Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!military From: welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Carronades Message-ID: <7441@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 14 Jun 89 03:26:37 GMT References: <7030@cbnews.ATT.COM> <7127@cbnews.ATT.COM> <7338@cbnews.ATT.COM> Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Organization: New York State Institute for Sebastian Cabot Studies Lines: 36 Approved: military@att.att.com From: welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) In article <7338@cbnews.ATT.COM>, Rex A. Buddenberg writes: =The British, on the other hand, built stouter ships and favored =the weather line of battle so they could descend downwind onto =the French and Spanish, get a good melee going toe to toe. =Thus came one of Nelson's aphorisms -- definitely rooted in =the weapons and tactics of the time -- about his captains could =do little better than heaving alongside the enemy and blowing =the ____ out of him. =As history shows, the British tactics generally were superior. =About the only strategically significant battle where they didn't =work was at Virginia Capes. the British tactics were very effective until they encountered the fledging US Navy in single-ship actions, at which point the superior gunnery training of the US crews changed the balance completely. it seems that the British emphasis was on volume of fire, with relatively little concern for minor details like aiming first. it also seems that the British considered the tendency of US crews to train at the guns daily to be a waste of time and powder, and so when British ships encountered Constellation and Constitution on the high seas, they were invariably cut to ribbons. (note that i am talking about the war of 1812 here, and not about the revolutionary war and the continental navy, which was a whole different kettle of fish) richard -- richard welty welty@lewis.crd.ge.com welty@algol.crd.ge.com 518-387-6346, GE R&D, K1-5C39, Niskayuna, New York ``but officer, i was only speeding so i'd get home before i ran out of gas''