USS United States Vs. HMS Africa

Who will Win?


  • Total voters
    40
Could the 44-gun United states defeat the 64-gun Africa in 1813 or 14? I'm not exactly an expert in Naval warfare at that time, so I have no idea.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:

67th Tigers

Banned
Probably not. The Africa is a 3rd Rate Battleship, and has 2-3 times the firepower and about 2-3 times the armour.
 
Well, Indefatigable did beat the 64 Droits de l'Homme and the United States was considerably stronger than Indefatigable while Africa was considerably weaker than Droits de l'Homme.

United States actually has a much heavier broadside than Africa if she could get within range for her carronades. So I'd say yes...if the United States has a better commander than Africa.

Of course, I doubt the United States would ever be able to get Africa by herself, so it's kind of a moot point.

Probably not. The Africa is a 3rd Rate Battleship, and has 2-3 times the firepower and about 2-3 times the armour.

United States was hardly a normal frigate. She was bigger, and more heavily built than Britain's Razees, and actually displaced more than Africa.
 
Ultimately, it'd be down to command decisions and luck. The US frigates were fucking scary for their time, and a 64-gun 'battleship' was an anachronism by the 1800s (which is why they refitted the things).

Of course, the Royal Navy managed to sink a French ship of the line with frigates, and they routinely bagged significantly larger ships by boarding action. Might work.
 
Stephan Decatur was the Captain of the USS United states at the time, and he was considered a very good captain from what i know, and was well known for the Barbary wars of 1803-1805, where he commanded the burning of the USS Philadelphia, a captured frigate, an act that Admiral Lord Nelson called "The most bold and daring act of an age"
 
It would be like putting a 1890 Pre-Dreadnought against a 1914 Cruiser. HMS Africa is in a higher weight class but it is 50 years behind the times (which is why it was in the America's rather than part of the Blockade against France). I would say that USS United States should win on paper but the Royal Navy was generally a more experienced and better trained force. so HMS Africa would make it a very close fight.
 
It would be like putting a 1890 Pre-Dreadnought against a 1914 Cruiser. HMS Africa is in a higher weight class but it is 50 years behind the times (which is why it was in the America's rather than part of the Blockade against France). I would say that USS United States should win on paper but the Royal Navy was generally a more experienced and better trained force. so HMS Africa would make it a very close fight.

United States was actually in a higher weight class, by over 100 tons. Africa was tiny for a ship of the line. A fight would probably revolve around whether the United States is able to get within carronade range without taking too much more damage than Africa, at which point its 42 pounders would wreck Africa.
 
Someone mentioned the Indefatigable. The Indie was a 44 gun frigate that was had been cut down (razeed) from a 64 gun ship of the line like the Africa. She retained her main armament of 24 Pounders.

The USS United States also carried 24 pounders as her main battery like a 64 gun ship of the line.

However Africa had the advantage in Long range firepower with a battery of 18 Pdrs on her upper gun deck. She also carried 20 more guns than the the United states including a 68 pdr Carronade on both sides of the focsle. The Americans had no guns heavier than a 32 pounder Carronade.

On the other hand, as a frigate, the United States had advantages in speed and manouevrability, but was also more lightely built and not designed for a protracted engagement against a ship as durable as a ship of the line. The American frigates were much like RN Battlecruisers of
WW I & II in that they weren't capable of going toe to toe with their own equivilent, when a US 24 Pounder Frigate went up against a British one, the Americans had their asses handed to them over the breech of their own bow chasers.

Africa was practically obselete by the time this engagement would have taken place, the state of her timbers would have left much to be desired and she would probably not have been able to handle a repeated broadside of 32 and 24 pounders at close. With this in mind it's unlikely that the engagement would ever have taken place, no one would have wanted her as a prize of war. But for the sake of argument

Assuming the United States has the weather guage she might have been able to fight Africa to a standstill (the latter would probably have been condemned and broken up afterwards) while spending perhaps a year in dock to repair the damage or even suffering the same fate as her opponent. If her captain had any sense these would be the only circumstances in which the United States would engage the Africa.

However, if the Africa has the weather guage the United States would probably be captured, given the Africa's significant advantage in crew size. In this scenario we're probably looking at another form of Pryhic victory in that HMS Quebec gets to fight another day while her captor doesn't
 
Simply put, there's too many questions to answer one way or another:

Is USS United States fresh out of dock or at the end of a long cruise? (Fouling of hull and hence can she draw on her superior speed?)

Who has the weather gauge?

How's the visibility? (Do the two vessels blunder into each other in the fog and settle things in a close range melee or are we talking sighting on the horizon and a long chase and long ranged skirmish before the action properly begins?).

What's the sea state? (As per Droits de l'Homme a lot of waves sloshing about and Africa's lower tier of guns ports may have to be kept closed, reducing her fighting power).

etc. etc.
 
However Africa had the advantage in Long range firepower with a battery of 18 Pdrs on her upper gun deck. She also carried 20 more guns than the the United states including a 68 pdr Carronade on both sides of the focsle. The Americans had no guns heavier than a 32 pounder Carronade.

United States had 42 pounder carronades.

On the other hand, as a frigate, the United States had advantages in speed and manouevrability, but was also more lightely built and not designed for a protracted engagement against a ship as durable as a ship of the line. The American frigates were much like RN Battlecruisers of
WW I & II in that they weren't capable of going toe to toe with their own equivilent, when a US 24 Pounder Frigate went up against a British one, the Americans had their asses handed to them over the breech of their own bow chasers.

What in the world are you talking about? U.S. 24 pounder frigates never faced British 24 pounder frigates in battle, except the loss of the President which pitted 4 British frigates including 2 24 pounder frigates against the President already badly damaged by grounding. The American 44s were more heavily built than most British razees, and thus the old 64 gunners they were razeed from.
 

archaeogeek

Banned
My money is on the american ship; one on one, not only does United States have heavy carronades, but it's both heavier and faster than Africa. While HMS Africa might try to snipe, United States can close in for the kill. With the 64's age (I didn't even realize anyone still fielded 64s that late), a one-on-one combat with a modern, heavily armed frigate will be very hard.

Also the armament of the USS United States included 24 42 pound carronades in 1812, plus 32 long 24 pounders (though I'm not sure about range).

I'm also amused that the current vote at the time of my comment goes 8/8 and 5 tie/draw: does that mean tie/draw wins? ;)
 
Xche08 I stand corrected, I knew the President pursuedby a squadron, but I didn't realise that it included 2 24 pdr frigates, and I also didn't know about the grounding damage.

Considering the fact that US frigates were more heavily built than the old 64s, to begin with (thanks whoever pointed that out). Ultimately it comes down to the wheather guage, and Africa is a goner regardless of what happens to the United States.
 
Weather is important

When the design specs were done up for the 44's, the parameters included being able to escape from a 74 in light weather, and beat them in heavy weather, as the lower ports of the 74 would have to stay closed. These ships did everything they were designed to do, and I suspect that President would pull it off. The 44's were very heavily built ships--"Old Ironsides," the USS Constitution, got the name because cannonballs bounced off her hull.

I'd bet on the President, all things being equal, win in any weather the Africa could bring her to battle, and do quite well if circumstances--such as defending a convoy--forced her to fight when she otherwise could have run.
 
Didn't the British give a standing order to all their ships of the line -not- to engage any US frigate or warship 1v1 because of the tremendous losses they were taking in such engagements?
 
Didn't the British give a standing order to all their ships of the line -not- to engage any US frigate or warship 1v1 because of the tremendous losses they were taking in such engagements?

Seems really doubtful. While Constitution and her sisters did a good number on several British frigates and smaller craft, the British won their own share of single ship engagements too. I would be very surprised if they ever told a 74 to avoid the United States ;)

Africa, however, is another matter. It was very old and actually smaller than the American ship. That could have certainly gone either way but the American victory seems a little more probable.
 
Didn't the British give a standing order to all their ships of the line -not- to engage any US frigate or warship 1v1 because of the tremendous losses they were taking in such engagements?

That order, instruction would be more acurate, was given to frigate commanders. 74s and bigger were free to do has they pleased.
 
Top