>"So formidable was the reputation of the USS Constitution among the Royal Navy that British captains were advised to avoid engaging her if possible unless sailing a ship of the line or favored with at least a 3-to-1 frigate advantage."
My question is would it have prevailed in an encounter against the much older but more heavily armed HMS Victory?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
I don't know, who would have prevailed between Ford Explorer and Tiger 2 tank?
This.
Did you even read your fucking quote?
>"So formidable was the reputation of the USS Constitution among the Royal Navy that British captains were advised to avoid engaging her if possible unless sailing a ship of the line or favored with at least a 3-to-1 frigate advantage."
>avoid engaging her if possible unless sailing a ship of the line
>ship of the line
Guess what the HMS Victory is?
Exactly.
>Ford Explorer
V6 or V8
>My question is would it have prevailed in an encounter against the much older but more heavily armed HMS Victory?
This is such a stupid question. Let me dedicate two whole posts to your stupidity.
First of all, the Victory was not significantly older in terms of design, only construction (and her most famous achievement was only 10 years before the 6 Frigates were matched by Royal Navy frigates of equivalent size and defeated).
But on top of that, they were two very different ships, designed for very different combat roles.
The Victory, as all first rates, second rates, and third rates, and some lower ratings, were designed to be battleships of the line. They were comparatively slow, but had extraordinarily thick hulls and staggering weights of firepower.
The 6 Frigates were designed, as most frigates were, to act as irregulars of the sea, to raid commerce, harass enemy fleets, screen the flanks of a line etc, and were only relied upon to hold a position in the line as a last resort, due to the fact that they were built more for speed than firepower and endurance.
The other issue is that victory in a naval engagement was only achieved in one of two ways; either you devastated the opponent so entirely with your fire that they surrendered/exploded, or you boarded to capture their ship. One requires going broadside with the opponent (an area the Royal Navy was famously unmatched in), the other requires hand to hand fighting.
At Trafalgar the Victory carried a broadside of anywhere from 1,100lbs to >3,000lbs depending on the shot (at close range, expect that to be at the higher end, with treble shot). The Constitution's broadside was around 680lbs, and though that could be increased significantly by loading multiple shot, it is still barely above half that of the Victory. The Victory also had a thicker hull (though admittedly not by that much, only a few inches). And of course, you have to remember that Royal Navy gun crews at the time were by far the best trained in the world. Their reloading efficiency was legendary, and one of the main reasons behind their continual victories over the French and Spanish, as weight of broadside is less of a factor if you can fire twice for each shot of the opponent.
This means that in a broadside engagement, the fight would be utterly hopeless for the Constitution. Obviously. As it was not designed to face a First Rate battleship in a line engagement.
In a boarding action, the Victory had a crew compliment of around 850, while the Constitution had around 450. And though numbers are not always a guarantee of success, you have to take into account the fact that the Royal Navy crews were far more experienced than USN crews of the day (for example, HMS Shannon vs USS Chesapeake was won by the Shannon with a crew compliment of 330 vs 379). A boarding action is also influenced by the size of the ship, as taller masts and larger crows nests allow for more marine musketeers to be deployed above the enemy crew, giving a decisive advantage to the larger ship. And last but not least, the deck of the Victory is simply much higher out of the water, meaning that any engagement fought by a frigate against it would quite literally be an uphill battle.
Ultimately, these ships are simply of two entirely different classes. The 6 Frigates were specifically designed to defeat anything that could catch them and evade anything that could match them.
Ford explorer with rpgs.
>void engaging her if possible unless sailing a ship of the line or favored with at least a 3-to-1 frigate advantage
why risk a 50% chance of failure or even 25% when you can wait until you have the advantage
>muh honor
The discounting the Constitution's Speed and Luck, HMS Victory has higher stats all round. The fight really comes down to the Constitution avoiding the Victory's attacks until it can launch its special "Old Ironsides: Victorious Hunter of 1812" and equal the playing field. Comparatively Victory's special "Kismet: Dying Words of England's Savoir" is only good in a supporting role, so the advantage goes to the Americans in this case.
one of them can sail, and the other is little more than a coastal battery :^)
The answer is that the HMS Victory would have a much heavier broadside than the USS Constitution, so it is very likely that the Constitution would use its superior speed to completely avoid such a confrontation rather than committing to a fight that it would be very unlikely to win. The Constitution was a mere frigate (albeit a quite well armed frigate) whereas the HMS Victory was a full-blown ship-of-the-line. A metaphor would be if a WW era cruiser tried to go up against a battleship by itself. It might win, but the odds are so low that it would be better run away and live to fight another day.
>a cruiser might win against a battleship
r u high m8?
You're a fucking idiot. How can you forget the secret technique of the Victory, Nelson's Beating Heart of the Ocean? Granted, it is only triggered by a blood sacrifice from the ship's captain, but I think we all know the boost to speed and firepower it grants would be more than enough to overcome the special of the Constitution.
Not him, but if you make them across REALLY long technological era differences.
I'd be willing to bet the Atago could take one of those pre-dreadnought BB.
US Naval history is underrated.
On the quarterdeck of HMS Victory is a large brass plaque marking the spot where Nelson fell.
I'm not surprised, I tripped over it myself.
(This was my late grandfather's favourite joke. RIP pop.)
torpedoes, although you would need ridiculous circumstances to get close enough to hit, its possible but as did say its so unlikely that running is by far the better option
A Japanese cruiser armed with Type 93 torpedoes would have easily been able to win against a battleship if it got close enough. This were high-speed torpedoes specifically designed to punch their way through the thick underwater bulkheads of a battleship. Of course, this is all predicated on finding an unaware battleship by itself without any escorts to protect it from torpedo attacks.
According to this narrative, british would have win
youtu.be
>, who would have prevailed between Ford Explorer and Tiger 2 tank?
Ford Explorer destroys the Tiger 2 in a game of "who can travel the furthest distance on a single tank of gas"
Not if the Tiger 2 is blocking the way.
Does breaking down on the way to the battlefield count as a tactical victory?
The quote implies that anything LESS than a ship of the line (or 3 frigates) would be hopelessly outmatched by the Constitution. A ship of the line was considered the bare minimum needed to have a fair fight one-on-one. If the Victory wasn't a really high-end ship of the line, the odds would probably be even (or at least that's what British doctrine though).
Good posts
If the cruiser is the Admiral Kuznetsov and the battleship is an unescorted Iowa class, I'd say it's fairly probable.
Not him, but aren't the Kuznetsov class an aircraft carrier, not a cruiser?
I think he meant Kirov.
I would have to think he meant the Kuznetsov; the Kirovs were 1930s cruisers. An Iowa would swat one of them in a few minutes.
Nigga there was Cold War battlecruiser that bore the Kirov name.
A health to all our fathers' fathers.
Ford Explorer would win after the tank breaks down.
>A ship of the line was considered the bare minimum needed to have a fair fight one-on-one
not exactly, that order stood only until enough razees had reached the theatre, a ship f the line like a 74 was considered t be plenty to take on a american heavy frigate, the planing being at least as thick and the armament and crew being superior
Just barely
Torpedoes render weight class a fairly useless metric assuming they find their mark.
2 US destroyers of Taffy 3 managed to cripple two heavy cruisers with torpedo runs. The Yamato was forced out of the fight entirely because of a torpedo run it barely avoided, and in general the entire Japanese flotilla ended up disorganized either because they were literally on fire, sinking, or out of position because of suicidal torpedo runs done by ships 1/8th their size.
Depends, does the explorer have offroad tires or just standard road ones?
Is Spike TV going to do Deadliest Ships and make the USN win everything ever?
Come on, you can't let your case of manlove for Horatio Nelson get in the way of the facts. Nelson's Beating Heart is easily countered by the Constitutions Class attribute "From Boston to Barbary, Freedom Roars Across the Seas" which counters all conceptual and rank up specials when they're used on a Pre-Civil War USN ship.
The only British ship before the Dreadnought with even afighting chance at defeating the Constitution is "The Fighting Temeraire, Vengeful Wraith from the Final Berth."
>Literally Sloops and Brigs
>Underrated
The USN was pretty meh during the 18th and 19th centuries because their prime enemy the RN only ever sent token forces to deal with them due to having commitments in Europe. The USN in the 20th century, especially against the IJN was god tier.
10/10
>A ship of the line was considered the bare minimum needed to have a fair fight one-on-one. If the Victory wasn't a really high-end ship of the line, the odds would probably be even (or at least that's what British doctrine though).
Fuck no