quote:
I think people are not minding the purpose of combat. The purpose of combat is not to kill your enemy. The purpose of combat is to render your enemy unable continue resisting.
British and American practice was to aim at the hull to kill the crew on the opposing ship.
French and Spanish practice was to aim at the masts and rigging to cripple a ship, then to move in and shoot at the hull to...kill the crew.
Either way if you aimed at the hull of a ship you were trying to kill the men on the deck.
quote:
As recently as the American Civil War sailors covered the gun deck with material to prevent its becoming slick with blood during the fighting.
Sand was put onto the decks prior to battle. This wasn't just done to soak up blood, but also to give the crew better footing overall. The last thing you want is for someone to slip on the deck while one of the cannons is recoiling.
quote:
Add to this the other items found on a gun deck that could easily have been turned into sharpnel and it is reasonable to believe than more sailors were taken out of action by splinters and other items turned to shrapnel than were killed or wounded by cannon balls.
A ship that was cleared for action would only have the guns and related equipment on the deck. 'Clearing for action' was meant literally, in that anything not required for fighting a ship was removed from the upper decks and put on the orlop on in the hold.
I do agree, and posted as such, about splinters most likely taking more men out of action than shot itself. Those records that I can recall about the number of killed and wounded men after a battle seems to indicate that for every sailor killed in the battle, there were three who were wounded.
The problem, however, is that such records indicate the state of affairs immediately after a battle. They do not include men who died from infection or complications in the days and weeks that followed.
quote:
Anyone know the number of dead and wound in the battle of Trafalgar?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_TrafalgarBritish losses; 458 killed, 1,208 wounded.
French; 2,218 killed, 1,155 wounded.
Spanish; 1,025 killed,1,383 wounded.
Total killed; 3701
Total wounded; 3746
From accounts of the battle, and known Spanish/French tactics of firing high and using sharpshooters to aim at the crews with muskets. The discrepancy between the number of British men killed and wounded is most likely down to small-arms fire - HMS Victory had to pull the guncrews off her weatherdeck because they were taking heavy losses from French musketry.
Conversely the kill/wounded ratio on the French and Spanish ships must have been down to cannon fire into the hulls, since the British ships were not (as a whole) using musket-fire from the masts.
There are two points to note;
The casualty lists do not include those who were lost in the days and nights after the battle, including the storm that sank several of the ships.
The British held their fire until they were at point blank range, then fired triple-shotted guns into the stern of the French/Spanish ships. The very first shots from cannons were always the most effective, since more time had been spent loading the guns. This, coupled with raking the ships (Having the shot fly the full-length of the gundeck) accounts for huge casualties on the French/Spanish ships.
The British were also known to be able to fire faster and more accurately than anyone else at this point in history - both Nelson and his Second Collingwood expected their ships to be able to fire three accurate broadsides in five minutes.
For those wondering what a ship of the line would have been like in action check out this link for HMS Victory;
http://www.hms-victory.com/ind...view&id=175&Itemid=1
