DOCSLIB.ORG

Warren Massachusetts Schooner

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

1 Warren (1) Commander William Coas Schooner 2 August 1776-[] October 1776 Massachusetts Privateer Schooner (2) Commander John Coulston 21 October 1776-[] 26 December 1776 (3) Commander Silas Howell 3 September 1777-9 September 1777 Commissioned/First Date: 2 August 1776 Out of Service/Cause: 9 September 1777/captured by HM Frigate Unicorn Owners: (1) Joseph Foster, Winthrop Sargent and Epes Sargent, all of Gloucester, Massachusetts and John Winthrop, Jr. of Boston, Massachusetts; (2) John Coffin Jones of Newburyport, Massachusetts and Stephen Bruce of Boston, Massachusetts et al Tonnage: 70 Battery: Date Reported: 2 August 1776 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 4/4-pounder 16 pounds 8 pounds 4/3-pounder 12 pounds 6 pounds Total: 8 cannon/28 pounds Broadside: 4 cannon/14 pounds Swivels: twelve Date Reported: 21 October 1776 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 8/ Total: 8 cannon/ Broadside: 4 cannon/ Swivels: Date Reported: 1 December 1776 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 12/6-pounder 72 pounds 36 pounds Total: 12 cannon/72 pounds Broadside: 6 cannon/36 pounds ©awiatsea.com-posted August 2019 --1-- Swivels: twelve Date Reported: 3 September 1777 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 10/ Total: 10 cannon/ Broadside: 5 cannon/ Swivels: Crew: (1) 2 August 1776: 53 [ total (2) 21 October 1776: 61 []total (3) 1 December 1776: 85 []total (4) 3 September 1777: 53 []total Description: Officers: (1) First Lieutenant Coas Gardner, 2 August 1776-; (2) First Lieutenant Benjamin Tucker, 3 September 1777-9 September 1777; (3) Second Lieutenant Moses Harris, 2 August1776-; (4) Second Lieutenant Thomas Sanders, 3 September 1777-9 September 1777 Cruises: (1) Cape Ann, Massachusetts to sea and return, []7 August 1776-28 September 1776 (2) Cape Ann, Massachusetts to sea and return, [ 7 November] 1776-26 December 1776 (3) Cape Ann, Massachusetts to area of Nantucket Shoals, []8 September 1777-9 September 1777 Prizes: (1) Ship Picary (Breholt Cleveland), in the West Indies, 29 August 1776 (2) Brig Swallow (Benjamin Griffiths), in the West Indies, []1 September 1776 (3) Ship Sarah and Elizabeth (James Foot), in the West Indies, 18 September 1776 (4) Schooner Patroclus (William Gill), 1 December 1776 Actions: Comments: ©awiatsea.com-posted August 2019 --2-- John Winthrop, Jr., owner of the Massachusetts Privateer Schooner Warren , petitioned the Massachusetts Council for a commission on 2 August 1776. Winthrop stated that Warren was a 70- ton vessel, armed with four 4-pounders, four 3-pounders, twelve swivels and four cohorns, and listed her crew as fifty men. Appointed as commander was William Coas of Gloucester (Cape Ann), with Coas Gardner of Gloucester as First Lieutenant and Moses Harris of Ipswich as Second Lieutenant. Winthrop also petitioned to be allowed to buy seven hundred pounds of gunpowder from the state. Both petitions were granted. 1 Warren ’s $5000 Continental bond was signed the same day, by Joseph Foster, Winthrop Sargent and Epes Sargent, all of Gloucester and by John Winthrop, Jr. of Boston, Massachusetts, and by Coas. The owners were listed as the Sargents, Foster and Winthrop. 2 Coas Gardner was formerly master of the sloop John , captured by the British on 7 March 1776. 3 Warren was the former fishing schooner Britannia .4 Warren probably sailed soon after her commission was granted. Three prizes were captured on this cruise: (1) Ship Picary (Breholt Cleveland), a three decked 300 to 400-ton vessel bound to London from Tobago. She was captured on 29 August (or 4 September) 1776 and was sent in to Cape Ann, arriving there on 14 September. Picary ’s cargo consisted of sugar, cotton, Madeira wine, rum and indigo. Picary was libeled on 26 September and trial was held on 15 October 1776. 5 (2) Brig Swallow (Benjamin Griffiths) was between 70 and 120 tons and engaged in the Guinea trade (i.e., the slave trade). She had sailed from the Guinea coast to Tobago, and was proceeding to London or Bristol with no cargo except gold dust and elephant tusks when she was captured. Although armed with six or eight 1½ -pounders and ten swivels, she made no resistance. She was sent into Cape Ann, arriving on 16 September 1776. She reported that Warren had been in chase of a ship when she parted company. She was libeled and tried at the same time as the Picary .6 1 NDAR, "Journal of the Massachusetts Council," 6: 12-14 and 14 note; also listed in Emmons, 168 2 NDAR, "Journal of the Massachusetts Council," 6: 12-14 and 14 note; Allen, Massachusetts Privateers of the Revolution , 319 3 NDAR, 4: 207 and note, 228 4 Hurd, D. Hamilton (comp.), History of Essex County, Massachusetts, with Biographical Sketches of Its Many Pioneers and Prominent Men , Philadelphia: J. W. Lewis & Co., 1888, II, 1336 5 NDAR, "Public Advertiser , Wednesday, October 2, 1776," 6: 626-627 and 627 note; "Boston Gazette , Monday, September 23, 1776," 6: 952; "Libels Filed Against Various Prizes in the Massachusetts Admiralty Court," 6: 1002-1003; "Petition to the Massachusetts Council of John Bardwell Barnard, Passenger in the Prize Ship Picary ," 7: 4 and note; "Petition of British Prisoners to the Massachusetts Council," 7: 593-594 6 NDAR, "Independent Chronicle , Thursday, September 19, 1776," 6: 899 and note; "Boston Gazette , Monday, September 23, 1776," 6: 952 and note; "Libels Filed Against Various Prizes in the Massachusetts Admiralty Court," 6: 1002-1003; "John Bradford to John Hancock," 6:1053-1055 and 1055 note; "Observations by the Late Master of the British Ship Spiers ," 7: 299- 300; "Whitehall Evening Post , Thursday, December 26 to Saturday, December 28, 1776," 7: 809-810 ©awiatsea.com-posted August 2019 --3-- (3) The 500-ton 7 ship Sarah and Elizabeth (James Foot) was another large Indiaman and was captured on 18 September 1776. She had a cargo of sugar, rum, indigo, tortoise, tortoise shell, cotton, mahogany, cash and plate, and was from Tobago or Barbados to London. Although she had sailed with the homeward bound Leeward Islands convoy under Navy escort, she had parted company after leaving the Florida Gulf and had fallen to Warren . She was escorted most of the way to Cape Ann by the privateer, who then took out her money and plate. Warren arrived on 28 September and the prize arrived safely on the 30th. The ship was tried and condemned, but purchased by her master, who sought permission from the Massachusetts Council (on 24 February 1777) to sail her to Jamaica in ballast. The Council gave limited permission on 21 March 1777, Foot having first to go to New York and negotiate a prisoner exchange for himself and his crew. If the exchange could not be arranged Foot was to return within sixty days. 8 Warren was re-commissioned under Commander John Coulson []Coulston of Gloucester on 21 October 1776. She was listed as having eight guns and a crew of sixty men. Her $5000 Continental bond was signed by Coulston and by John Coffin Jones of Newburyport, Massachusetts and Stephen Bruce of Boston. The owners were listed as Jones, Bruce and others. 9 Another cruise began about 7 November 1776. The only prize reported was the 100 ton schooner Patroclus (William Gill), from Dominica to Quebec, 10 or to Halifax, Nova Scotia, 11 captured on 1 December 1776. She was brought in to Cape Ann. The owners of the privateer denied the master and crew their private interest, then promised restitution, thus leading the prisoners to miss a cartel ship. Warren arrived at Cape Ann on 26 December 1776 from her cruise. The schooner was libeled on 9 January 1777, with trial set for 28 January 1777. 12 The prisoners reported that the Warren was armed with twelve 6-pounders, twelve swivel guns, and had a crew of eighty-five men. 13 7 Hurd, History of Essex County , II, 1336 8 NDAR, "John Bradford to John Hancock," 6: 1053-1055 and 1055 note; "Independent Chronicle , Thursday, October 3, 1776," 6: 1113-1114 and 1114 note; "" Petition of British Prisoners to the Massachusetts Council," 7: 593-594; "Whitehall Evening Post , Tuesday, November 19 to Thursday, November 21, 1776,"" 7: 749-750; Captain William Cornwallis, R.N., to Philip Stephens," 7: 750-751; "Petition of James Foot to the Massachusetts Council," 7: 1274-1275; "Acts and Resolves of the Massachusetts General Court," 8: 164-166 and 166 note; "Petition of John Stoughton to the Massachusetts General Court, " 8: 250 9 Allen, Massachusetts Privateers of the Revolution , 320; Emmons, 168 10 NDAR, "Petition of British Prisoners to the Massachusetts Council," 7: 593-594; "Boston Gazette , Monday, January 6, 1777,"" 7: 868; Libels Filed in the Massachusetts Maritime Court," 7: 906-907 11 New-Lloyd’s List []London , Friday, February 25, 1777 12 NDAR, "Petition of British Prisoners to the Massachusetts Council," 7: 593-594; "Boston Gazette , Monday, January 6, 1777,"" 7: 868; Libels Filed in the Massachusetts Maritime Court," 7: 906-907 13 New-Lloyd’s List []London , Friday, February 25, 1777 ©awiatsea.com-posted August 2019 --4-- Warren was advertised for sale at Boston on 15 July 1777. She was then at Colonel Foster’s wharf and was noted as 70 tons. Warren was to be sold just as “she came from sea.”14 Warren was again commissioned on 3 September 1777, under Commander Silas Howell of, probably of Gloucester. She was listed as having ten guns and a crew of fifty men. Her $5000 Continental bond was signed by Howell and by Winthrop Sargent of Gloucester and John Winthrop, Jr. of Boston. The owners were listed as Winthrop and Epes Sargent and others of Gloucester. 15 She fitted out at Cape Ann, Massachusetts with a listed battery of ten guns and a crew of fifty men.
Recommended publications
  • Volume 5 Fort Mchenry.Pdf

    Volume 5 Fort Mchenry.Pdf

    American Battlefield Trust Volume 5 BROADSIDE A Journal of the Wars for Independence for Students Fort McHenry and the Birth of an Anthem Of all the battles in American history none is more With a war being fought on the periphery of the Unit- connected with popular culture than the battle of Fort ed States the British, under the influence of Admiral McHenry fought during the War of 1812. The British George Cockburn, decided to bring the war more di- attack on Fort McHenry and the rectly to America by attacking the large garrison flag that could be Chesapeake Region. The British seen through the early morning Navy, with Marines and elements mist, inspired Washington, DC of their army wreaked havoc along lawyer Francis Scott Key to pen the Chesapeake burning numer- what in 1931 would be adopted ous town and settlements. Howev- by Congress as our National An- er, Cockburn had two prizes in them, the Star-Spangled Ban- mind – Washington, DC and Bal- ner. The anthem is played be- timore, Maryland. Retribution for fore countless sports events the burning of York was never far from high school through the from his mind and what a blow he ranks of professional games. thought, would it be to American The story of the creation of the morale if he could torch the still Star-Spangled Banner is as developing American capital. Af- compelling as the story of the ter pushing aside a motley assort- attack on Baltimore. ment of American defenders of the approach to Washington, DC In 1812, a reluctant President at the battle of Bladensburg, Mar- James Madison asked Congress yland, Cockburn and his forces for a Declaration of War against entered the city and put the torch Great Britain.
  • A Timeline of Alexandria's Waterfront

    A Timeline of Alexandria's Waterfront

    City of Alexandria Office of Historic Alexandria Alexandria Archaeology Studies of the Old Waterfront A Timeline of Alexandria’s Waterfront By Diane Riker July 2008 In the life story of a city, geography is destiny. And so, it is no surprise that Alexandria was destined to become, at least for a time, a major seaport. Here, close to the Potomac’s headwaters, the river’s natural channel touched shore at two points. Between the two lay a crescent of bluffs, backed by abundant woods and fertile fields. Millennia before the town existed, grasslands bordered a much narrower Potomac, providing hunting and fishing grounds for the earliest Americans. Our timeline begins with a remarkable find in the summer of 2007. Prehistoric Alexandria Alexandria Archaeology Museum 11,000 B.C. In 2007 a broken spear point dating back an estimated 13,000 years is uncovered by archaeologists at a Civil War cemetery above Hunting Creek. The Clovis Point is Alexandria’s oldest artifact. Similar tools, also made of quartzite, have been found in Europe and antedate the Paleolithic period. Perhaps the first Europeans here were not who we thought they were. 9,000 B.C. Following the melting of the glaciers, sea levels rise and the Potomac River becomes much wider. Ancient spear points have been found at Jones Point where native Americans probably hunted deer and other mammals. 1,000 B.C. Charred hearthstones and bowl fragments indicate a more settled population. The river runs with shad and sturgeon. The tidelands provide rich soil for cultivation. At Jones Point in 1990 indications of a “village” are found.
  • THE MODERNIZATION of the OTTOMAN NAVY DURING the REIGN of SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ (1861-1876) By

    THE MODERNIZATION of the OTTOMAN NAVY DURING the REIGN of SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ (1861-1876) By

    THE MODERNIZATION OF THE OTTOMAN NAVY DURING THE REIGN OF SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ (1861-1876) by DİLARA DAL A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies Department of Classics, Ancient History and Archaeology College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham April, 2015 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT The main focus of this study is to examine the modernization of the Ottoman navy during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz, exploring naval administration, education, and technology. Giving a summary of the transformation of shipbuilding technologies and bureaucratic institutions of the Ottoman naval forces between 1808 and 1861, it analyses the structure of the Ottoman navy, its level of development in comparison to previous periods of time, and the condition of the vessels making up the naval fleet from 1861 to 1876. It also intends to evaluate the character of existing administrative structures at the outset of Abdülaziz’s reign in 1861 and the nature of subsequent changes, including structural reorganization of the Imperial Naval Arsenal, the Ministry of Marine, and the Naval Academy, as well as advancements in military training and seafaring; all within the context of the impact of these changes on the military, political, and economic condition of the Empire during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz.
  • Salvage Diary from 1 March – 1942 Through 15 November, 1943

    Salvage Diary from 1 March – 1942 Through 15 November, 1943

    Salvage Diary from 1 March – 1942 through 15 November, 1943 INDUSTRIAL DEPARTMENT WAR DIARY COLLECTION It is with deep gratitude to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in San Bruno, California for their kind permission in acquiring and referencing this document. Credit for the reproduction of all or part of its contents should reference NARA and the USS ARIZONA Memorial, National Park Service. Please contact Sharon Woods at the phone # / address below for acknowledgement guidelines. I would like to express my thanks to the Arizona Memorial Museum Association for making this project possible, and to the staff of the USS Arizona Memorial for their assistance and guidance. Invaluable assistance was provided by Stan Melman, who contributed most of the ship classifications, and Zack Anderson, who provided technical guidance and Adobe scans. Most of the Pacific Fleet Salvage that was conducted upon ships impacted by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor occurred within the above dates. The entire document will be soon be available through June, 1945 for viewing. This salvage diary can be searched by any full or partial keyword. The Diaries use an abbreviated series of acronyms, most of which are listed below. Their deciphering is work in progress. If you can provide assistance help “fill in the gaps,” please contact: AMMA Archival specialist Sharon Woods (808) 422-7048, or by mail: USS Arizona Memorial #1 Arizona Memorial Place Honolulu, HI 96818 Missing Dates: 1 Dec, 1941-28 Feb, 1942 (entire 3 months) 11 March, 1942 15 Jun
  • Monitoring and Incompatible Incentives in the Age of Fighting Sail

    Monitoring and Incompatible Incentives in the Age of Fighting Sail

    Explorations in Economic History 39, 204–231 (2002) doi:10.1006/exeh.2002.0783, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on The British Navy Rules: Monitoring and Incompatible Incentives in the Age of Fighting Sail Douglas W. Allen1 Simon Fraser University The British Navy during the age of sail was systematically successful against its opponents, most notably the French. This paper documents this success, shows that it cannot be explained by superior ships, training, or other naval capital, and puts forth the hypothesis that the British Navy governance structure provided better incentives to fight than those of their opponents. The hypothesis is tested by examining the structure of the rules and then contrasting them with the rules governing privateers, the army, and the navy over time. The paper concludes with a discussion of why the French did not copy the British strategy. © 2002 Elsevier Science (USA) He asked who the stout man was who had just been so ceremoniously disposed of. “He was an admiral,” they told him. “But why execute this admiral?” he enquired. “Because he had not enough dead men to his credit,” was the reply; “he joined battle with a French admiral, and it has been established that their ships were not close enough to engage.” “But surely,” exclaimed Candide, “the French admiral must have been just as far from the English as the English admiral was from the French!” “True enough,” was the answer; “but in this country we find it pays to shoot an admiral from time to time to encourage the others.” Voltaire,p.
  • April, 1SÍAVAL SONGS and BALLADS in the Library of This

    April, 1SÍAVAL SONGS and BALLADS in the Library of This

    American Antiquarian Society [April, 1SÍAVAL SONGS AND BALLADS BY GAHDNER W. ALLEN N THE library of this Society is a collection of I broadsides marked: "Songs, Ballads, etc. In three Volumes. Purchased from a Ballad Printer and Seller in Boston, 1813. Bound up for Preservation, to show what articles of this kind are in vogue with the Vulgar at this time, 1814. N. B. Songs and common Ballads are not so well printed at this time as 70 years ago, in Boston. Presented to the Society by Isaiah Thomas. August 1814." There are in this set three hundred and two broad- sides containing three hundred and forty-nine distinct poems. Mr. Ford says of them that "no other American library can offer anything like it for the period, and all other libraries combined would still hardly be able to match the contents of these three volumes. "^ In this collection of broadsides are about fifty American naval songs, more than two thirds of them relating to the War of 1812; others to the Revolution and to our hostilities with France and Tripoli. A few are perhaps more political than naval; it is not always easy to draw the line between them. There are a num- ber of other songs, concerning the sea or sailors of a sentimental sort, of less interest to the historian. Several of these latter are British. Fourteen of the naval ballads are listed in "Broadsides, Ballads, etc.. Printed in Massachusetts, 1639-1800. "^ About half »"The Isaiah Thomafl Collection of BaUads," by Worthingtoo C. Ford. Proo. Amer. Antiq.
  • The Anglo-German Naval Arms Race, 1906-1916

    The Anglo-German Naval Arms Race, 1906-1916

    Middle States Geographer, 2012, 45: 84-89 FROM INNOVATION TO IMPASSE: THE ANGLO-GERMAN NAVAL ARMS RACE, 1906-1916 Darrell A. Norris Department of Geography S.U.N.Y. College at Geneseo Geneseo, NY 14454 ABSTRACT: Weapons systems’ common compromise of offensive power, defensive protection, and mobility was expressed as a sensational innovation in naval architecture with the completion of HMS Dreadnought in 1906, when Great Power rivalry guaranteed an ensuing arms race. The latter entailed steady improvements of power, protection, and propulsion, all requiring a larger and more costly platform to incorporate even slight advantages. The large dreadnought fleets built by Britain and Germany incorporated few improvements in tactics, command and control. Lengthening big gun ranges exceeded their limits of effectiveness, and hit rates at long range fell to 3 percent or less, yielding probable stalemate other than the destruction of obsolete vessel types and vulnerable hybrids. Advances in destructive power, protection, and speed led inexorably to the increased size and cost of capital ships, climaxed by their inconclusive clash at Jutland in 1916. As a weapon system, the battleship was necessarily modified to cope with air and undersea attack, with imperfect success. Such new vulnerabilities for the battleship echoed the denouement of French armored and mounted knights by English archers and men-at-arms at Agincourt. Perfect weapon symmetry and its related spatial deployment are apt to be transitory phenomena in the practice of modern warfare. Keywords: naval history, arms race In Ancient Greece, the Olympic wrestler already represented a long-outdated and intentionally ritualized form of combat, one with no added protection, strength, or range of movement independent of human anatomy.
  • Oliver Cromwell

    Oliver Cromwell

    Oliver Cromwell Sloop-of-War (1) Commander William Coles Massachusetts Privateer 29 April 1777- Brigantine/Ship (2) []Master Robert Richardson [][]April 1778- June 1778 (3) Commander Thomas Simmons 10 July 1778- (4) Commander James Barr 11 August 1779- (5) Commander John Bray 13 April 1781-7 July 1781 Commissioned/First Date: 29 April 1777 Out of Service/Cause: 7 July 1781/captured by HM Frigate Maidstone Owners: (1) John Derby, George Dodge, Jr. & Co. of Salem, Massachusetts and George, John and Andrew Cabot, Joseph Lee, and others of Beverly, Massachusetts; (2) Jonathan Ingersoll et al of Salem, Massachusetts; (3) John Derby et al of Salem, Massachusetts; (4) Bartholomew Putnam of Salem, Massachusetts Tonnage: 150, 160, 162, 200 Battery: Date Reported: 29 April 1777 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 16/6-pounder 96 pounds 48 pounds Total: 16 cannon/96 pounds Broadside: 8 cannon/48 pounds Swivels: Date Reported: 6 August 1777 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 16/ Total: 16 cannon/ Broadside: 8 cannon/ Swivels: Comment on this or any page at our ©awiatsea.com-posted September 2020 --1-- Date Reported: 17 August 1777 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 16/ Total: 16 cannon/ Broadside: 8 cannon/ Swivels: Date Reported: 23 September 1777 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 19/6-pounder 114 pounds 54 pounds Total: 19 cannon/114 pounds Broadside: 9 cannon/54 pounds Swivels: Date Reported: 2 October 1777 Number/Caliber Weight Broadside 16/6-pounder 96 pounds 48 pounds Total: 16 cannon/96 pounds Broadside: 8 cannon/48 pounds Swivels: Date Reported: []25
  • Naval Accidents 1945-1988, Neptune Papers No. 3

    Naval Accidents 1945-1988, Neptune Papers No. 3

    -- Neptune Papers -- Neptune Paper No. 3: Naval Accidents 1945 - 1988 by William M. Arkin and Joshua Handler Greenpeace/Institute for Policy Studies Washington, D.C. June 1989 Neptune Paper No. 3: Naval Accidents 1945-1988 Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Nuclear Weapons Accidents......................................................................................................... 3 Nuclear Reactor Accidents ........................................................................................................... 7 Submarine Accidents .................................................................................................................... 9 Dangers of Routine Naval Operations....................................................................................... 12 Chronology of Naval Accidents: 1945 - 1988........................................................................... 16 Appendix A: Sources and Acknowledgements........................................................................ 73 Appendix B: U.S. Ship Type Abbreviations ............................................................................ 76 Table 1: Number of Ships by Type Involved in Accidents, 1945 - 1988................................ 78 Table 2: Naval Accidents by Type
  • Ottoman Sea Power………

    Ottoman Sea Power………

    KADIR HAS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES PROGRAM OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS CONTINENTAL POWERS AND QUEST FOR STATUS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ’S FLEET (1861-1876) MEHMET ALİOĞLU SUPERVISOR: PROF. DR. SERHAT GÜVENÇ PHD THESIS ISTANBUL, JUNE 2020 Mehmet Alioğlu Doktora Tezi 2020 Student’s Full Name Ph.D. (or M.S. or M.A.) Thesis 2011 CONTINENTAL POWERS AND QUEST FOR STATUS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ’S FLEET (1861-1876) MEHMET ALİOĞLU SUPERVISOR: PROF. DR. SERHAT GÜVENÇ PHD THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Kadir Has University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in the Discipline Area of International Relations under the Program of International Relations. ISTANBUL, JUNE, 2020 I, MEHMET ALİOĞLU; Hereby declare that this PhD Thesis is my own original work and that due references have been appropriately provided on all supporting literature and resources. MEHMET ALİOĞLU __________________________ JUNE 2020 ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL This work entitled CONTINENTAL POWERS AND QUEST FOR STATUS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SULTAN ABDÜLAZIZ’S FLEET (1861-1876) prepared by MEHMET ALİOĞLU has been judged to be successful at the defense exam held on ... ... 2020 and accepted by our jury as PHD THESIS. Prof. Dr., Serhat Güvenç (Advisor) Kadir Has University Prof. Dr., Mitat Çelikpala Kadir Has University Doç. Dr., Gün Kut Boğaziçi University Prof. Dr., Gencer Özcan Bilgi University Doç. Dr., Ahmet Salih Bıçakçı Kadir Has University I certify that the above signatures belong to the faculty members named above. SIGNATURE Prof. Sinem Akgül Açıkmeşe Institute Director School of Graduate Studies DATE OF APPROVAL: …/…/….
  • Read Book Form Line of Battle Ebook

    Read Book Form Line of Battle Ebook

    FORM LINE OF BATTLE PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Alexander Kent | 368 pages | 04 Jul 2006 | Cornerstone | 9780099497622 | English | London, United Kingdom Form Line of Battle – GeMiGaBoK If things go well, a side can draw all of its three cards and get to act before the other side. Movement is quite regulated, yet randomised, each ship has to throw a number of d6, based on wind direction and ship maneuverability, to determine how far it can move. The player has to decide whether to use all of the dice, or just one. This causes all sorts of chaos and fun in the battleline, when some ships move faster than others. All ships have to first move straight ahead and then turn. Ships of the line turn max of 45 degrees, frigates etc max Corrected angles after comment by Kaptain Kobold. Ships can fire each broadside once during a game turn. Movement and fire is defined so that ships can fire before they move, after they move but before they turn , or after they turn. Fire arc is 60 degrees or so. All ships have broadside values and hull values 10 for a normal 3rd rate plus some additional class and quality modifiers. The result is the number of broadside factors lost by the target and possibly critical hits like masts falling or rudder damage. Well placed hits also reduce the hull factor of the target, making it more vulnerable. When the broadside falls to zero, the ship has to surrender. There are all the normal provisions for raking, collisions, boarding, nice critical hits and all sorts of detail, which makes for a very enjoyable game.
  • ''Brandenburg'' Class Battleships

    ''Brandenburg'' Class Battleships

    ''Brandenburg'' class battleships PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 02:51:24 UTC Contents Articles Brandenburg class battleship 1 SMS Brandenburg 7 SMS Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm 12 SMS Weissenburg 18 SMS Wörth 23 References Article Sources and Contributors 27 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 28 Article Licenses License 29 Brandenburg class battleship 1 Brandenburg class battleship SMS Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm Class overview Operators: Kaiserliche Marine Ottoman Navy Succeeded by: Kaiser Friedrich III-class battleship Built: 1890—94 In commission: 1893—1938 Completed: 4 Lost: 1 Scrapped: 3 General characteristics Type: Battleship Displacement: 10013 t (9855 long tons; 11037 short tons) Length: 379.58 ft (115.70 m) Beam: 64 ft (20 m) Draught: 26 ft (7.9 m) Propulsion: 2 shafts triple expansion 10000 ihp (7500 kW) Speed: 17 knots (31 km/h) Range: 4500 nautical miles (8300 km) at 10 knots (20 km/h) Complement: 568 Armament: 2 × 2 - 28 cm (11 in) K L/40 guns 2 × 28 cm (11 in) BL / 35 caliber guns 8 × 10.5 cm (4.1 in) QF guns 8 × 8.8 cm (3.5 in) QF guns 3 × 45 cm (18 in) torpedo tubes Armor: Belt 12–16 inches turrets 9 inches (230 mm) deck 3 inches (76 mm) Brandenburg class battleship 2 The four Brandenburg-class pre-dreadnought battleships were Germany's first ocean-going battleships. They were also the first German warship, of any type, to be fitted with wireless communications. The class comprised Brandenburg, Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm, Weißenburg, and Wörth.