The general strategy adopted by the Americans against the British during the War of 1812 was of guerre de course (commerce raiding). Conventional wisdom says this was a necessity as the American Navy could not have stood against the British battleline.
Is this really true though? The American fleet was indeed small, consisting of 8 frigates, 12-14 smaller vessels, and no ships of the 3rd rate or larger. By contrast, the RN had over 600 ships, including more than 80 in American waters.
There is no doubt that the commerce raiding strategy stung the British, who were obviously very reliant on worldwide trade, but my question is, if the commerce raiding had been left to privateers and smaller vessels (which did most of the damage in that area anyway) and gotten all the frigates together to challenge the British in a fleet action, what would have been the outcome?
On the surface, it seems easy, no ships of the line vs. lots of ships of the line. However, all of the RN ships were not in one place. A more typical fleet would size would have been the force that captured the USS President (4 frigates, including a very heavy razee frigate).
It is not out of the question that the 3 heavy 44-gun frigates of the US Navy could have potentially gone toe to toe with a 3rd rate. Their general structure actually was more along the line of a 3rd rate than of the average frigate of the day.
What do you all think, given fairly even numbers, who would have prevailed?
Lets say a US fleet consisting of the 3 big US frigates (Constitution/President/United States), plus 3 smaller ones, and 2 sloops of war against a 74-gun liner (HMS Royal Oak or similar), a 50 gun 4th rate, 2 large 38-44 gun frigates and 2 smaller 28-32 gun frigates and 3 unrated ship-sloops. Nine ships to eight.
Also, its worth noting that while the Americans won numerous frigate engagements throughout the war, showing themselves very skilled at ship handling and gunnery, commanding even a small fleet in action is something else again, and the British had lots of practice at this.
Anyway, I'm eager to see what you all think.
Recent discussions in the History forum
AnnouncementAmazon Discussions Feedback Forum
|430||Mar 23, 2015|
|Who killed JFK on November 22nd, 1963? What are some of your answers and beliefs? VOLUME II||3264||8 minutes ago|
|Was Groening guilty?||440||11 minutes ago|
|Fighter aces head to head match up.||67||26 minutes ago|
|Worst President in History||2470||42 minutes ago|
|History of the Palestinian Nation (Part IV)||1189||1 hour ago|
|A Place For Pro-Israel Posters III||7219||2 hours ago|
|Hellstorm:The Death of Nazi Germany||165||6 hours ago|
|Fact then and now: if you are a homeowner with a gun you are more likely to get a robber entering your house than he is to get you--READ!!!||81||8 hours ago|
|New Biography Of The Kaiser||38||10 hours ago|
|Should the US have become involved in WWI?||30||1 day ago|
|Favorite Memorial day films?||3||1 day ago|