Talk:Lively-class frigate

Macedonian

Lively class frigate listings as included in the works by Gardiner and Winfield do not include the later USS Macedonian. In common with many ship designs of the period, successful designs were repeated, sometimes any number of years later. These would be called things like 'repeat xxx class'. NOT part of the original class! Other ships were built to the designs of a captured ship (the British in particular repeated several heavy French frigate designs after several captured ships were found to perform very well in comparison to their own ships). Captured ships were not considered part of the original class by the navies that took them nor where they grouped that way, even when several ships of the same class were captured and commissioned (see Winfield), and ships built to the lines of captured ships certainly weren't. The RN would never have considered the later American Macedonian as being one of their Lively class, the French did not consider the ships built to the design of the captured Pomone as being part of their class, they were the British Endymion class. Benea (talk) 00:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it's certainly relevant to include Macedonian, don't get me wrong. But would you be opposed to some sort of differentiation, rather than tacking it on at the end of the list, making a specific section for the revival of the design by the US Navy in the 1830s with a single ship? Benea (talk) 00:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

That sounds entirely appropriate. --Columbia clipper (talk) 02:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The page image

Maybe I am old fashioned but shouldn't the image be something that encapsulates the Lively class as a successful design, and not an engagement one lost? Admittedly the clash was a foregone conclusion given the size, armament and crew differences of the two vessels but it still seems a bit strange to have this there. Alooulla (talk) 05:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)