Talk:Comus-class corvette

Comus class and Calypso class corvettes

This article started as Comus class corvette. The 11 vessels are also referred to as C class corvettes. Noel, G. H. "A Practical Measurement of the Comparative Fighting Efficiency of Ships of War", Transactions of the Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. XXVI, pp. 1–29 (London:1885); cf. Hunter, Mark C. "HMS Calypso: Locating the Newfoundland Royal Naval reserve drill ship, 1900-22", The Great Circle: Journal of the Australian Association for Maritime History, 28:1 (2006), pp. 38-39 (quoting 1900 letter from commodore of Newfoundland Division of RN on proposed use of C-class ships).

I therefore have moved it to that title, as Comus class is sometimes used to refer to just the first nine ships. There is still some ambiguity, as Comus has also been used to refer all eleven vesels of both groups. All 11 are treated here as C class corvettes; a detailed description of the first nine (or Comus class) will appear here also, as well as a summary of the last two, or Calypso class, with the detail covered in a separate article. Kablammo (talk) 02:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Also see [1] (Calliope as C class) and [2] (Comus and others as C class). Kablammo (talk) 16:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that combining both Comus and Calypso classes under one article makes for over complication (not least in the infobox). My references (among them the definitive The Sail and Steam Navy List) shows them as two separate classes. So to do the navboxes (I know I changed the C-class corvette one, but I haven't touched the Calypso-class one ). The List of corvette and sloop classes of the Royal Navy also shows them as two separate classes. It seems to me that "C class" is a grouping of convenience, since they do not share the same dimensions, armament or engines. I suggest we have two separate articles (Comus & Calypso classes) linked by a short page (almost dab-like) called "C-class corvette". I only made the changes in the first place because navigating between the various corvette classes made no sense when I came across them. Shem (talk) 17:15, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

While I don't have any personal issue with your suggestion, our usage should be based on RN usage, not Wikipedia convention or convenience. Here, there is no question that the Victorian naval establishment called all of these ships "C class" vessels, including the First Lord.[3] More recent usage uses two classes, but there is still a degree of ambiguity:

• Osbon, in Passing of the Steam and Sail Corvette appends to that title The Comus and Calliope classes, yet uses "Comus and her sisters" in at leat two places to refer to all vessels, including Calypso and Calliope (referring to the last two as "improved and slightly larger vessels" of the last of the Comuses).
• Archibald, in The Metal Fighting Ship in the Royal Navy 1860—1970, does refer to two classes, the Comuses and the last two (which he calls "sisters" to the first nine), and collectively groups them all as "C class corvettes".

While Calypso and Calliope were slightly larger and more powerful, their "construction, subdivision, and internal layout was almost a complete repetition" of the series (Osbon, p. 206), and in some respects the final vessels of the first nine resembled Calliope and Calypso more than the first of the Comuses. The first six vessels were ship-rigged while the final ones were barques; the first were armed with M.L.R.s in embrasures while the final ones had B.L.s, some in sponsons.

In reality, Calypso and Calliope were refinements of the design of their sisters (perhaps akin to the "long-hull" version of the intitial "short-hulled" Essex class aircraft carriers of the USN?).

There are two possible solutions:

1. Your suggestion, having separate articles on the Comus class and Calypso class, or
2. One article on the C class corvettes, with the two variants treated as subclasses, which I understand the infobox supports. I personally think this is the most accurate.

In either event the close relationship of the groups needs to be clear.

I have invited Rif Winfield to comment here as well. Kablammo (talk) 21:32, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

You won't find any sort of consistency in the 19th century navy, which means that either position could be supported by contemporary texts. Throughout the period classes evolved, so that for example, the Greyhound class were lengthened versions of the Cruizer class, and the Racer class were a lengthened version of the Swallow class; and so it goes on. The only difference here is that (for what is maybe the first time) the RN chose to call them all by "alphabetical" names, leading to the description "C class". Plenty of other classes had variety within the class without making them necessarily a sub-grouping of another class; indeed the process goes on to this day. If we put them down as variants of a single class we complicate the presentation of data for the reader with no great benefit in being "right" or "wrong" (or indeed "accurate"). Rif will have a viewpoint, which I'm happy to follow, whatever it is. Shem (talk) 22:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

It does seem that the whole concept of "class" may be more rigid than it once was. And I agree that we should follow whatever Rif suggests. I was trying to avoid unnecessary duplication of text (by treating the Calypsos as a subclass) but that may be inevitable. Kablammo (talk) 15:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Another alternative, based on the Great War era C class cruiser article:

• keep this title as is
• first section will be Comus class corvette, covering both the intitial 9 and general layout and design. "Comus class corvette" would redirect here.
• merge in Calypso class corvette and convert the existing article to a redirect here. Separate infobox for Calypsos, as with C class cruiser article.

This would avoid duplication of text in separate articles. Kablammo (talk) 16:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I have looked more at Parliamentary debates and a couple of online issues of Brassey's. It appears that Comus was used as the name of the class originally; there was some criticism of lack of speed, and the decision was taken to build two more Comuses with an additional knot of speed. These were the Calypsos. They were sometimes referred to as Comuses as well, but often all of the cruisers were called C class. Kablammo (talk) 16:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

My apologies for late entry into this discussion, but I have been abroad (and not on-line) for the past 15 days. The situation recorded in Admiralty records appears to be that the first nine of these vessels were stated to be Comus class and the last pair to be Calypso class, as intimated by George Osbon. The use of the term "C" class certainly existed as a convenient label, but as far as I can see it was rarely used by the Admiralty (and certainly not officially). It is completely true that the Calypso design was a development/extension of the Comus class (with a similar internal layout), but that it a situation fairly routine in development terms. For example, among the corvettes of the 1870s the composite-hulled Emerald class were clearly a development of the preceding Amethyst class design which had wooden framing, the use of metal framing resulting in a 3-foot increase in beam but no change in length, and almost all of the eleven ships had names of precious stones; yet there is no suggestion that there should be or were ever combined as a single class! There were of course differences between the nine Comus class, including the differences in rig and armament mentioned above (the first six - all built from 1876 by John Elder and Co, Govan - were the ship-rigged group, and had 3-cylinder engines; the next three - built from 1878 in the Royal dockyards - were barque-rigged and had 4-cylinder engines), but the nine were always considered as one class, and the Calypso and Calliope - again built in the dockyards - as a separate class (the term "sub-class" was not one that was ever used at that era). Accordingly I believe that there should be two articles labelled Comus class corvette and Calypso class corvette, and that any reference to a hypothetical "C class corvette" should be minimal, although I have no objection to the brief 'dab' article you suggest provided it makes clear that the official listing was as two classes. Certainly both articles should make reference to the fact that the Calypso design was a development of the Comus class. Regards, Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 00:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I have now amended the Comus class corvette article to include relevent additional data and in doing so I have made the changes discussed above; I trust this meets with your (joint) approval. I have incidentally removed the glaring inaccuracy whereby it was stated that the Comus class were preceded by the Highflyer class cruisers (of 1898)! Note that I have left the Calypso class corvette article (and any 'dab' article referring to C class corvettes, although I feel that this would be unnecessary and probably misleading) for you to update; I would also hope that someone will begin articles on the Emerald class and Amethyst class corvettes of the 1870s; I would be happy to expand these when they have been set up. Regards, Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 16:49, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Rif - thanks as ever for the erudition. Shem (talk) 10:55, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Rif. I don't pay much attention to templates but it looks like we need a renamed template for these ships also. Kablammo (talk) 12:51, 30 October 2010 (UTC)