Foresail and mainsail dimensions are commonly referenced with letters J, I, E, and P, referring to the length of the foredeck, mast height, boom length, and main sail height. Sail type refers to the shape and functionality of the sail, while rig type refers to the way these sails are set up on the boat. A sailing ship typically consists of various key components, including the hull, keel, mast, sails, rigging, and rudder.
The hull is the main body of the ship that provides stability. Tall ships are historically large, traditionally-rigged sailing vessels, while modern tall ship rigs include topsail schooners, brigantines, brigs, barques, ketches, lugers, cutters, and more. Small sailboats, under 20 feet in length, rarely have masts taller than 20 ft or shorter than 8 ft. Sailboats between 20 and 30 feet have masts up to 30 feet tall, and large 40-foot mainsails are Dacron with a thickness of 0.007 on longer sailboats.
Hull thicknesses, of solid fiberglass, range from 1 in the keel area to 12 above the waterline. These vessels were cargo carriers of between 200 and 400 tons, requiring a crew of six to eight. A sailing ship is a sea-going vessel that uses sails mounted on masts to harness the power of wind and propel the vessel. There are various sail plans available, with a variety of sail sizes ranging from 2 inches more or less to up to 18 inches.
📹 Ship Types in the Age of Sail – Sloops, Brigs, Frigates and Ships of the Line
Today we look at the classifications of ships in the Age of Sail in the Royal Navy, a system that has become shorthand for the …
How thick is the hull of a sailing ship?
The thickness of any ship’s hull is determined by the expected conditions it will encounter, the cargo it caries and the cost of a thicker plate. In general, expect around 1–1.5cm or so on average for the normal hull plate, getting somewhat thicker near the bow, stern and bottom plates for strength.
How thick is a ship deck?
Deck plating thickness can vary widely depending on a host of factors ranging from ship type to the region of disposition of the plate. However, for all practical purposes, deck plating thicknesses for any kind of vessel usually range from 4-5 mm to 20-25 mm.
The larger the ship type, the greater the scantling distribution of deck plates. Moreover, deck plating thickness also depends on the following:
- Disposition
- Highest magnitude of structural loads acting
- Contribution to global strength
How thick is a cruise ship hull?
Between 28 and 32mm thick Steel plate varies in thickness from ship to ship. Cruise ships have fairly light scantlings up top, but the underwater hull is between 28 and 32mm thick – more possibly in “panting areas ” at the bow and stern.
How thick is a US Navy ship hull?
Depending on the destroyer, generally the hull thickness is anywhere from 10mm ( 3/8″ ) up to 15mm ( 5/8″ ). Different Navies have different requirements, so there are always variations.
What was the thickest hull on a battleship?
By the Guinness world records, the thickest battleship armor of all time was in the HMS INFLEXIBLE built in 1881. It was a total of 42 inches, 24 inches steel, backed by teak wood to the total thickness of 42 inches.
Why wasn’t Titanic welded?
Many argue that welding seams would have proven more effective and could have saved Titanic, however welding was in its infancy at this time in history and metallurgy wasn’t as advanced.
Luckily modern ship building technology and standards have come a long way to ensure it is capable of surviving disasters at sea.
About ShapeCUT. The team at ShapeCUT are all about using the best steel for the right application, and have extensive experience in using the latest steel cutting machines to get the job done right. No matter the size, shape or complexity of the task, ShapeCUT have the tools and knowledge to help you. Talk to ShapeCUT today to find out more.
How thick was the hull of Titanic?
Tensile Testing. The steel plate from the hull of the Titanic was nominally 1.875 cm thick, while the bulkhead plate had a thickness of 1.25 cm. Corrosion in the salt water had reduced the thickness of the hull plate so that it was not possible to machine standard tensile specimens from it.
The Titanic began its maiden voyage to New York just before noon on April 10, 1912, from Southampton, England. Two days later at 11:40 p.m., Greenland time, it struck an iceberg that was three to six times larger than its own mass, damaging the hull so that the six forward compartments were ruptured. The flooding of these compartments was sufficient to cause the ship to sink within two hours and 40 minutes, with a loss of more than 1,500 lives. The scope of the tragedy, coupled with a detailed historical record, have fueled endless fascination with the ship and debate over the reasons as to why it did in fact sink. A frequently cited culprit is the quality of the steel used in the ship’s construction. A metallurgical analysis of hull steel recovered from the ship’s wreckage provides a clearer view of the issue.
The ships were designed to provide accommodations superior to the Cunard ships, but without greater speed. The first on-board swimming pools were installed as was a gymnasium that included an electric horse and an electric camel, a squash court, a number of rowing machines, and stationary bicycles, all supervised by a staff of professional instructors. The public rooms for the first-class passengers were large and elegantly furnished with wood paneling, stained-glass windows, comfortable lounge furniture, and expensive carpets. The decor of the first class cabins, in addition to being luxurious, differed in style from cabin to cabin. As an extra feature on the Titanic, the Café Parisienne offered superb cuisine.
The designed speed for these ships was 21-22 knots, in contrast to the faster Cunard ships. To achieve this speed, each ship had three propellers; each outboard propeller was driven by a separate four-cylinder, triple expansion, reciprocating steam engine.2 The center propeller was driven by a low-pressure steam turbine using the exhaust steam from the two reciprocating engines. The power plant was rated at 51,000 I.H.P. To provide the necessary steam for the power plant, 29 boilers were available, fired by 159 furnaces. In addition to propelling the ship, steam was used to generate electricity for various purposes, distill fresh water, refrigerate the perishable food, cook, and heat the living space. Coal was burned as fuel at a rate of 650 tons per day when the ship was underway. Stokers moved the coal from the bunkers into the furnaces by hand. The bunkers held enough coal for a ten-day voyage.
How thick was the Titanic hull?
The steel plate from the hull of the Titanic was nominally 1.875 cm thick, while the bulkhead plate had a thickness of 1.25 cm.
The Titanic began its maiden voyage to New York just before noon on April 10, 1912, from Southampton, England. Two days later at 11:40 p.m., Greenland time, it struck an iceberg that was three to six times larger than its own mass, damaging the hull so that the six forward compartments were ruptured. The flooding of these compartments was sufficient to cause the ship to sink within two hours and 40 minutes, with a loss of more than 1,500 lives. The scope of the tragedy, coupled with a detailed historical record, have fueled endless fascination with the ship and debate over the reasons as to why it did in fact sink. A frequently cited culprit is the quality of the steel used in the ship’s construction. A metallurgical analysis of hull steel recovered from the ship’s wreckage provides a clearer view of the issue.
The ships were designed to provide accommodations superior to the Cunard ships, but without greater speed. The first on-board swimming pools were installed as was a gymnasium that included an electric horse and an electric camel, a squash court, a number of rowing machines, and stationary bicycles, all supervised by a staff of professional instructors. The public rooms for the first-class passengers were large and elegantly furnished with wood paneling, stained-glass windows, comfortable lounge furniture, and expensive carpets. The decor of the first class cabins, in addition to being luxurious, differed in style from cabin to cabin. As an extra feature on the Titanic, the Café Parisienne offered superb cuisine.
The designed speed for these ships was 21-22 knots, in contrast to the faster Cunard ships. To achieve this speed, each ship had three propellers; each outboard propeller was driven by a separate four-cylinder, triple expansion, reciprocating steam engine.2 The center propeller was driven by a low-pressure steam turbine using the exhaust steam from the two reciprocating engines. The power plant was rated at 51,000 I.H.P. To provide the necessary steam for the power plant, 29 boilers were available, fired by 159 furnaces. In addition to propelling the ship, steam was used to generate electricity for various purposes, distill fresh water, refrigerate the perishable food, cook, and heat the living space. Coal was burned as fuel at a rate of 650 tons per day when the ship was underway. Stokers moved the coal from the bunkers into the furnaces by hand. The bunkers held enough coal for a ten-day voyage.
How thick is the Titanic’s hull?
Tensile Testing. The steel plate from the hull of the Titanic was nominally 1.875 cm thick, while the bulkhead plate had a thickness of 1.25 cm. Corrosion in the salt water had reduced the thickness of the hull plate so that it was not possible to machine standard tensile specimens from it.
The Titanic began its maiden voyage to New York just before noon on April 10, 1912, from Southampton, England. Two days later at 11:40 p.m., Greenland time, it struck an iceberg that was three to six times larger than its own mass, damaging the hull so that the six forward compartments were ruptured. The flooding of these compartments was sufficient to cause the ship to sink within two hours and 40 minutes, with a loss of more than 1,500 lives. The scope of the tragedy, coupled with a detailed historical record, have fueled endless fascination with the ship and debate over the reasons as to why it did in fact sink. A frequently cited culprit is the quality of the steel used in the ship’s construction. A metallurgical analysis of hull steel recovered from the ship’s wreckage provides a clearer view of the issue.
The ships were designed to provide accommodations superior to the Cunard ships, but without greater speed. The first on-board swimming pools were installed as was a gymnasium that included an electric horse and an electric camel, a squash court, a number of rowing machines, and stationary bicycles, all supervised by a staff of professional instructors. The public rooms for the first-class passengers were large and elegantly furnished with wood paneling, stained-glass windows, comfortable lounge furniture, and expensive carpets. The decor of the first class cabins, in addition to being luxurious, differed in style from cabin to cabin. As an extra feature on the Titanic, the Café Parisienne offered superb cuisine.
The designed speed for these ships was 21-22 knots, in contrast to the faster Cunard ships. To achieve this speed, each ship had three propellers; each outboard propeller was driven by a separate four-cylinder, triple expansion, reciprocating steam engine.2 The center propeller was driven by a low-pressure steam turbine using the exhaust steam from the two reciprocating engines. The power plant was rated at 51,000 I.H.P. To provide the necessary steam for the power plant, 29 boilers were available, fired by 159 furnaces. In addition to propelling the ship, steam was used to generate electricity for various purposes, distill fresh water, refrigerate the perishable food, cook, and heat the living space. Coal was burned as fuel at a rate of 650 tons per day when the ship was underway. Stokers moved the coal from the bunkers into the furnaces by hand. The bunkers held enough coal for a ten-day voyage.
How thick is ship hull coating?
24 to 25 mils In accordance with NSTM guidelines, each coating system for a ship’s hull should be identical, with all dry film thickness (DFT) measurements falling between a total coating thickness of 24 to 25 mils.
How thick is a battleship deck?
The Turrets are frontally protected with 20 inches of armor, with the sides and rear covered with 10 inches. The Barbettes under the turrets are between 12 and 17 inches thick, and the deck itself is layered with a total of 8–8.5 inches of armor.
How thick is the floor of a ship?
Modern ship’s hull is only 13 to 15 mm thick steel plate. Plain carbon and mild steel are the most common grades of steel for shipbuilding, as they boast a raft of beneficial properties that make them uniquely suited for marine engineering.
📹 Age of Sail Gunnery – The Lethality of Splinters (ft.Vasa)
Today we take a look at one of the key mechanics of age of sail naval warfare, the generation of splinters and how they affected …
An interesting side story. In the 1790s, in order to get more hulls in service, the RN bought about a dozen East India merchantman on the stocks and modified them into two deckers. The East Indiamen were usually built with an armed quarterdeck and a gun deck. In the more insecure times, the gun deck could be armed instead of used for cargo or passenger cabins. This meant that they could be converted by putting gun ports into their main deck in place of cargo. But even though the decks were reinforced, these ships suffered from hogging and sagging decks. This was countered by putting carronades on the original gun deck. One of these ships was armed with all carronades and the story is that coming into action with a French frigate and firing a broadside from the gun deck only, the French captain surrendered after seeing the size of the shot coming from the gun deck and didn’t wait to see what would come from the main deck. What made these ships further interesting was their size. They ranged from the size of the standard RN 64-gun ship of the line to being fully equal in size to the largest French frigates and the American “big three” 44s. Armed as 64s and 56s, they would have made a formidable opponent to these frigates, but as East Indiamen, their fuller lines as merchant ships reduced their speed such that they would have found it hard to bring these frigates to battle. As it was, because of their merchant build and the quality of wood used to finish them to meet the emergency of the RN having to fight the French, Spanish and Dutch navies at the same time.
Note that ships with oars could move against the wind, were extremely manoeuvrable and capable of turning on the spot (where turning a sailing ship was a much more difficult and ponderous operation, with a turning circle in the hundreds of metres) and could even outspeed sailing ships in a sprint (when naval wisdom held that larger ships capable of spreading more sail were faster than smaller ones).
At 32.52 you show a picture of HMS Pickle. This was the vessel that brought the news of Nelson’s death at Trafalgar back to England, because she was fast. Incidentally, she was purchased into service in 1801 from private, previously known as Sting. wrecked in 1808. You may also find the books of Richard Woodman enjoyable. The principal character, Nathaniel Drinkwater, commanded a bonb vessel at Nelson’s battle of Copenhagen. They are very well written and based on fact, rather like Sharpe and Flashman!
Very useful article, Drach. The visuals were very helpful in displaying the changes to the various rates in terms of size, crew, and standard armaments (hoping that spreadsheet will be available for download…). The increases in broadside weight were impressive, especially for the “smaller” rated ships, which helped those ships punch above their weight when necessary.
Probably worth adding the 3rd rate was the main workhorse ship undertaking many scouting and combat patrol missions detached from the fleet while the 1st and 2nd rates tended to either be mothballed between conflicts or stick together in the battle fleet either offensively or defensively deployed against the main enemy fleet concentration.
Finally someone makes it all clear. And I can see why I have never been able to get this straight. In a relatively few short minutes you have saved me much frustration and wasted time as I used to look at pictures of rigging and declare the type. I do not get it and will not get it, but I really like your website. It is, for me, the last word on all things nautical!!
The etymology of ship type names and other maratime language is fascinating (to me, at least!). I realized a lot of connections in this vid that I hadn’t been aware of before… pinnace(sp?)/pinnacle, gallon/galleot, etc, kind of like the classic example of steerboard/starboard. A comprehensive discussion of etymological connections in the nomenclature of the age of sail would be the stuff of a dissertation or scholarly book, but a vid covering the broad strokes of ship type nomenclature, the associated conventions and the development thereof (or other naval linguistic connections/developments, etc) would be welcomed by some of the more etymologistically inclined students of naval history that follow and dig this website. I suspect that there are more than a few other than myself… Cheers! (P.S: Is ‘etymologistically’ even a word? It seems like it at least ought to/could be… maybe ‘etymologically’ is better. ha!)
The transcript makes an interesting guess at the spelling of the PLURAL of the ship type discussed from about 4 minutes in… (the plural first comes at +/- 5’11). For the singular, it proposes Hinus, but the plural has, among other things, had its first letter changed (and looks a lot more anatomical). It does add a humorous touch to an otherwise already brilliant article.
Just by my gaming history, I have become acquainted with a few naval terms and very broad ship classifications. It started with ‘Sid Meier’s Pirates!’ which I played on my Commodore 64. Galleons were useless but were great captures for the prize money and valuable cargo they carried. Fast Galleons, merchants, were soso (for a pirate) because like all square rigged vessels, they could not sail into the wind. Frigates were fine although still can’t sail into the wind. For the realistic pirate, the best ships were barque, sloop and sometimes one or more pinnaces. In the game, the sloop was superior because it could sail over shoals while a barque couldn’t and a pinnace was much too small (not enough men, not enough rations for longer cruises, can’t store any valuable cargo. Later I started playing Empire Total War. Unfortunately, while the land battles are quite entertaining, naval battles are rigged! On Hard Level, you could never win in a one vs. one ship battle of same class. With two similar ships vs the AI-controlled single enemy ship, you had a 50-50 chance. But to make sure, you needed three ships. Two to bring down its rigging with a third in reserve in case the enemy managed to suddenly sink your ship. This happened to the human player quite frequently, almost never to the AI player. Why not play the game on Moderate Level then? That was too easy while Hard was just too hard where naval battles were concerned. The AI would often manage to sink one of my ships (it would start leaking and you knew it would go down eventually) while even 5th rate frigates in AI hands seemed indestructible.
30:22 in addition if you are interested in pirates you’ll often here them sailing in sloops however during the golden age of piracy and in general referring to a non naval vessel to this day a sloop is a single masted vessel, athough can sometimes be used as a general term and that vessel may have two masts. However if they say a Bermuda sloop for example a favourites among later golden age pirates for it’s speed, that is a single masted vessel.
THANKYOU 😁🤩 this is something I asked when I was 10 to my grandfather, cause he was in the Navy. He expected his son to provide the answers which were not forth coming, I search our bookshelf and found no answers, we always lived outside of town so I could not walk in to the library and any requests to go to the library after school were swiftly declined. Lastly this was before the internet
I think this history is interesting from the standpoint that standardization of ships is not a set in stone for all of time kind of thing. It’s a constantly moving target. And I feel like this can make ship type identification difficult. You’d like to think a 2nd rate is a 2nd rate is a 2nd rate, but each new establishment increased the size and armament of all of the ratings. So a 2nd rate under a previous establishment was smaller and more lightly armed than a 2nd rate of the newer establishment. I also feel like we see this today, but not as neatly divided into “establishments”. I mean, we have the generation of destroyers that include the US Arleigh-Burke class and their contemporaries in other navies being a particular displacement. But now we’re seeing other navies bring in a new generation of ships in which the frigates are larger than the previous generation of destroyers. Adding to that is that these days, there’s a lot of politics invovled in how a ship is classified. Navies often feel like the government might be reluctant to spend money on new destroyers but can be convinced to fund said ships if they are designated as frigates, making them sound like smaller, cheaper options.
Was the Royal Navy armament standards going up in tier and number a result of opposition or simply better production of the larger cannon? E.G. Was the Royal Navy trying to catch up to how heavily French, Dutch and Spanish ships were armed, trying to get an advantage over same by carrying more cannon, or simply a case that there was a better supply of the heavier cannon to use?
We Dutch never cared about it, we just looked what made the most money. If it made money enough and needed to defend itself we just put guns on it. Also we looked what we needed, like with the Raid on the Medway, we needed some fire ships, well, let’s see, a that one, those two and that one are ok, let’s use those. Second, very important, shallow waters, our ships needed to be useful in shallow waters, again with as much as useful cargo storage as possible. Which came also back in the build of our warships. If you look at all the ships designed, even today, they are most a bit in a class of their own, our cruisers weren’t really cruisers, like our frigates. Also our subs differs from the standards, but that’s another story.
What’s an old sea dog’s favorite ship? Bark. A Second Rate article. Technically First Rate, but that would imply rarity, which certainly doesn’t apply to this particular website. 🙂 A thought occurred while pondering the shot weight of a broadside. I wonder if velocities improved significantly. Thus, a lighter broadside from a later vessel could equal, or surpass, an older design. Energy on target, joules, perhaps?
Hold on Drach, you mention the Royal Sovereign as being scarcely larger than Sovereign of the Seas in the 17th century, however I’m quite under the impression that they are the same ship after a name change and a rebuild; after so many years they would rebuild them and changes in dimensions are not unheard of. Perhaps you were referring to another of the new first rates and misspoke? I’ll dig out Lavery’s book later and check.
Currently reading the Patrick O’brien series. About half way through. Question. The revision in 1745, did they increase the gun size on existing ships or just on any new construction? Given the increasing weight of changing up the guns, I have to wonder if existing ships were pushed too hard or were they rebuilt with larger scantlings? I imagine the recoil difference would have really pounded hell out of older ships if they’d not been rebuilt.
Did you forgot to include (or maybe i just missed it, just woke up and still tired “phased off” a few times) that it wasnt that easy to just count every gun on a ship to say its a X gun ship or a Y gun ship? Because depending on the time only specific guns were counted, like only guns on the gun decks and/or only broadside guns, sometimes the guns on the quarterdeck counted sometimes not, especialty if the guns on the quarterdeck were carronades, wich only counted if all guns on a gun deck were carronades.
I see you’ve picked one source for your 17th century artillery sizes, as many of the authors of the period disagree. And in Nye’s 1647 book he even list multiple versions of each classification: “Some Sakers of the oldest sort, cast in the reign of Henry the eighth, and Edward the Sixth,” then “Sakers Ordinary” and “Sakers lower than the former”. Bastard pieces are generally any odd ones that don’t fit any of the designated types, and a cut is any piece they needed to make shorter than normal (normally due to a failed casting at the muzzle). It was a mess, but there were attempts at standardising based of weight of shot as early as 1630, with orders for 3 and 6 pound artillery.
After 50 years into this stuff curious how battle ship and cruiser replaced the old term I finally learn they are Battle Ships of the Line or Ships of the Line of Battle thus Battleship and Cruiser goes way back into the age of sail. And Frigate being a rather vague term at the start and often afterwards so I will forgive modern navy only half way though for calling smaller than destroyer frigate. As the later named frigates were also Cruisers term frigate should have stayed retired or at least be larger than the destroyers who after all as torpedo boat destroyers are supposed to be the small war ship. Note with all the pirates and unconventional fighters fighting from motor boats and inflatables that is what the modern destroyer should be equipped for in large part. Oh well way to late now.
Ah you, you missed out on so many ships with limiting to royal navy . As The 3 most most important ships that gave birth to much of what was used in the age of sail had its origins in the Knarr, Kogge, and brigantine . ships that where around for 400 years before beeing replaced with Galeons, Brigs, sloops, flutes and other lovely ships of war .
I think there was a bit too much leaping about in this article. I know, the problem with the intertubes is there is always some wanker who leaps in and drones “umm excuse me, in 1679 there was a blah blah blah” I think like you sort of said at the start, choose one “line” of designation and stick with it.
The Developers really screwed up the balance of the Rating System at Tier Three. Way too much compression with the Third Rates, you have 64 gun Ardents regularly in the same match as a 80 gun Tonnants? Absolute Madness. These Large 74s and 80s have a throw weight on par or surpassing a 98 gun Second Rate, and their secondary battery are the same 24 pounders as the 64’s main battery. Granted your top tier players such as Nelson with tuned up crew skills can still win against those odds but most average players would get stomped. They really need to decompress the Tier. Don’t get me started on the Super Frigates.
Sir? When can a fifth rate be called a frigate but also be a cruiser? I do wish you’d listen, Wymer. It’s perfectly simple. If you’re not getting your hair cut, you don’t have to move your brother’s clothes down to the lower peg. You simply collect his note before lunch, after you’ve done your scripture prep, when you’ve written your letter home, before rest, move your own clothes onto the lower peg, greet the visitors, and report to Mr. Viney that you’ve had your chit signed.