Room for a gun

[Don Case]

I'm putting in the last bulkhead on the gun/main deck of the Discovery1789. The original drawings I have show the gunports in this position but they also show the bulkhead in this position. It doesn't appear to be enough room on the right hand side of the gun. Could I get opinions from more experienced builders? Sorry about the blurry picture, hands are a little shaky this morning

 

[Don Case]

I keep forgetting that these bulkheads were removable and the paneling was my choice. I keep posting questions and then answering them myself. Sorry about that. I shortened the bulkhead about a foot and that will make it look a little better.
After looking at the pictures maybe a little more won't hurt. I'll check the cabin size.
This picture is not so blurry, coffee must have worked.

 

[DARIVS ARCHITECTVS]

Some of the guns on my model are likewise in tight corners. Sometimes it's hard to avoid.

 

[Don Case]

I imagine that with these ships being sail powered that things didn't happen too fast. They probably had time to move things around. I was just looking at your thread with the tight corner and I thought that one gun shared between ports may have been the answer. They would probably rarely need broadside and chase guns at the same time.
In the case of the Discovery, at least until she was converted to a bomb, I don't think the guns were ever fired in anger. Well once they fired a shot into the trees to impress the natives. They were mostly used for signaling and I'm thinking they would have used the swivel guns for that. Would use less powder.

 

[DARIVS ARCHITECTVS]

I imagine that with these ships being sail powered that things didn't happen too fast. They probably had time to move things around. I was just looking at your thread with the tight corner and I thought that one gun shared between ports may have been the answer. They would probably rarely need broadside and chase guns at the same time.
In the case of the Discovery, at least until she was converted to a bomb, I don't think the guns were ever fired in anger. Well once they fired a shot into the trees to impress the natives. They were mostly used for signaling and I'm thinking they would have used the swivel guns for that. Would use less powder.

In the corners at the stern, the close placement of the corner stern chase port and the aft-most broadside port required only one gun carriage be used for those ports on two decks on my model. It was the only solution when the gun ports were so close to each other, as shown in Payne's engraving made prior to 1636. When original sources are suspect, we are often faced with no other choice but to guess at what a ship's feature should look like. Yes, the gun could be turned to switch to the other gun port, but I was looking for a better explanation for the spacing problem, and found none.

 

[Frank48]

I imagine that with these ships being sail powered that things didn't happen too fast. They probably had time to move things around. I was just looking at your thread with the tight corner and I thought that one gun shared between ports may have been the answer. They would probably rarely need broadside and chase guns at the same time.
In the case of the Discovery, at least until she was converted to a bomb, I don't think the guns were ever fired in anger. Well once they fired a shot into the trees to impress the natives. They were mostly used for signaling and I'm thinking they would have used the swivel guns for that. Would use less powder.

Good evening, in my humble opinion, the position of the guns is a freedom of the authors of Kit, for each gun there are about ten employees to maneuver

 

[Don Case]

I know I've seen a measurement for the distance between guns but I can't find it. Anyone know offhand and did it vary with different sized guns?

 

[Uwek]

I know I've seen a measurement for the distance between guns but I can't find it. Anyone know offhand and did it vary with different sized guns?

Definitely it very between the different sizes, the carriages of the guns were different (also in the width) and the had different number of seamen / gunners acting with the guns, All this had an influence.
I am pretty sure, that there was with the time a regulation of the distance, and based on this defined distance they defined also the timbering of the framing.

BTW: You answered your question in the first post correctly.
During preparation of the ship to be "Ready for action" they would have removed the interior bulkhead walls (bringing them into the hold), but not only to get the space for the guns, but also to reduce the number of timber which possibly produce wooden splinters by a hit of a canon balls. Most seamen died because of splinter injuries.
BTW2: Bombs used the normal guns only for self-diffence (for example against gunboats during a siege), these ships were usually not used for normal sea-action, because they were too slow (form of hull, masting and sails were not optimal because of the mortar guns, high weight inner structurem, of the mortars and the heavy amunition) and bad sailors and absolutely underarmed. Also the caliber were relatively small.

 

[danielsje]

You did answer the question…when cannon were used in combat the decks were cleared of most, if not all bulkheads. Thus, it does not matter if a bulkhead was too close to a cannon as you illustrate…when it came time to fire, the bulkhead was gone…you can safely build your deck structures close to the cannons knowing this will still be structurally accurate. Essentially, the combat ship was first and foremost designed for action…cannon placed to facilitate said action. Then everything else was put in place around the cannon. “Ahoy quarterdeck, sail off the port bow.” “Clear the deck for action Mr. Hornblower, if you please!”