Cost of an Ancient Warship
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Charles Talleyrand - 26 Aug 2003 01:33 GMT I'm trying to understand the cost of building an oceangoing ship in some terms I can understand. I great answer would be of the form "To build an 80 ft sailing vessel in 1492 took about 14,000 man/hours" or something like that.
Or "One could buy a 100 ft sailing vessel in Venice for 9000 florins, and each florin could hire a skilled worker for a week."
I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess.
Significant Google searching didn't help. Can anyone here help?
Andrew Toppan - 26 Aug 2003 02:05 GMT >I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. >I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. >Significant Google searching didn't help. Can anyone here help? 10 seconds of Googling for HMS VICTORY indicates that she "cost £63,176. For comparison, this would be equivalent to the cost of building an aircraft carrier today."
http://www.hms-victory.com/factsandfigures.htm
-- Andrew Toppan --- actoppan@gwi.net --- "I speak only for myself" "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today, Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
Mark Sieving - 26 Aug 2003 04:22 GMT >10 seconds of Googling for HMS VICTORY indicates that she "cost £63,176. For >comparison, this would be equivalent to the cost of building an aircraft >carrier today." According to the calculator at the Economic History Services website (http://www.eh.net/ehresources/howmuch/poundq.php), £63,176 in 1765 would be the equivalent of about £5.3 million in 2002. I don't think you could build much of an aircraft carrier for that.
That's not so much to dispute the HMS Victory website as to show that trying to compare purchasing power from different eras is a tricky business.
Mark Sieving
Charles Talleyrand - 26 Aug 2003 06:06 GMT > >I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. > >I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > http://www.hms-victory.com/factsandfigures.htm And the USS Constitution cost $302,718 in 1797 US dollars, although the Brits could build a 74 gun ship for less. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/constitution.htm http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/supfrig.htm
I'm trying to understand these numbers in terms of something like manhours needed to build the ship. I note that the pay for a US sailor was 10-17 US$ per month. Therefore it took something like 25,000 man-months to build a Constitution (or a British 74). Does this seem reasonable?
If you're curious, the Constition was 3x over budget in part due to political problems with Congressional funding, and is therefore a bad example to use. That's why I'm asking for other examples. And please don't pull this thread into a 'Congress has always sucked' direction. Can we please have one thread without current politics?
Can someone offer other examples, particularly from a different time period and/or a different sized ship? That would be most helpful.
-Thanks
Jack Linthicum - 26 Aug 2003 13:08 GMT > > >I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. > > >I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > time period and/or a different sized ship? That would be > most helpful. J. Richard Steffy, Wooden Shipbuilding and the Interpetation of Shipwrecks, Texas A&M University Press, 1994.
Keith Willshaw - 26 Aug 2003 13:40 GMT > > Can someone offer other examples, particularly from a different > > time period and/or a different sized ship? That would be > > most helpful. > > J. Richard Steffy, Wooden Shipbuilding and the Interpetation of > Shipwrecks, Texas A&M University Press, 1994. While doing a little research thus lunchtime I came across the following site which has some interesting data regarding the early USN
http://www.iment.com/maida/familytree/henry/genealogy/smiththompsonletter.htm
No construction costs I'm afraid but some information on running costs
Keith
Arved Sandstrom - 26 Aug 2003 14:25 GMT [ SNIP ]
> Can someone offer other examples, particularly from a different > time period and/or a different sized ship? That would be > most helpful. I offered one example - the bomb vessel series from 1692 - in another post in this thread. Keith helpfully corrected me on contemporary wages, suggesting that skilled labour at the time (shipwrights etc) was probably closer to 25 pounds per individual per annum.
The construction cost estimates that I cited for those bomb vessels were 2828 pounds total - of that, 1919 pounds were for the timber, planks, trenails, pitch, tar, mast, sundry material and workmanship, masts and yards, and 909 pounds were for furnishing with rigging and ground tackle sails and sea stores for the boatswain's and carpenter's store, and eight months provision of sea stores.
This Navy Board estimate does not include ordnance stores.
Again, without including ordnance stores, Chris Ware states that the total cost of purchased/converted bombs in the period 1690-95 was 13,315 pounds (this for eight vessels), and 31,872 pounds for fourteen purpose-built bombs. For purposes of comparison, he mentions that with this total expenditure (45,187 pounds) one could have purchased two Third Rates (without sea and ordnance stores).
Costs of the INFERNAL class of bombs (late 1750's) ranged from 3355 to 3758 pounds. These are building costs only. In fact, a average of another 400 pounds was expended per vessel of this class to fit them for service (i.e. fitting the mortar beds), and the cost would still not include the ordnance.
As another complementary set of figures, from the same source, we find that the costs of fitting out a 1690's bomb with mortars and ordnance stores was:
ca. 3480 pounds for a 13in mortar and all materials and officers to attended (wages for Ordnance staff) 60 pounds for the mortar @ 12s per ton 140 pounds for two carriages 700 pounds for five hundred 12 1/4 inch bombs (the HE ammo) 175 pounds for 125 carcasses (incendiary ammo) ca. 14 pounds for 750 fuzes 480 pounds for a 100 ton tender
Of course, one then still has to add wages for officers and seamen who manned the vessel. As this helps also give an idea of the costs of a ship, I'll note that Michael Lewis ("The Navy of Britain") mentions that in the 13th and 14th centuries the average seaman received 9 shillings a month. These wages dropped considerably in the following few centuries. In the mid 1600's the wages for a seaman were 14-15 shillings per month, but considering inflation, things had actually gotten worse. Of course, at close to ten pounds per annum, in the 17th century, the average sailor was doing better than most. After the Spithead mutiny in 1797, pay was roughly a shilling per day (assuming you actually got paid).
If you look at Web sources like http://www.ex.ac.uk/~RDavies/arian/current/howmuch.html, I think you'll find that there is a great deal of information about wages and costs at various times.
AHS
John Halliwell - 27 Aug 2003 01:46 GMT >Can someone offer other examples, particularly from a different >time period and/or a different sized ship? That would be >most helpful. A quick dig through 'The History of Ships', Peter Kemp, ISBN 1-84013-504-2 gives:
Prince Royal 1610, 114x43ft, 1330 tons, 55 guns: Overall building cost was 20,000 pounds of which 441 went on carving and 868 7s on painting/guilding
Sovereign of the Seas 1637 (size not mentioned) Overall building cost 65,586 pounds 16s 9.5d (including guns) of which 6,691 pounds on carving & decoration.
 Signature John
Staale Sannerud - 27 Aug 2003 10:10 GMT > A quick dig through 'The History of Ships', Peter Kemp, ISBN > 1-84013-504-2 gives: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Overall building cost 65,586 pounds 16s 9.5d (including guns) > of which 6,691 pounds on carving & decoration. Note that both of these ships were large "prestige" vessels and _absurdly_ expensive for their firepower. The Sovereign (100 guns btw) especially so.
Staale Sannerud
Peter Skelton - 26 Aug 2003 12:55 GMT >>I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. >>I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >http://www.hms-victory.com/factsandfigures.htm That's an obviously incorrect comparison. How many first rates did the world have just before the Napoleonic wars? How many aircraft carriers does it have now? What was the population then, what is is now?
If the text were written in the 1940's, it might make sense but today? ____
Peter Skelton
TMOliver - 26 Aug 2003 16:32 GMT Andrew Toppan <actoppan@gwi.net> vented spleen or mostly mumbled...
>>I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe >>Napoleon. I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > £63,176. For comparison, this would be equivalent to the cost of > building an aircraft carrier today." Awww, no....
That could only build one of those cut rate RN CVs to be, you know, two thrudeck crusiers welded together, one island removed, and a bit of planking laid across the gap.
TMO
I suspect that for most sailing warships, especially the 1st and 2nd Rates, the cost of the "Pupkeep" far outweighed those of the original "pup".
Peter Skelton - 26 Aug 2003 13:01 GMT >I'm trying to understand the cost of building an oceangoing ship in >some terms I can understand. I great answer would be of the form [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Significant Google searching didn't help. Can anyone here help? You might try "The 74 Gun Ship" Jean Boudret, French originally but well translated, or Lavery's "The Ship of the Line." I'm not certain they'll have exactly what you want, but allow a week, they tend to be adicting and they aren't thin.
Good luck
____
Peter Skelton
Glenn Ashmore - 26 Aug 2003 13:52 GMT It is not going to be easy to equate pre-17th century cost to the present but once you get an idea of labor and material it will probably be good from the first century up through the 16th. While designs changed materials and construction methods did not change very much and while material prices varied over time long term inflation was virtually unheard of.
I can give you a small modern day comparison of labor if not total cost. I have a favorite stopping point in Bay des Cays Haiti that I have stopped by several times over the years. For the past 2 years there has been a group of 3 men directed by an incredibly old guy building a 65' schooner on the beach. They are doing it the old fashioned way with axes and adzes, pegs, oakum and tar. Keel was laid in February 2000 and when we stopped by in May of this year they were preparing to set the masts.
I figure they can only work 10 hours a day probably 300 days a year so a SWAG would be 18,000 hours + - maximum if my math is right. (2 yrs*300 days*10 hours*3 men.) Actual time is probably a lot less because they had to spend a lot of time scrounging material. (We donated an old blown out genoa and a worn halyard.)
Other adjustments include: Labor and material requirement goes up as the cube of the length so an 85' hull would probably require twice the labor of a 65' one.
A 15th century trading vessel would have been a bit more elaborate than this boat and a war ship considerably more.
A 15th century ship yard would have more tools and equipment to work with than these poor fellows.
> I'm trying to understand the cost of building an oceangoing ship in > some terms I can understand. I great answer would be of the form [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Significant Google searching didn't help. Can anyone here help?
 Signature Glenn Ashmore
I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
Justin Broderick - 27 Aug 2003 00:31 GMT > I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. > I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. I found this fascinating link: http://www-atm.physics.ox.ac.uk/rowing/trireme/thesis.html
For reference, Kagan gives one drachma as a good day's pay for a skilled Athenian craftsman, and there were 6000 drachmas in a silver talent.
--Justin
Arved Sandstrom - 27 Aug 2003 05:09 GMT > > I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. > > I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > For reference, Kagan gives one drachma as a good day's pay for a skilled > Athenian craftsman, and there were 6000 drachmas in a silver talent. Another very interesting reference: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/1229novgorod-germans.html
I have to admit, I have no idea as to what the value of a marten's head was in 1229. For that matter, if you were paid in cloaks, exactly how many cloaks do you need? Do you fob them off to your relatives?
Some of my favourite passages:
"When summer guests come to the torrent, which is called Vorsch the ferrymen will take them immediately, without any delay, to the fishermen's inn, where, on arrival, each boat will pay to the ferrymen four loaves of bread, and a scutella of butter: if they do not want bread, two kunen will be given in place of each loaf, and three martens' heads for the butter. To each ferryman will be given eight martens' heads, and one pair of cloaks, or, in place of the cloaks, three martens' heads. The summer guests will observe the same law for paying thelony as is given above for winter guests.
When a guest brings skiffs into Novgorod, if such skiffs meet ships in Nü, each skiff will receive its own price and a gammon of bacon, or five marks kunen for the gammon. If the skiff meet merchants in Lake Ladoga, or in the Volga, it will receive half the price, and half the bacon, or three marks kunen. If any skiff, piloted with other skiffs, does not arrive at the appointed time, it will lose its fee. If any skiff, piloted, but not laden, is wrecked or endangered in the descent, it likewise will lose its fee. When the merchants ascend by skiffs, and perchance some dispute arise between the merchants and the ferrymen, or if an open quarrel occur, and the strife be settled by agreement, the dispute should not be aired further."
The whole article is delightful. Thelony of course is tolls. The same website comments on that in http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/805Chartoll.html , which is also interesting.
All in all, I would have settled for several marten's heads, a cloak, and a gammon of bacon, plus a few marks kunen.
AHS
Trevor Rabey - 27 Aug 2003 09:23 GMT your link gives this:
Athens supremacy at sea was founded upon her ability to utilise the trieres as an effective weapon. She capitalised upon her role in the battle at Salamis in 480 to win hegemony over some of her former allies. Thanks to the encouragement of Themistokles, Athens had channelled the proceeds of a windfall from the silver mines at Laurium into a fleet. They were designed by Themistokles himself "for speed and quick handling" (Plutarch Cimon 12.2). Her fleet of 200 triereis were built before the second Persian Invasion, for a naval war with Aegina, and enabled the Greeks to repel the invasion successfully. After the repulsion of the Persians the naval forces under Athenian command liberated the Greek cities of Asia Minor and the offshore Islands, part of Cyprus and even invaded Egypt (Morrison and Coates, 1986).
but how long did it take to build the 200 ships, ie from getting the silver to Salamis 480?
> > I'm interested in any time period from ancient Egypt to maybe Napoleon. > > I'm just trying to get an order of magnitude informed guess. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > --Justin Charles Talleyrand - 29 Aug 2003 06:07 GMT Here's a summary of the data about old-time ship construction I've gathered. Much thanks to the people who helped add to this collection. Can anyone add more?
Unless stated otherwise, all prices are without weapons. For a normal man-o-war the weapons might be 25% of the hull price give or take alot. Sails might be the same amount.
A Greek Trireme in the ~400BCs cost ABOUT 5,000 drachma and the equipment for it cost about 2,200 drachma. Each drachma is about a day's salary. http://www-atm.physics.ox.ac.uk/rowing/trireme/thesis.html
A medium trader of 40 tons or more carring capacity must have cost about £100 when new in 1580.
Prince Royal 1610, 114x43ft, 1330 tons, 55 guns: Overall building cost was 20,000 pounds of which 441 went on carving and 868 7s on painting/guilding
Sovereign of the Seas 1637 of 169 foot on the gun deck and 1461 tons http://www.kotiposti.net/felipe/England/england.html Overall building cost 65,586 pounds 16s 9.5d (including guns) of which 6,691 pounds on carving & decoration.
To build a 'bomb vessel' of about 100 feet in 1692 cost 2828 pounds which was about 120 man-years worth of salary for a skilled laboror, or 283 man-years for a common sailor.
To build a "Third Rate" in 1692 would have cost about 22,000 pounds which is about 880 man-years salary (skilled) or 2,200 (common sailor)
In 1750 the Infernal bomb ship had a crew of 80 men and was ship-rigged at 96 ft long and 385 tons and cost about 3500 pounds. http://home.wnclink.com/russell/thunder.htm which is the equivelent of 249,000 pounds in 2002. http://eh.net/hmit/ppowerbp/pound_result.php?year1=2002£s=3500&shillings=&p ence=&year2=1790&action=compare
The HMS Victory of 100 guns and 186 foot on the gun deck displacing 2126 tons cost 63,176 pounds.
A Dainish 70 gunner in 1780 cost 187,000 reichsguilder or 3,000 man-years of for an ordinary sailor including guns and sails.
A Danish 90-gunner in 1790 cost 212,700 reichsguilder or about 3,500 man-years for an ordinary sailor including sails and bronze guns.
And the USS Constitution cost $302,718 in 1797 US dollars, although the Brits could build a 74 gun ship for less. It took something like 25,000 man-months to build a Constitution (or a British 74). The Constitution was way over budget, which was only $100,00. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/constitution.htm http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/supfrig.htm
Thomas Billings - 29 Aug 2003 18:34 GMT > Here's a summary of the data about old-time ship construction I've gathered. > Much thanks to the people who helped add to this collection. Can anyone add [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/constitution.htm > http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/supfrig.htm While I've seen quotes from N.A.M. Rodger in this thread, I haven't seen any mention of the Scottish ships built by James IV between 1504 and 1510. Rodger's "Safeguard of the Sea" says that the 6-700 tom Margaret "cost a quarter of a year's revenue for James IV. That seems to work out to about 1,250 Marks.
Note this doesn't include the 'shore establishment' that is so important to actually sustaining naval power over significant numbers of decades.
Regards,
Tom Billings
 Signature Oregon L-5 Society
http://www.oregonl5.org/
Ståle Sannerud - 30 Aug 2003 22:35 GMT > A Dainish 70 gunner in 1780 cost 187,000 reichsguilder or 3,000 man-years of > for an ordinary sailor including guns and sails. > > A Danish 90-gunner in 1790 cost 212,700 reichsguilder or about 3,500 man-years > for an ordinary sailor including sails and bronze guns. NB! The 292.700 riksdaler for the 90 is for the bronze guns _only_, hull and rigging coming on top of that! The total cost for an eighty-gun ship on the other hand, including hull, guns and rigging, was 390.152, bronze guns included. For the record, the 90 would cost 410.382 riksdaler, all told.
The numbers above were drawn up in the same document, ca 1780.
Staale Sannerud
|
|
|