Friday, May 2, 2008 - New servers are in! Click-in for more info!
VoyForums

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1234 ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 01:06:50 05/08/08 Thu
Author: Bob Legge
Subject: Re: Copper sheathing
In reply to: John Tredrea 's message, "Re: Copper sheathing" on 07:16:09 05/07/08 Wed

John Fincham, "A History of Naval Architecture" page 97, gives the following additional costs involved in replacing the iron bolts below the waterline with copper bolts.
First Rate £2272 - 2nd Rate 90 £2018 - 3rd Rate 74 £1559 -
3rd Rate 64 £1178 - 4th Rate 50 £872 - 5th Rate 44 £618
5th Rate 36 £528 - 5th Rate 32 £ 476 - 6th Rate 28 £390
6th Rate 24 £337 - 20 gun £279 - Sloop £210
- Brig £158. These were ordered to be fitted October 1783.
Problem not solved until after 1823.
Bob Legge.
>>
>>
>>I will search Boudriot, i remember he give quite a lot
>>of infos about coppering
>>What i remember now is :
>>- bronze bolts to attach the copper plate to the hull
>>- COST : around 10% of the cost of the ship !!!!
>
>Thanks gentlemen! This is just about everything I
>needed to know. Cy says the cost of coppering a
>British 74 was ƒ1500. Looking at Winfield, who does
>list the cost of ships (I can't find any mention of
>the cost of coppering, but it may be somewhere in his
>four books), the cost of a 74 seems to have usually
>been around ƒ55-75,000. This means that the cost of
>coppering would have been from 2-3% of the cost of the
>ship. Didier says about 10% of the cost of a French
>ship. I accept both percentages as valid and this
>would seem to indicate the British manufacturing and
>metallurgy was more advanced at this time. Jan Glete
>has said that British metallurgy with respect to the
>casting of iron cannon was probably second only to
>that of Sweden in the late 18th Century and well ahead
>of the other non-scandinavian countries in Europe and
>so it would not surprise me if they could also work
>more cheaply with copper.
>
>I would have guessed that copper sheets would have
>been thicker -½" to 1". This proves, among other
>things, that I am no metallurgist :-).
>
>Thanks again,
>
>John Tredrea

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* Notice: Posting problems? [ Click here ]
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:


Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.