Howitzers in the tops?

[Daniel]

When the USS United States captured the HMS Macedonian during the War of 1812, the chagrined British commander reported that the American vessel had "howitzers in her tops."

That rather amazed me. I think of howitzers as being very heavy guns. How could the mast stand up to the weight and recoil of a large gun being fired on the top? How big of a howitzer would they put up there? And, most importantly, was this done during the Golden Age of Piracy?

Edited April 28, 2010 by Daniel

[Dutchman]

i jnow fighting tops on some of the girls would hold a dozen or so marines. So logisticaly, I'd say doable, but might not be the smartest thing to do with all the powder raining down on sails. I bet boarders away might have a reference if any book does. Anyone with a copy mind looking.

[Tartan Jack]

My first question would be if the British commander was being literal or figurative. The second would be if he meant the platforms on the masts or the upper/top deck, or either the quarterdeck or forecastle.

The common charge made by the Admiralty against the Americans in the War of 1812 is that the Americans weren't playing fair. There were established "rules of war" on who fought who and all sorts of related stuff. With the American Frigates, they were built along the hull shapes of earlier light/fast frigate, but on the scale and firepower of "razed" ships-of-the-line frigates (the upper decks were cut off to only leave one or 2 gundecks and 30-40 cannons. The American frigates used 24-pounders and 32-pounder carronades as their main guns, while British frigates typically had 18s and only some had carronades. Also, many British frigate had between 20 and 36 guns, while the American ones had 32-44 guns. The British termed the American ones "Frigates and a half" and declared they weren't "fair" to British frigates, so British frigate captains could run from battle with them with no dishonor. Later in the war, the Admiralty declared that 2 British frigate were to "fairly" take on one American one.

Basically, they said the Americans "cheated" and made ships that weren't "fair" to the established "rules" for naval combat of the era. You know what . . .

They did.

On purpose.

And built NO ships-of-the-line.

[callenish gunner]

A small howitzer could have been hoisted aloft as were swivels from time to time ...Fort Ticonderoga has what looks like a blunderbuss on steroids tha was used as swivel gun in the fighting tops aboard a gunboat. Howitzers from the period were not huge guns some were sized to be carried on pack horses weighing in at 70-90 lbs.

Discretion in aiming and firing practices would reduce the possibility of setting the sails/rigging alight and if loaded with canister/grape shot they would be deadly to opponents deck crew.

Nothing directly in regard to this in Boarders Away

Edited April 28, 2010 by callenish gunner

[Daniel]

I see reference on the Web to some 19th century mountain howitzers that only weighed 250 pounds. Certainly that wouldn't be too great a weight for the tops, although I don't know if that weight includes the carriage. Still wondering about the recoil, though; firing at a high angle, a lot of the recoil would go down against the top, rather than laterally.

But more important: since evidently the howitzers were used in the tops, how far back does the practice go? Did the ships of Benbow's and Rooke's time use howitzers in the tops? Might pirates have done the same?

[Capt Thighbiter]

Maybe the Brits were mistaken? Swivels in the fighting tops, I can see. Howitzers? Dam thats a lot of recoil to be taken up, especially if under sail and you were firing to windward.

I am going to post the question over on the BP cannon website. If there were howitzers commisioned for ship board use, there should be some record of it, and those guys know the makers of cannon like the HE folks here know Admiralty slop contracts.

[MarkG]

Maybe the Brits were mistaken? Swivels in the fighting tops, I can see. Howitzers? Dam thats a lot of recoil to be taken up, especially if under sail and you were firing to windward.

I am going to post the question over on the BP cannon website. If there were howitzers commisioned for ship board use, there should be some record of it, and those guys know the makers of cannon like the HE folks here know Admiralty slop contracts.

Maybe it was a small mortar. Both can fire explosive shells.

Mark

[Crudbeard]

Actually a howitzer was commonly found in the fighting tops, according to Gilkerson. King howitzers looking something like a coehorn mortar but with trunnions in the center instead of the ends could have 6 to 8 inch bores and be two feet long and still be handled easily up there. The term howitzer referred to a very light tube for the diameter of the bore with a chamber about half the size of the bore for the powder. It was found that this reduced charge of powder needed to be in a smaller diameter chamber in the breech behind the projectile. So this made them short range weapons, ideal for firing down onto enemy decks.

[Story]

King howitzers looking something like a coehorn mortar but with trunnions in the center instead of the ends could have 6 to 8 inch bores and be two feet long and still be handled easily up there.

I just read this thread and the King Howitzers immediately came to mind, as well.

Forgive me ressurecting this thread, but by way of Devil's Advocacy see here

http://www.cannonsonline.com/product_pgs/barrels/features/danielKing1_howitzer.htm

[Dread Pyrate Greyhound]

I would think swivel guns would be mounted on the tops, and maybe the british commander was exxagerating because of the damages his ship was receiveing from the American's broadsides.