Re: Distance between ships -- NAVAL WARFARE IN THE AGE OF SAIL 1650-1815

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:56:48 10/24/09 Sat
Author: Albert Parker
Subject: Re: Distance between ships
In reply to: Ruyter 's message, "Distance between ships" on 10:45:56 10/24/09 Sat

>Calculating that in the Battles of 1653 there where
>some 100-120 ships forming a line, taking 30 meters
>length to each ship, I estimated that there were some
>50 meters on average between two ships.

The line of battle as the common fighting formation had not been developed yet in 1653, and the fleets did not include 200 ships apiece, so there were no 200-ship lines of battle. Battles with 100 ships in line were rare. According to Carl Ballhausen, Der erste englische-holländische Seekrieg, 1652–1654, sowie der schwedisch-holländische Seekrieg, 1658-1659 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1923), hull counts for some battles were:
Kentish Knock, Sept. 28/Oct. 8, 1652
English: 66 of at least 10 guns
Dutch: 67 of at least 24 guns
(Pemsel*: Each fleet "about 65")
Portland, Feb. 18/28 to Feb. 20/Mar. 2, 1653
English: 83 (Pemsel*, 70)
Dutch: 62 (Pemsel*, 70)
Gabbard Bank, June 2/13
English: Not in my notes (Pemsel*, 115)
Dutch: 98 (Pemsel*, 104)
Scheveningen, July 31/Aug. 10, 1653
English: 114 (Pemsel*: Monck has "over 100")
Dutch: 112 (Pemsel*: 82)

*Helmut Pemsel, A History of War at Sea (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1975).

The English developed the line ahead formation during the war of 1652–53; the Dutch were using it by the war of 1665–67. But already the fleets had gotten smaller as ships had gotten larger. Data from Pemsel, op. cit., his dates are all new style or Gregorian calendar.
Lowestoft, June 13, 1665
English: 109
Dutch: 103
Four Days, June 11–14, 1666
English: 70, but with 20 detached, and some losses before they joined
Dutch: 84 to start, later reinforcements replaced damaged ships or those that had used up their ammunition
St. James's Day, Aug. 4, 1666
Both "about 90"

Fleets were even smaller in the next war, so the lines at Lowestoft were probably the maximum for the age of sail. I believe that the admirals in the centers of their lines could not see the ends ahead or astern.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Distance between ships -- Cy, 02:20:57 10/25/09 Sun
- Re: Distance between ships -- Ruyter, 03:16:01 10/25/09 Sun
  - Re: Distance between ships -- Cy, 04:23:45 10/25/09 Sun
    - Re: Distance between ships -- Ruyter, 13:24:51 10/25/09 Sun
      - Re: Distance between ships -- Cy, 14:49:05 10/25/09 Sun
        Re: Distance between ships -- Gerardo, 17:29:56 10/25/09 Sun

[ VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* Notice: Posting problems? [ Click here ]
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>>Calculating that in the Battles of 1653 there where >>some 100-120 ships forming a line, taking 30 meters >>length to each ship, I estimated that there were some >>50 meters on average between two ships. > >The line of battle as the common fighting formation >had not been developed yet in 1653, and the fleets did >not include 200 ships apiece, so there were no >200-ship lines of battle. Battles with 100 ships in >line were rare. According to Carl Ballhausen, Der >erste englische-holländische Seekrieg, 1652–1654, >sowie der schwedisch-holländische Seekrieg, >1658-1659 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1923), >hull counts for some battles were: >Kentish Knock, Sept. 28/Oct. 8, 1652 >English: 66 of at least 10 guns >Dutch: 67 of at least 24 guns >(Pemsel*: Each fleet "about 65") >Portland, Feb. 18/28 to Feb. 20/Mar. 2, 1653 >English: 83 (Pemsel*, 70) >Dutch: 62 (Pemsel*, 70) >Gabbard Bank, June 2/13 >English: Not in my notes (Pemsel*, 115) >Dutch: 98 (Pemsel*, 104) >Scheveningen, July 31/Aug. 10, 1653 >English: 114 (Pemsel*: Monck has "over 100") >Dutch: 112 (Pemsel*: 82) > >*Helmut Pemsel, A History of War at Sea >(Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1975). > >The English developed the line ahead formation during >the war of 1652–53; the Dutch were using it by the war >of 1665–67. But already the fleets had gotten smaller >as ships had gotten larger. Data from Pemsel, op. >cit., his dates are all new style or Gregorian >calendar. >Lowestoft, June 13, 1665 >English: 109 >Dutch: 103 >Four Days, June 11–14, 1666 >English: 70, but with 20 detached, and some losses >before they joined >Dutch: 84 to start, later reinforcements replaced >damaged ships or those that had used up their >ammunition >St. James's Day, Aug. 4, 1666 >Both "about 90" > >Fleets were even smaller in the next war, so the lines >at Lowestoft were probably the maximum for the age of >sail. I believe that the admirals in the centers of >their lines could not see the ends ahead or astern.

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.