Ship of the line question.

During the Penobscot Expedition in July-August 1779 3 RN sloops with 8 gun broadsides (9pdrs I think), anchored in a narrow channel and supported by land based guns nearby, held off several attacks from many much larger ships with larger guns, the largest being the USS Warren with 32 x 18 and 12 pounders.

bagaducepen%20web.jpg


What I want to know is if the US fleet was in the same position and in possession of the Fort could the Warren and other American ships all larger and more powerful that the RN ships be able to hold off HMS Riasonable a 64 gun (32 x 32 pdrs and 32 x 18 pdrs) ship of the line and 5 Frigates of similar power to Warren? Or would the battleship just smash the Warren and others with its 32pdrs?
 
Last edited:
I find it unusual that on a board with so many Americans a topic ripe with AH possibilities for better outcomes for the US doesn't get a reply.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Smaller ships tend to have an advantage in restricted waters because they are already more maneuverable. They also don't have to be as concerned about the depth of the water when executing maneuvers. Although fought with steam powered ironclads, the Battle of Hampton Roads shows what can happen when large ships with deep draughts fight in restricted waters.
 
Mowat's 3 sloops were anchored so their broadsides faced out into the bay, the guns on the disengaged side were removed and emplaced on land. He moved twice during the campaign as a result of the attacks he suffered from the US ships as well as the emplacements of US batteries ashore, but each time he anchored with his broadside facing out into the bay. IIUC the problem wasn't the ships themselves but fire from the fort as well, so the US ships would take a lot of damage if they closed with the RN sloops in order to destroy them.
 
land based guns, if well served and using heated shot are a massive force multiplier in wooden warship combat - fire was brutal on things made of wood and canvas and hemp, covered in paint and carrying tons of gunpowder. That could explain the ability of the smaller force to hold off the larger.
 
So the question remains; if the Americans had captured the Fort in the days before Admiral Collier arrived would the USS Warren and other American ships supported by the land based guns (12 pounders I think) be able to withstand the HMS Raisonable?

Or would the much greater firepower of HMS Raisonable's 32 pdrs smash the US ships so quickly that the Fort wouldn't be a major problem?
 
Paul Revere, commanding the artillery, rowed back to the ship after unloading was complete, to have lunch. He didn't command the army forces, and I'm not sure who commanded Marine forces. The commander of naval forces wouldn't attack 3 sloops defended by the fort unless the fort was attacked. The land forces wouldn't attack the fort unless the sloops were attacked. Meanwhile, the British had decided finally on lace curtains for the fort. Under what circumstances could the American forces have taken the fort?
 
IIUC if the Americans attacked the fort on the first day, as a follow-on from capturing the heights above the fort and when all 200+ Marines were with the Militia they could have taken it. The fort was unfinished and the walls were low enough to jump over and the Americans outnumbered the British by about 1200 to 750.

Another attempt was to be made on the 13th of August by sending about 450-500 men around the back of the fort where the walls were not as high as those facing the American camp, while another several hundred men made a demonstration in front of the high walls.

Either way the command arrangements for the expedition were atrocious and were the leading cause f the expedition's failure.

The Army commander was Solomon Lovell, Peleg Wadsworth 2IC, Lt-Col Revere was commander of the artillery. The Marines were commanded by a Captain Welsh.
 
I find it unusual that on a board with so many Americans a topic ripe with AH possibilities for better outcomes for the US doesn't get a reply.

I'm always wary of pre-Constitution PoDs. Our system of government is a big reason for OTL being an "Ameriwank", and there's just so much that can go wrong without it.
 
I'm always wary of pre-Constitution PoDs. Our system of government is a big reason for OTL being an "Ameriwank", and there's just so much that can go wrong without it.

In this case the American system of government at the time wasn't able to appoint a competent command structure or sufficient high quality troops and although there was a surfeit of ships none were a match for the single ship of the line the RN sent.
 
Top