HMS Victory and Le Redoutable at Trafalgar (1/300)

[EJFoeth]

For model work I almost exclusively use collets. They are so more convenient and a lot safer than messing around with a 3-jaw-chuck. Also, if you have to re-chuck a part, chances are much better that it runs true in a collet - in an 3-jaw-chuck it almost certainly will not.

Indeed, and virtually guaranteed to be off when using styrene. My main parting routine consists of taking out the work piece, switching to a parting tool, setting it to a known distance ("zero"), position the to-be-parted piece against the tool, fix, set the right position & part. This does work with the 3-jaw chuck but not perfectly. Styrene is very soft, while parting the piece is typically pushed a bit away from the parting tool and the rear surface is not always flat anyway. I used the collet set for the Proxxon as well but for some reason it doesn't work as well as I'd like. The newer collet set uses the ER type, the version I have does not... perhaps I should try the new version, e.g.,

http://www.hobbiesguinea.es/en/proxxon- ... 250-e.html

The main advantage other than improved holding is not risking the chuck hitting your hands or other tools. I always apply a file rotating the lathe in the opposite direction; if you go with the turning direction you may catapult the file in your eye when it hits the jaws (which would be bad, because files corrode easily). This risk would be reduced (but not gone) with the smooth collet chuck.

One should also add that they double-slotted, like ES-collets, which are really meant for tool-holding, not for work-holding.

So you'd have to use the single-slotted collet that typically has three slots?

[wefalck]

Yes, to the last question.

[marijn van gils]

Many thanks guys!

Learning a lot here! Also learning that there still is a lot more to be learned...

[marijn van gils]

Meanwhile, I had some more lathe fun!

I made one of each type of gun barrel necessary for the diorama, both french and british patterns:



Now the carriages!

Cheers,

Marijn

[wefalck]

Good lathe fun then !

[Bouncy70]

Very nice lathe-work!

[Dan K]

Wow. This is very impressive work on the lathe.

I never realized how many different types of cannon were carried at one time by these ships. I've always thought in terms of American frigate armament. Parochial knowledge base, I giuess.

[Martocticvs]

They did simplify things (a little) in the 1820s (I think). First rates were re-armed with an all 32-pdr armament (unless they weren't up to it, in which case they were usually cut down to be smaller ships, or just broken up), but the guns themselves were still different sizes, getting lighter for each deck going upwards (for obvious reasons). And then of course they were introducing shell guns at around the same time, so that really just confused things even more!

Very nice lathe work there!

[marijn van gils]

Many thanks guys!

Martovics is right. Around 1810, many innovations were made to improve the wooden ships of the line, one of which was review the armament.

In 1805, there were different calibers for each gun deck:
- Victory:
- lower gun deck: 32 pounders
- middle gun deck: 24 pounders
- upper gun deck: 12 pounders (long)
- forecastle: 12 pounders (medium) + 68 pounder carronades
- quarterdeck: 12 pounders (short)

- Le Redoutable:
- gun deck: 36 pounders
- upper deck: 18 pounders
- forecastle + quarterdeck: 8 pounders.
I still have to check if she had 36 pounder carronades at Trafalgar. If somebody knows the definite answer?

I also didn't know these kind of things. Great how modelling projects can cause one to immerse oneself into new subjects, isn't it?

So, only the British 12 pounders (medium and short) and carronades, and the French 8 pounders will be in full view on the exposed decks. The long 12 pounders and 18 pounders will only be exposed in the waist of the ships, while the finished models will only show the barrels of the 36, 32 and 24 pounders sticking through the gunports.

[zs180]

Very impressive work going on here - I am following it with great interest!

[Martocticvs]

Redoutable may have been armed with some obusiers rather than carronades. France did adopt true carronades around that time though. Seems British officers had a habit of referring to obusiers as carronades in reports, so it may be impossible to know for certain which.

[Edit 1]
However, we can be reasonably certain she did carry examples of such guns, for one is referred to specifically by her captain, Jean Jacques �tienne Lucas in a report back to his government after the battle: http://www.wtj.com/archives/lucas_01.htm, also https://www.napoleon.org/en/history-of- ... trafalgar/

[Edit 2]
I did a little digging, and I found a French copy of this, from a volume published in 1845, which makes it clear that Lucas used the word 'caronade' in his report, and not obusier. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oQN ... 20&f=false (page 322)

This also proves the first page I linked above has a typo for the calibre (32 instead of 36).

[marijn van gils]

Many thanks Martovics! That is some great information!

A carrronade was even one of the guns that bursed during the battle. I must have read that report more than 10 times by now, and I still missed that...

I only got the idea of carronades from Redoutable's Wiki-page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_sh ... ble_(1791)
But it gives the same armament for almost the entire T�m�raire-class ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A9m% ... f_the_line ), so I'm not sure how accurate this is.

Boudriot's 74-gun ship only has 10 openings for guns at the quarterdeck and 6 on the forecastle. This fits with the 16 8-pounder guns mentioned in the above wiki-pages. But where were the carronades positioned?

According to Winfield and Roberts 'French Warships in the age of sail 1786-1861', in the section about the later T�m�raire-class:
In around 1887, the ordnance was increased by the addition of 4 x 36pdr obusiers, mounted on top of the dunette; in other vessels of this class the gaillards armament was increased from 16 to 20 x 8pdrs. By 1807 the obusiers had been abolished and nearly all ships of this type had 14 or fewer 8pdrs, although they also had up to 14 x 36pdr carronades.

According to this naval dictionary, the dunette is the poop: https://books.google.be/books?id=3pVAAA ... ip&f=false . But Lucas clearly places the burst carronade on the forecastle.
Is it possible there is some confusion between the obusiers and carronades on the above wiki-pages, since they mention 4 of them? Then, is it possible Redoutable had more than 4 carronades at Trafalgar? And/or some of them replacing 8pdrs? And in that case less than 16 x 8pdrs?

So, as usual more research results in more questions :
- How many carronades and 8pdrs did Le Redoutable have?
- Where were they positioned?

Any ideas anyone?


And since Boudriot's 74-gun ship doesn't have carronades, I'm on the search for plans of them now.
Some googling found me this one at this webpage: http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=479970


Does anyone have any more? Plan view of the slide mount? 3D- view or maybe photos of a surviving example?
What publication does the above plan come from? Does it have more on the 36pdr carronade?

Many thanks in advance for any help!

Marijn

[dafi]

Imho this is a english model. The french obusier as far as I remember look much more like this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obusier_de_vaisseau

"Obusier de vaisseau

Obusier de 36, mod�le 1787, found on the wreck of the Golymin. On display at the Mus�e national de la Marine
In service 1787�1805
Used by France
Production history
Produced 1787
Specifications
Barrel length 85 cm
Crew 5
Calibre 36-pounder
The Obusier de vaisseau was a large calibre but light piece of naval artillery mounted on French warships of the Age of Sail. Designed to fire explosive shells at a low velocity, they were an answer to the carronade in the close combat and anti-personnel role. However, their intended ammunition proved too dangerous for the crew, and the French navy phased them out at the beginning of the Empire in favour of the carronade.
Accounts by British warships of the armament of captured French ships tend to describe them as carronades. However, when the description includes the remark that the weapon was brass, this suggests that it was an obusier.
Several of the guns were recovered from the wreck of the Golymin in the road of Brest, and are now on display at the Mus�e national de la Marine in Paris and in Brest.[1]"

Also the obusiers found at Aboukir after the explosion of the L�Ocean look like this.
http://www.franckgoddio.org/projects/ot ... fleet.html (picture 2)
Perhaps to ask Gerard Delacroix of the french Arsenal forum.

XXXDAn

[marijn van gils]

Many thanks Daniel!

But the forum-post I found that drawing on states this:

A little more detail, in case one finds Mr. Brechtel's response above too summary.

In 1786, the French Navy adopted the "obusier de vaisseau". Based on the Gribeauval 6-inch land howitzer (169 mm calibre), and intended to be made in various sizes, actually only 36-pounders were made. These were in bronze, and intended to fire cannister and shell, just like the land pieces. The 36-pounder barrel was 84.3 cm long and weighed 350 kg.


The French found the shell rounds difficult and dangerous to use at sea, and began to load the pieces with plain ball rounds instead, leading to the use of the term "caronade obusier". Ill-suited to firing the ball round, the pieces were replaced from 1804 by true caronades.

These French caronades of the An XIII were cast in iron, first 36 pounders and then later (1810) also 24-pounders. The 36-pounders were still 169 mm caibre, but longer (182.1 cm) and much heavier (1223 kg). They were essentailly copies of British designs.



So it seems they used real carronades, after 1804, and that drawing is supposed to be the French 36pdr.
The breech seems to be much rounder in appearance than the british design. Like this:

Also, Lucas french language report uses the word 'caronade' and not obusier.

But I think the same confusion between obusiers and carronades might make the wiki statements on Redoutables' armament unreliable...

Cheers!

Marijn

[dafi]

Nice research

XXXDAn

[Bouncy70]

"Obusier" means "howitzer", it was a French/Spanish weapon of around the same size as the carronade and filling much the same niche as a light-gun replacement on the large warshps. It was a thin-walled, short, almost cylindrical weapon originally designed for firing explosive shells. It has roots back in the very beginning of the 18th Century, at least. Basically the French/Spanish met the carronade in battle, were much impressed, and found something roughly similar that they already had in production and tried that. It turned out the be far less effective than the carronade proper and was gradually replaced by them.

As for where a carronade or a howitzer would be mounted, well, here it gets a bit complicated. Let us start with the term "74-gun ship". Until the American Revolution, it meant just what it said on the box, a ship with 74 guns, full stop. By the time of Trafalgar, it rather meant a ship of the basic type that was once meant for 74 guns but which might carry anything from about 74ish to eightysomething guns, some of which would be carronades. Or howitzers.

Basically, the carronade replaced the not very powerful light guns, the six- or eight-pounders on the weather decks. It weighed about the same but threw a much larger ball using a smaller crew. It was also much shorter. This turned out to be a critical point. In way of the shrouds this was a Bad Thing, the muzzle flame from the carronade could set fire to the ship's own rigging. The solution was to keep the long guns in those positions, and only replace them in positions free of the shrouds. Depending on the exact layout of the gunports this mean that in actual fact about half the light long guns were kept, the rest being replaced on a one-for-one basis with carronades.

Because of the limited weight and compact size of the carronade it turned out to be possible to stuff a few of them on to the ship in positions that did not carry long guns, such as a pair or two on top of the poop deck/dunette, or a pair just aft of the catheads as on the Victory. These were "surplus to rating" so to speak and could turn a 74-gun ship into an 80-gun ship without it really being counted. If and how these extra carronades were mounted was largely up to the whim of captain/dockyard, depending on what was available, how much stability the ship had, and how badly the firepower was felt to be needed. It was never really standardized.

[wefalck]

In the German quarterly DAS LOGBUCH there has been a three-article series on the 'carronade' by Peter R�ckert. You can get it through the German associations' Web-site (click on the link in my signature).

The up-shot is that the French experimented with carronades, but never whole-heartedly adopted them as the British did. There were good reasons for this, some of them have been mentioned already. In addition, it was found that a too heavy reliance on them in terms of armament can put a ship into disadvantage because the opponent with more 'normal' guns can open effective fire from a longer distance - keeping you at arm's length before the carronades become effective.

Google does not come up with many of their works, but on the Web-site of the Biblioth�que Nationale de France (http://www.bnf.fr/) you can download various works on 'artillerie navale'. Not sure though there is something from the period in question, as this is not so much 'my' period.

[marijn van gils]

Many thanks guys!!!

I was already afraid that the listed armaments I have seen so far are just generalizations for the entire class, but in reality things varied from ship to ship and throughout their careers... That makes it very difficult of course to pinpoint the setup for a particular ship at a precise moment in time... But also more interesting!

At least knowing the logic behind their placement and use will allow some better 'guestimation' if I don't find more definite answers.

I'll be surfing around on the BNF too now!

Thanks again guys!

Marijn

[PetrOs]

Waiting eagerly to see further progress on the ship! I just placed a langton Dutch Gunboat which I started about 8 years ago to my bench, to be shown in a diorama (probably being cut out of harbour ), so would be watching your progress!

[marijn van gils]

Sorry Petros,

Work has been busy lately, but finally some progress.

First, I added a barrel for a French 36 pounder carronade to the collection (lower right):



Then I scratchbuilt the carriages from plastic sheet.
The British ones are in the photo below, with their respective barrels behind them.
The carriages for the 32 and 24 pounders were nearly identical (top), as were those of the long and medium 12 pounders (middle), so I only made one of each. The short 12 pounder carriage was notably shorter though (bottom)
The top carriage has already been partly prepared for resin casting.



With barrels mounted (largest barrel):


The French guns were simpler: one carriage for each calibre.




The slide carriages for the carronades: French at the left, British to the right. I also made a �recoiled� version of the French 36 pounder carriage. I made two British 64 pounder slides, as this would be faster than having them cast in resin and afterwards cleaning up the castings.


Note the difference in size between the French 36 pounder and the British 64 pounder!


All types of carriages together:


I prepared them for casting by cluing more plastic to their undersides.
I haven�t added any stool beds to the carriages, as these would have to be attached to the pouring plug quite solidly and become time-consuming to detach after casting. These will be easy to add with simple strips of plastic sheet after casting. And I only need to do it to the guns on weather decks, as these stool beds will be completely invisible on guns below decks.



And everything attached to the pouring plugs: British at the top, French at the bottom.



And finally, the obligatory finger-photo! ?


Cheers,

Marijn