and so on. Many of these are original vessels, Gazela, a 170' Portuguese barkentine that fished on the Grand Banks, for instance.
My ancestor was a Bosun on HMS Naiad, a frigate that was part of the British fleet at the battle of Trafalgar. He was a career sailor but became the Greenwich piermaster when he retired from the Royal Navy. His descendents all worked in the London docks until my father who became the first one to work in an office keeping company accounts.
Yea.. This subject is quite a minefield for non-native english speaker.
and the Germanz of course made a song about that ;) th-cam.com/video/cp-2XJ5mnkw/w-d-xo.html
E.g. pronouncing "boatswain" as "boat" + "swain" not as the correct "bosun"
I wouldn't have understood more even if it was on my native language. The sailors have so many strange words for different parts of the ship or their duty, I don't know even half of them in any language.
The word " English" should be capitalized.
@@petertuffley7475 That can trip up native speakers too, given that it's highly specialised technical vocabulary.
Obscure words being mispronounced isn't a sign of not being a native speaker so much as not ever having heard the technical vocabulary (which is rarely used in ordinary everyday communication) spoken out loud.
The disciplinary role of the Boatswain's Mates were actually more of a side duty. Their main job was to be experts of deck seamanship. They were the ones in charge of all hauling and hoisting equipment, anchors and ground tackle, boats, and paint.
Aye, officially, law enforcement aboard ship was carried out by the Master-at-Arms, who on larger ships had one or more “Ship’s Corporals” assisting him.
Thank you for this breakdown. I've read a lot of naval fiction, and this is the clearest explanation I've encountered.
I think one thing that needs mentioned is that there was a difference between nominal and actual strength. Many ships had difficulty obtaining enough men. Contrary to popular opinion a lot of navy men were volunteers (it was easier than being in the merchant marine, because naval ships were manned per the guns while merchant ships were manned per the sails), and some captains could coax more men by being lucky and obtaining numerous prizes, but still, a lot of ships sailed with suboptimal crews.
In "Two Years Before The Mast" Dana relates that eight hands were sufficient to sail the ship he started out in (I think; could be 8 per watch--it's been a few years since I read it, and my dog ate the book so I can't re-read it just now). And a merchant ship wasn't substantially smaller than many frigates.
As for those correcting your pronunciation, ignore them. It's fine--you have an accent, but we all do, and anyone who can't understand you simply isn't trying.
I'm assuming press-ganging was indeed a thing...
@@wrath231 Sure. But there are a few issues with it. First, people,find impressment objectionable and strive to avoid it. Second, you got a mixed bag. A raw hand on his first voyage was little better than a landsman, to say nothing of disease and disciplinary issues you could be inheriting. You also have to consider desertion. And scale. Impressment would work well enough for a relatively small navy, but the larger the navy the harder it is to fill it via impressment. Then you had to be careful not to press so many that your trade falls off-it could easily lead to what amounts to a self-imposed blockade. And the governments of the time recognized that, issuing exemptions to certain groups.
It’s all horribly complicated, and more so because of the tie-in with classes and racism and sexism and religious discrimination the like at the time.
@@jamesverhoff1899. I suggest you read Billy Bud Sailor by Melville. Also you should read about the two major mutiny’s that occurred during the Napoleonic wars ‘Spithead and the Nore’. They were very much tied up with impressment. Which could occur at sea with merchant crews being taken to serve on warships. In fact I believe one of the causes of American disaffection at that time.
Also yes you are correct that the merchant marine would have been hard work but for many the rewards would be high as they would be allowed to trade individually. A few pounds of pepper or mace would have been very valuable at that time.
@@tedwarden5803 I agree that impressment occurred, I'm just saying that it wasn't what it's made out to be today. Your examples bear this out. Billy Budd was one guy. The American issue was that the British didn't respect American citizens, and violated American sovereignty to catch deserters, among other things (no cause for war is simple). Spithead and Noir included some discussion of impressment, but it wasn't a major issue--in Noir the articles they presented to the Admiralty discussed payment of those impressed. "The Dear Surprise" has published the articles from both events, and the articles issued don't seem to paint the mutinies as "very much tied up with impressment"; they were about pay, discipline, and leave more than impressment.
I'm not saying the press gangs didn't exist, or that they weren't problematic. The press gangs, much like the ships themselves, depended a great deal on the individuals involved. I'm just saying that this method wasn't the main one used to man the fleets.
Your point about merchant marine sailors getting greater rewards is a valid one, but from a very American perspective. The British at the time were very class-conscious. A rich man without a title and honors was considered less than a poor man with a title and honors. It's a very different mindset (see "Two Years Before The Mast" for other differences in mindsets between the two countries, and a few others). Further, your comment is geographically limited. Obviously the Company had other perks--including their own military. But a trader dealing with tar, or pine, or furs, or food, or...well, anything except spices and gems wasn't likely to provide the individuals with much opportunity for lining their own pockets. And merchants sometimes wouldn't sail. A sailor could be in both the Navy and--once the commission was over--sail with a merchant. Remember, once the commission was over the sailors were paid off, and while examples of sailors being snapped up again abound (admirals, the press, and other factors being what they were), a lot of sailors had down time between commissions. It wasn't either/or the way it is in today's navies, is what I'm trying to get at--a sailor could do both.
@@jamesverhoff1899. Something like half of the men who fought at Trafalgar on the British side were impressed.
Most of them not landsmen/lubbers.
Plus the British crown has never been quick to put its hand in its pocket. Those men were only discharged when they left ship.
I hasten to add that this is a conversation not an argument. But I’m afraid your giving the British navy a better reputation than it deserves.
Apart from winning almost all its engagements.
Great presentation. The one thing that would really tie it all together would be to see is a physical layout of the ship and where all of these people would be at any given time.
It doesn't look like a ship that size could hold that many people.
the humor gets better every video
thank you!
It's called experiance!
But you could work on your voice!
I was a USN officer. In my frigate (FF1052 class) we had a crew of 17 officers and 240 enlisted.
Whenever the Air Detachment was onboard (1 x helicopter) that added 4 more officers and 12 enlisted.
Sometimes we even had a US Coast Guard detachment which further added 1 officer and 8 enlisted.
So...the most we ever carried for a patrol was a total of 22 officers and 260 enlisted.
The lighthearted descriptions for the icons are just superb. Makes following the numbers easier. :)
Excellent video. The data analysis about the composition of various ranks was really nicely done. I came for the the sailing and stayed for the analytics!
I remember when you started with little subscribers and views. It makes me happy to see your channel grow this big. Awesome content, keep it up mang
To all the people correcting his pronunciation please learn to make highly detailed, excellent videos in another language and let MHV nitpick how you pronounce sometimes tricky words.
+James Robert ;)
Military History Visualized Kein Problem.
***** I wasn't trying to be rude-just wanted to point out that MHV is doing us a big favor by posting these videos in English. We know what he meant and many of the pronunciations are different depending on what part of the English speaking world you live in. Many times there really isn't any 'proper' way.
I guess I'm touchy on this from having a German mom-and having to go to speech therapy as a child because I pronounced English like her. I was also very ashamed at the way I saw some of my fellow GI's behave in Germany and the way they would get mad at a German for not speaking English to them. I remember my Dad's advice as I boarded the plane-"Remember you're a diplomat for your country." It was amazing how much Germans opened up to me whenever they saw I was trying to learn and speak German where ever I went.
@1978ajax to make things clear, his post is NOT preventing improvement. I am very aware about my pronunciation as can be seen in my trailer and also my 9 things you watched too much MHV, also one of patreon goals includes a speech trainer, e.g., I got rid of the extremely wrong pronunciation of comparison, which I probably had for 20 or more years. The thing is a large amount of "pointing out" here (the whole channel not just this video, where it was ok, but reading the same thing 20 times is a bit tiresome) is done not in the manner you speak off.
Whereas with specific words the comments are helpful there are like 5-10 times "fix your pronunciation, cause I can't understand you", which come from non-native speakers. Not to mention those that "recommend" to just get a different narrator completely ignoring the whole logistics, copyright, financial and other issues involved with such an arrangement.
Fun fact: for this video I checked the word "mizzen", because I thought, well that might probably sound odd, but I didn't, I never would have thought about "forecastle" being pronounced so differently, now I know and I am happy that it was pointed out, but this occasion was probably one of the rather few times where it was helpful.
well, since it was the first of its kind and I give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't imply all corrections, especially since he clearly understands the many other parts involved in the process. So on a merely argument level you are correct, but when people are kind and otherwise well articulated I give them a bonus. So, I would say you are both right, yet on different levels and with a different level of precision.
I'm currently a Deck rating, going through my Able Seamen training, and this all amazes me, we only have to know 15 Knots & Splices for our EDH (Efficient Deck Hand) I couldn't imagine having to learn twice that much. Also having no Naval history in my family going into this line of work was such a big culture shock, the Language among other things is such a hard thing to come to understand and use, I'm still getting lost on my ship because of it. Great Video, keep it up!
Thinking about the many knots... how many use cases for knots are there? Tying 2 ropes together, tying a rope to a pole, having a knot which tightens and one which does not tighten... so why 15 or 35 knots - would 5 knots not cover all applications?
@@ruffianeo3418 They all have there uses however I do find that there are some I use a lot more that others. I don't think I've been taught one that I've never had to use.
Very good video. Reminds me of Master and Commander, nice to see all the ships roles visualized.
Merry Christmas.
Props to this man for actually using sources
Absolutely fantastic, I really appreciate what you've done.
Well done video. I've read a fair bit about the age of sail & served on a tall ship. This is probably one of the best video breakdowns of the crewing of a sailing warship. Keep up the good work.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Very good vid. I'm just reading through the Aubrey-Maturin books right now and it helps to have guides like this to show the crew distribution
The speaker is Amazingly articulate. My sailor butt loved this. Olde Navy - 69/73 US "Frigate" , damn Tin Can with a crew of "Watchers of about 278.......
Very informative. Thanks for drilling down and presenting this. Keep the videos coming !!!
Great video, thanks for spending time on it!
Amazing info as always and love the subtle jokes! xD
It's SOOOOO much easier for me to understand things when they are presented visually so this style of vid is exactly what I need!
Thank you so much! :D
I love these videos. Fun to watch, great presentation and of course you learn interesting stuff
I have watched it a while ago. It's still a captivating and informative video. Congratulations and contuniue beeing awesome.
Also I liked the Mighty Jingles touch.
Excellent video, thank you for making it.
The amount of men such a ship could accomodate testifies to what an amazing work of engineering a vessel of this period could be. A common frigate was a relatively small ship and yet could give lodging to 300 men as well as store all the necessary gear, ammunition, weaponry and cargo while still reaching speeds of 14 knots...
to think there are those who still believe the people in 18th\19th century were stupid and who mock line warfare
Line warfare was actually pretty smart considering that other naval traditions required swarming and boarding actions. One of the precursors to the development of the line of battle occurred during the first conquest of Ormuz. Albuquerque defeated 250 Arabian ships containing 4,000 men with 6 ships and 460 men at the cost of 11 wounded killing 900. He did this by making a carousel formation which allowed his ships to concentrate their firepower into the tightly clumped up rowed ships trying to board or bring their archers to bear.
That's the future. What a fascinating and modern age we live in
I really enjoy your videos and can understand you just fine. Keep up the good work.
Awesome! Thank you!
awesome video! as a sailor in the US navy I love learning about the roots of our traditions
This was after you traitors had split 🧐
Thanks for the upload 🇬🇧
According to the last videos.. this was the last for the first wave..
Its been an honor sir
yeah, this was the intention, for more info see the pinned comment on the previous video.
Military History Visualized Whoa? Thanks for the reply..enjoy your Holiday..and merry Christmas
Interesting and informative video, thanks. Merry Christmas.
Thank you for these!
Thank you. Great summary.
Really like the informantion and how you are presenting keeps history intrersting . Please keep adding to the libary , thank you
+Military History Visualized another well done video.Keep up the good work.
I was surprised a ship of that size had so many crew.. well done you explained it all clearly
Just found your channel, thank you for the awesome videos.
Very well done, thanks for the information!
Excellent Video - Thank You!
Cracking video sir! It's not easy dealing with technical, historical subjects like this in a language not your own, kudos to you for doing it, and doing a bang up job to boot! To a purist, some of your pronunciations are, a little odd, however, in this day and age, many native English speakers have the same issues! I doff my cap to you, this is good stuff. Finally, just to say, I know we're I to try and match your feat in reverse, you would most likely damage yourself laughing! ;-) Please, keep up the good work!
Outstanding job!
awesome video, it would be great if you did a similar breakdown of the crew of a vessel from a different era, or some other unit you find interesting or characteristic!
really good video - i would really like to see more like this
Wow thank you very much! This is amazing
Very interesting and well done. Thank You!
Thanks for a very informative video.
Very interesting. Well put together. Thanks.
I liked his use of the term "larboard" I haven't heard anybody use it in quite a few years, this guy know his stuff.
dude.
love your videos.
that is all.
excellent very well done keep up the good work
i love the description of an able seaman. cool times and an awesome trade
I remember the Minerva from when I played Pirates of the Burning Sea. It was one of my favorite ships.
more of these please !
Hey MHV I love your channel. I was wondering if you would please do more medieval/ancient videos? I watched all your videos on Rome, the video on Alexander's Logistics and also the castle, archers, and trebuchet videos. You did a great job and it would be great to see more of that sort!
hey, thank you! Well, the ratio might change, but right now I am working on doing more data-centric stuff, thus there will be probably less of those areas. Another point is, outside of WW2 I need to spend way more time in properly researching, because I am not so aware of these areas, also there is nothing like the "Germany and the Second Wold War"-Book-Series that provides an excellent overview with a large amount of depth... usually there is only: overview or overwhelming details. Although, I gathered some excellent books on forts & castles, there will be definitely more on those, also since Austria is "littered" with castles, but there might be more in 2018 on that, I had to postpone a project due to costs and time.
Very informative!
This was fantastic
Can you make this into a poster with detailed legend? I would love to have one to hang in my office.
was thinking about it, but the design of the ship is far too shitty and I have no idea on how to improve on that.
Would be interesting to have one of these videos on WWII era (or even modern) battleships and carriers. A *big* project!
was the original plan and I put quite some time into finding source on that, then I got the book and well, Nelson's Navy first :)
Cool! Well, I look forward to it, whenever you can manage that. ; ) Keep up the great content!
That was fun. Thank you
Excellent summary my man... thank's for that... All the more full an understanding of the antique cassette tapes of Robert Hardy reading Patrick O'brian's series of historical naval novels... xxx ;-)
Fascinating stuff!
can you do a vido on ship types
Like in destroyers, frigates, corvettes, cruisers,etc.? Please do. I have no idea how ships are labeled.
Alright, I will try my best in a short comment form, beginning in the 1750s. Aside from smaller vessels the main fighting ships had three masts and a continous row of cannons (called guns). The Royal Navy had its ships divided into 7 different classes. 1st to 6th rates and unrated, with the latter being all the small ships having less than 18 (20?) cannons (6pdr) and usually less than three masts, specifics are armed Brigs, sloop-of-wars, small (mail) transports etc.
6th rates (Frigates), armed with 20-28 guns of 6 or 9 pound shell weight. The French navy classified there equivalent ships as Corvettes, a term not used by the British until the1850s. (The corvette Unitè became re-designated as a frigate after capture by the RN)
5th rates (Frigates), larger than 6th rates with up to 38, later also 40+ guns of 12 and 18pdrs in the main gun deck and some lighter guns/carronades on the top deck. (Hermoniè, the ship in the video)
4th rates (Ships of the Line) these ships had two continous gundecks and were designed for the line of battle. 24pdrs on the main gun deck, 9, 12, or 18pdrs on the second deck and some on-the-top-cherries, totalling at 50-66 guns (50 and 64 being common). (HMS Agamemnon)
3rd rates (SoL) also two decks with 70-80 guns, the 74 was the most standart Ship of the Line type used as it was (just like the 32, 36, 38 guns frigates) a good mixture of production and upkeep, speed, manouverability and fighting power. Shell weights were 32/24 on the lower gun deck, 18 on the middle gun deck, 9 prd or carronades on the top (Téméraire, HMS Bellona)
2nd rates: (Sol) three gun decks and basically a 1st rate in a little smaller and cheaper. 32s lower, 24/18s middle, 9 pdrs upper deck and 6/9prd or carronades on top, 80-98 in total Usually designated as flagships for faraway stations (west indies, e.g.) (Bucentaure, HMS Barfleur, Christian VII)
1st rates (SoL) the biggest fighting ships out there with more than 100 broadside cannons, very expensive, very rare, very difficult to manouver but absolutely deathly. 42s/32s lower deck, 24s middle deck, 18 upper deck and 9/12 pdr atop. (HMS Victory, Commerce de Marseille, and the infamous Santissima Trinidad)
Carronades were way shorter and lighter than regular cannons and thus had larger projectiles (24/32/42, even 68pdr) that could be monted instead of cannons one-third that shot weight. Those were used on a ship's weater deck as hard-hitting close range weapon (and were not counted as guns), although some frigates were exclusivly armed with carronades (those then were counted)
To 1800 the frigates grew bigger and the 4th rates could not keep up with the more widespread 74s as they had no sailing advantage and a lack of fighting power. Some 64 gun ships were "cut down" to a frigate by removing the upper gun deck. These Razees had the heavy hitting 24pdr battery and the stronger hull of the 4th rates, but the agility of a frigate, making it a usefull asset once more. Famous example of this is HMS Indefatigable which was a 64 gunner could down to 44 guns, and then had a rather successful career.
Even more drastic were the six US "Superfrigates" (USS Constitution) which were purpose-build as descibed above. Extremly strong hull, 24pdrs cannons in the gun deck, 44pdr carronades on the weather deck and the speed of smaller 5th rates. With a good performing crew they could smash smaller frigates while running away from 3rd rates. Such a design and operative principle would later evolve in the cruisers of 1900s till the early stages of WW2. Generally the Ship of the Line became the Ironclad and then the Dreadnought, then the Battleship. The 5th rate and "5th rate +" Frigates became steam frigates, then armoured cruisers, then heavy cruisers (or large light cruisers). The 6th rates became corvettes/light cruisers. While the smaller craft would vanish. With the introduction of the turbine and the torpedo small craft were "reborn" as torpedoboats that evolved into the destroyers of the world wars and fast attack craft. The battlecruser was more of an battleship with less armour but more speed and a designated cruiser-hunter (those buggers that were to run away from everything they could not fight and to fight everything they could) than a cruiser. In and shortly before WW2 however the battleships became faster and thus the battlecruiser became useless.
The term frigate then re-emerged as a smaller destroyer class focussed on anti sub only after Destroyers in turn grew in size with escort and fleet protection, but also fast attack in squadron mission profiles using torpedos and improved artillery. To protect convoys, "low-tech" easy to produce, slow ships with not really any substancial anti-surface weapons were developed, now dubbed corvettes. With the increasing power of (naval) aviation battleships became obsolete in/after the second World War and the aircraft carrier was the new big kid in the fleet.
Today, the Destroyers and the Frigates are the allrounders of the Navy. It is not really possible to distinguish those types as every country has different norms. In the USN, the destroyer is larger and can fufill all mission profiles (anti surface, anti submarine, anti air), the frigate is specialiased in anti submarine. The RN has frigates as multi-purpose with focus on anti sub and (just slightly) larger destroyers as ships with strong focus on anti air. Germany on the other hand has no destoyers, but its frigates would be counted as destroyers in other parts of the world. Cruisers are basically larger destroyers with a larger focus on anti surface, but noone builds then anymore, they are still in service though. Corvettes are minifrigates now and are more suited to protection and control of homeland waters.
Conclusion: Frigates and Corvettes of the sailing area, the world war era and modern era do not have that much in common as one might think based on the name.
@@aghostlyhat well destroyers are not a Napoleonic ship type. We need to know what time period we're talking about first :)
Endlich hab ich insight zu Hornblower ;)
Good info for those newcomers to Hornblower and/or the Aubrey-Maturin series
Found that today. A former cap hoorn sailing captain told me in the sixtees, how sailing vessels were crewd.
On commercial vessels one shift could only maneuvre one of the main sails, "all hands on deck" meant handling all sails on one mast.
Maneuvers like a gyb or a tack took hours.
Military vessels were crewd so, that "all hands" could handle all masts at the same time.
Really nice video. I suppose the only thing you didn't touch on was that the ship was also a training vessel. Landsmen in the waisters would be learning the skills of seamen in the hopes of eventually being rated able, and midshipmen would be learning how to be officers, including navigation lessons and such
Oh man! Lovely! Do more of these, please! 17th-18th century army organisation maybe?
Mighty Jingles Mining Ltd, love the reference
this is a very good video
i love your age of sail videos
With respect to Jordan's comment below
Very well done, thank you.
Love navy vids
Great video, it was extremely interesting. What would be really near is if you had a video of say a modern warship. Its really interesting that even a modern destroyer still has around a crew of 300 men.
You speak very good English. Heavy accent in all, I could understand everything you said. Oh, and awesome video as always!
I think people need to get out more. His accent isnt that heavy and whatever difficulties (minimum!) there might be amounts to what you might find in a supermarket in mid america. Bravo, auguri, alles gute! fab research and presentation WITHOUT ANY qualifications
@@NickTinBeirut are you criticising a compliment?
Your channel is fucking interesting. Danke schoen!
Excellent
Crew size, compared to a merchant ship of similar draft, was enormous. And yet it was always the Navy that was pressing man out of merchant ships that could ill afford the crew reduction. The Navy always needed more crew, willing or not (mostly not) to fight and sell the ship and crew prizes back to port.
Nice job. Narration was good. Of all the jobs, it sounds like being an artisan would be pretty good. You cant be pressed into anything but your skills whatever you are known for.
As a something of a student of these things, I offer my congratulations for producing this is a wonderful video. You boiled a great deal of data down to a usable, watchable chunk for the layman in most admirable fashion. I do offer the following--in addition to the pronunciation corrections already given for "chaplain" and "admiralty" as they are spoken on land and at sea, there are a few that are not heard on land much and that don't make any phonetic sense whatsoever:
"boatswain" is pronounced "BOW sun."
"forecastle" is pronounced "FOKE sul." Note to be confused with "FORE sul," see below.
And, of possible use in future videos: if "sail" appears in any word, it is pronounced "sul." For example, "mainsail" is pronounced "MAIN sul." "Tampion" (the wooden plug that goes in the barrel of the guns to keep water and corrosion out) in those days and on those ships was pronounced "TOM kin." It receives a more phonetically orthodox pronunciation today (TAM pee un"). "Gunwale" was then and is now "GUN ul." "Mast" when part of another word is generally spoken as "must," as in "foremast" which is pronounced "FORE must." Note that the "u" in "must" here is spoken with the "schwa" vowel sound with almost no vocalization at all, as with "u" in "circus."
Naval pronounciations seem nonsensical Bow-sun not botswain eh. How is "chaplain" and "Admiralty pronounced differently?
Not sure those words were already butchered 200 years ago and apparently the old prononciation is still common.
boatswain comes from the norwegian båtsmann, in dutch (also old dutch) it was bootsman...all the NorthSea countries mark him as a Boat-man...and what do the english do ? misunderstand it and pervert it into boat-swain ??
Similarly, coxswain (the person in charge of the ship's boats, especially the Captain's barge) is pronounced cox-un.
@@oddballsok Actually, from the Old English 'batswegen', from 'bat' (boat) and Old Norse 'sveinn' (boy). And to answer Derp's question, 'chaplain' is pronounced 'CHAP-lun', not 'chap-LANE' -- not that English spelling gives you any clue to the proper pronunciation, and the Old French 'chapelein' (and the modern 'chapelain') _are_ pronounced '-lane', so I can understand the confusion.
Bit of trivia from the age of sail: If you stand at the front of the fo'c'sle and look down for'ard over the railing to where the bowsprit emerges from the hull, you will see, on either side of the bowsprit, a wooden plank with one or more round holes cut in it (larger ships would have boxed shafts running down through the bow structure). These were used by the sailors to relieve themselves, wiping with the gouty end of a rope that was dangled in the water to clean it. They were referred to by their location at the head of the ship, and that's why a toilet is called a 'head' in the navy. This was just for the seamen, however; the officers would have their own in compartments in the stern galleries, where they didn't have to go out to the bow when the ship may be ploughing into rough seas and geting soaked.
Very nice.
excellent!
I looked up how fast these frigates were. I thought they'd be slow but they could run 14 knots! That's crazy
Excellent video.
One thing to note, is that ship crew were routinely under-strength. This is especially true for the marine contingent. From the sources I routinely read and study a frigate of that size would rarely have a marine company as large as 50. One rule of thumb I read a while back was that the RN would at least try to get a marine for every gun on a ship. Even that seemed optimistic.
The ship's crew we are routinely under strength? Are you in a ship's crew?
Corrected.
@@slappy8941 'were' past tense...
Fantastic
I know this was two months ago but can you please do a overview of the infantry tactics of the napoleonic era? Please this will really help me
will happen, probably cavalry first, because I have nothing done in the horsie area besides a few rainbow dash references for shit & giggles.
Very cool.
You mention the Lively class boat Spartan (38), some may find it of interest that another Lively class boat, HMS Macedonian fought and was captured by the American frigate United States. Macedonian had a crew of 301 and suffered 43 killed and
71 wounded.
ye. very interesting video. I didn't know much about the organisation of frigates in the 1700s until I watched this video!
You didn't need 278 men to sail it, but you did need something like it to fight it.
OMG this model looks exactly like my workplace (nuclear power plant). Even down to the marines (security officers).
Very cool
OOOooooo please more napoleonic navy vids!
You forgot the one that swims behind to push the ship forward
One should also note that Naval ships of that time usually took a good amount more crew witht hem than actually needed because they had to expect a quite high amount of deaths even on a peacefull journey. Even with scurvy somewhat under controll thanks to try and error research like from Cpt. Cook a long distance sea journey was far from safe and the supply sittuation far from optimal back then. This was also the reason that important skills were doubled, tribbled an so on.
Great video as always, but I was wondering, were you planning on doing something more modern soon? I'd love to see a video explaining the organisation and structure of the NATO forces from one of the wars in the Middle East, maybe something like the German equipment in WW2 but on a larger scale. Or, if you have the information on hand, it would be cool to understand how the Russians invaded Crimea (if you can get the information without being assassinated by Putin).
Just some ideas if you see them. Love the channel!
I have been expanding my knowledge and libraries mostly into the Pacific, Napoleonic and WW1 era. Also a bit into Medieval, especially Castles and a bit the Crusades. My recent looks into proper books for modern stuff were of limited success, also I need to start reading and less buying. One thing I learned in this year is simply: 1 good book allows me to create several videos in a rather short amount of time, whereas several average books often are not good enough for 1 video or even lead to cancelled projects.
Hence, I decided to spend more time on researching proper literature before.
I probably will work my way out of the Cold War first, also contemporary stuff like 21st century might be rare.
Of course my plans always change and adapt, as are my interests, so there is always a bit of dice throw in it as well.
That's fair enough, I can understand that you'd want to have a deep enough understanding about what you're making videos about!
Merry Christmas and thanks for the response B)