How big should cannon be (compared to what's available)?
{Ronald L. Ambs}


It has been a while since this question was posed, but I needed to do some research. My basic problem is that my resources list the length of the gun from the muzzle to the widest spot on the gun (at the breech end), not from the muzzle to the end of the cascable (the button at the end of the cannon).

I'm pretty sure that the lengths quoted by fittings companies run from the muzzle to the end of the cascable. To account for the extra distance from case, you need to add two and a half calibers to the "official" length. One caliber, for this purpose is equal to the size of the bore.

Further complicating the issue is that smaller guns -- 9, 6 and 4 pounders -- come in a variety of lengths, even during the American Revolutionary Wars and early French Revolutionary/Napoleonic period. (The larger guns also started coming in different lengths during the late Napoleonic period, but thankfully, he appears to be looking for lengths prior to that period.)

So here goes:

These values are based on the Blomefield pattern gun of 1796, used by the Royal Navy. My source is The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War by Brian Lavery.
Units 24 lbr 18 lbr 12 lbr
Full Size Length inches 108 108 90
Bore inches 5.823 5.292 4.623
Overall Length inches 122.5 121.2 101.5
1/8" Scale (1:96th scale)
Length inches 1.125 (1-1/8) 1.125 (1-1/8) 0.9375 (15/16)
mm 28.6 28.6 23.8
Overall Length inches 1.27 (1-1/4+) 1.26 (1-1/4+) 1.057 (1-1/16)
mm 32.3 32.0 26.9
(Note that the overall length was the length + 2.5 * bore.)

One thing you may notice is that the standard 24-lbr gun and the standard 18-lbr gun were the same length. The 18-lbr was a smidge thinner. The 24-lbr had max. diameter of 21 inches, while the 18-lbr had a diameter of 19.5 inches. At 1:96 scale, this is 0.015 ("1/64"), the proverbial "hair."

My recommendation is go for the 30 mm guns for the 24 and 18lbrs, and the 25 mm for the 12-lbr. Put a thick coat of paint on the 24lbrs, and a thin coat on the18lbrs.
{Mark Lardas}


To the 17th C gunner, a cannon was designed to shoot a heavy load a short distance, while a culverin was designed to propel a light load a long distance.

One of the best places to find odds and ends about naval guns is Robert Gardiner's article on Guns and Gunnery in The Line of Battle in Conway's History of the Ship Series. (IMO, this is the best encapsulation of this topic to be found). The table he gives is not exhaustive, but gives these figures.
CANNON OF SEVEN 7 inches bore 47 lb shot (replaced by the 42lbr)
DEMICANNON 6 25 lb (replaced by 32lbr)
CULVERIN 5 18 lb
DEMICULVERIN 4.5 9 lb (Ancestor of the 9lbr)
SAKER 3.5* 5 lb (replaced by 6lbr)

[Murderers] are small iron or brass pieces, which have chambers put into them [i.e. breechloaders] and most usefully used at the bulkheads of the forecastles, halfdecks or steerages. And they have a pin of iron named a pintle which is put into a stock of wood, and so they are fastened and traversed. And the main employment of these murderers is to scour the decks; that is to murder such men as enter upon the decks at an enemy's boarding.
- (Nathaniel Boteler's Six Dialogues for the Sea Service.)
{John H Harland}
In Russia the "artillery pound" as defined by czar Peter I was the standard measurement in the XVIII and XIX century (more precisely until the year 1877). The "artillery pound" was defined as "a cast iron ball having a diameter of two inches and a weight of 115 zolotniks". From Peter the Great the Russian inch was put equal to the Imperial = 2,54 cm and "zolotnik" was an old Russian weight unit = 1/96 Russian lb = 4,2658 grams (before the year 1918 in Russia was still used the old national system of measurement units).

With this definition, (at least in Russia) the caliber of a cannon in inches was twice the cubic root of the conventional weight of the ball: e.g. the caliber of 12, 18 and 24 pounds cannons was equal respectively to 4" 37/64, 5" 15/64 and 5" 49/64, or in millimeters 116.3, 133.1 and 146.5, very close (only a little bit bigger) than the figure reported in the post of Marc Lardas for English ships.

Typical characteristics of naval guns (English, French and American) are reported also in the book The line of battle (Conway) for the period 1650-1840. For example, referring to the Napoleonic period some figures are:
Calibre
(in/mm)
Length
(in/mm)

(ft-in/m)
Gun
weight
(Cwt/kg)
Shot
weight
(lbs/kg)
Powder
Weight
(lbs/kg)
Remarks
24pdr long gun American 5.8/147.3 9-4/2.84 48/2439 24/10.9 8/3.6 Upper deck armament of big frigates
24pdr congreve British 5.825/148 7-6/2.29 42/2133 24/10.9 8/3.6 Lightweight short gun used to up-gun
In the scale 1/8" (=1:96) it means about 3 cm. Of course you have to take into account also the shape, material and appearance of guns: much simpler iron guns in Napoleonic time, complicated and decorated bronze guns in XVII century. In the first half of the XIX century often ships of the Royal Navy had carronades on the upper deck and, beginning from the Napoleonic time, also French ships has similar guns.
{Davide Ruggi}


Here are some quotes from Mr Jean Boudriot's 'JOHN PAUL JONES and the BONHOMME RICHARD', Naval Institute Press, 1987, ISBN 0-87021-892-1:
The French Navy of the pre-Napoleonic period still used a duodecimal system of linear measurement, and weights expressed in pounds and ounces; however, modern readers familiar with the 'anglo-saxon' measurements of today are in for a rude surprise if they believe that old French feet or pounds or pints are the same as those to which they are accustomed!...As a very rough guide (and by no means always appicable), French measures are often about 10% larger than their English counterparts.
- (from the introductory notes)
and...
A French pound (livre) weighed 489 grammes; thus an 18-pdr gun fired a ball weighing 19.42 English pounds (8.81 kgs); 12-pdrs were equivalent to 12.94 English pounds (5.87 kgs),...
- (Note 3, Chapter 2, p 21).
{Info from otmm@aol.com}

Long Guns and Carronade

Long guns
Weight Weight Length Diam. Charge Range (yds) at elevation
(ball, lbs) (cwt) Bore lb oz 1deg 2deg 3deg 5deg
32 56 9'6" 6.41" 6 0 800 1220
18 42 9' 5.29" 6 0 600 993 1335 1770
12 22 7`6" 5.18" 2 0 500 800 1030 1540
1cwt (hundredweight)= 112lb. Test firings aboard HMS Excellent.

An 18 pdr long gun with a charge of 5lb of powder was capable of penetrating nearly 2 feet six inches into oak at a range of 400 yds. and over 1 foot at 1000 yds.

By ricochet firing ranges could be increased considerably :- At 1deg elevation the 800 yds for a 32lb long gun could be increased to 2900 yds after 15 grazes. Contemporary notes add:- Ricochet firing requires a perfectly smooth sea. The closer the gun is placed to the water, the farther it ranges the shot. It might be advisable to heel the ship over by running in the opposite guns. Ricochet firing is not used for shells because the fuzes are always extinguished when so used.

The carronade was a short gun developed by the Carron Company, a Scottish ironworks, in 1778. Half the weight of an equivalent long gun, it could throw a heavy ball over a limited distance as shown in the following table This lack of range was frequently a disadvantage, allowing an opponent with conventional guns to stand off and fire without the British vessel being able to reply.

To allow for irregularities and lack of roundness in cannon balls and the difficulties in boring out long cannon there was always a large gap between the ball and the bore. This was known as "windage" and could be almost 0.2" in a 32 pdr. long gun. The Carron Company managed to reduce the windage to 0.073" in their 32 pdr carronades with a corresponding increase in efficiency.
Carronades
Weight Weight Length Diam. Charge Range at elevation (yds)
(ball, lbs) (cwt) Bore lb oz 1deg 2deg 3deg 5deg
42 22 4'6" 6.84" 3 8 430 700 900 1200
32 17 4' 6.25" 2 8 380 600 800 1170
24 13 3'9" 5.68" 2 0 360 580 770 1120
18 10 3'4" 5.16" 1 8 340 550 745 1050
12 6 2'8" 4.52" 1 0 310 520 715 970

{Bruce Bardell}


These data are from Danish archives, these are mostly Danish-made guns of course but they should be pretty representative; the state of the art was the same in most developed countries after all. I list them by gun size and model ("system" = single set of plans):
Size Model (year) Length (calibres)
36 1687
1692
1786
20 (brass)1786
17 1/16
15 4/25
24 1673
1687
c1660-90
c1700
1692
1692
1786
1794
1797
1804
20 (brass)
20 1/2 (brass)
18 1/2 - 20 2/3 (captured Swedish guns)
18 5/8 (ditto)
17 13/16 - 19 2/3 (poor quality control here...)
18 1/2 (1692 variation "Litra L")
16
18 1/16 (purchased British guns)
16 3/4
17 1/2
18 1673
1663
c1660-90
c1700
1692
1786
1792
1804
1804
19 25/48 (brass)
18 5/8 (purchased Dutch guns) (brass)
18 1/2 - 20 (captured Swedish guns)
18 3/5 - 19 3/4 (ditto)
18 - 18 15/16
17 3/5
7 (very short guns, carronade alternative)
16
10 3/4 (short gun again)
12 1648
1673
c1660-90
c1700
1683
1692
1692
1786
22-24 (brass)
20 1/2 (brass)
19-22 (captured Swedish guns)
19 1/8 (ditto)
21 1/2
19 - 19 1/3
21 1/2 (1692 variation "Litra L")
16
8 1673
c1660-90
c1700
1692
1692
19 1/2 - 19 3/4 (brass)
20 5/8 - 22 (captured Swedish guns)
18 1/2 - 20 1/8 (ditto)
18 25/32 - 19
21 (1692 variation "Litra L")
6 1649
1673
c1660-90
c1700
1683
1692
22 (brass)
20 - 22 1/2 (brass)
20-22 (captured Swedish guns)
21-22 (ditto)
20 1/2 - 23 5/8
19 1/2 - 22 5/24
The smaller guns (2-3-4 pounders) follow the same pattern, varying from an extreme low of 14 to an extreme high of 23 calibres in length, with the majority around 17-19 calibres.

So, my advice would be to vary the length factor of your guns a little bit, taking into account the year and the gun size. There is a general downward creep in length (and in thickness of metal as well) during the 1700s for all calibres of gun, where data is available.

The general configuration of guns in other countries would match the Danish pattern quite nicely - there is a gaping hole in the Danish data between 1692 and 1786 simply because they kept on producing guns to the 1692 pattern throughout that period; the rather short 1786 models were inspired by earlier French and especially English developments however.

Denmark used 36-pound guns, while the Royal Navy used 32- and 42-pounders; the Danish 36 would be an English 39- or 40-pounder or so. The very short 18-pounders of 1792 and 1804 are a local Danish speciality, and should be overlooked.
{Staale Sannerud}


Thank you, Staale, for your very useful table of information. You are, of course, quite right. As I have begun to research the subject I have very quickly learned that the esteemed Harold Hahn's dimensions and proportions are probably most useful as general rules of thumb. The fact is that proportions varied tremendously depending on the material from which the gun was cast (brass, bronze, or iron) and whether it was a long or short, light, medium or heavy gun, among many other possible variations. Still, once reduced to scale, unless you're prepared to take a micrometer to the guns on every model, the proportional differences between the model and the real thing (at least as far as British guns are concerned) would probably prove to be so slight as to be unnoticeable. (Ooh, did I really say that?)
{Chris J. Andersen}
Click for larger image.
(From Hahn's book: 'Ships Of The American Revolution And Their Models'.
Harold M. Hahn has graciously given me permission to include a copy of his drawing (158Kbytes) DESIGN OF EIGHTEENTH CENTURY GUNS... This should print out as a full-page image, showing allmost all dimension of 18th century naval guns, and their carriages, relative to the gun's caliber (The exception being the length).

Back?