Scuttlebutt Website SCUTTLEBUTT
WEBSITE 		ForumIndex FORUM
INDEX 		Search Posts SEARCH
POSTS 		Who's Online WHO'S
ONLINE 		Log in LOG IN         

Forum Index: DISCUSSION: Dock Talk:
Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships 		Team McLube

 
 


The Publisher
*****


Mar 9, 2010, 9:14 AM

Post #1 of 8 (12853 views)
Shortcut
Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships Log-In to Post/Reply
Scuttlebutt 3040

Class Afloat, owners of the tall ship Concordia that sank after failing to recover from a freak wind gust, say the 18-year-old Polish-built vessel was designed and tested to survive just that sort of knockdown.Concordia's survivors say a powerful blast of wind knocked the 60-metre vessel so far over on its side that its masts and sails were lying on the surface of the South Atlantic Ocean. The ship failed to right itself, capsizing and sinking within 20 minutes last month 550 kilometres off the coast of Brazil. -- Read on: http://tinyurl.com/yjotodf




The Publisher
*****


Mar 9, 2010, 9:15 AM

Post #2 of 8 (12851 views)
Shortcut
Re: [The Publisher] Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships [In reply to] Log-In to Post/Reply
Scuttlebutt 3041

From Richard Eberhard, Newport, RI:
The sinking of the Concordia is only the last of a series of sinking of large square rigged training ships, starting with Pamir in the 1950’s. In every case these disasters could have been avoided by the use of proper sail materials. Prior to WWII sailing ships used canvas, which acted as built in safety valve. If there was too much load on the sails, they blew out, thereby reducing the load on the vessel. Now, with the use of synthetic materials, this safety valve has eliminated.






The Publisher
*****


Mar 9, 2010, 9:16 AM

Post #3 of 8 (12849 views)
Shortcut
Re: [The Publisher] Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships [In reply to] Log-In to Post/Reply
Scuttlebutt 3042

From David Redfern:
On a square rigger I was involved with, we discussed this matter with the naval architect (Colin Mudie) in particular with reference to the 'Marques' disaster during the Tall Ships race in 1984 and whilst we used modern line and sails, he looked at building in weak points in the lines that would give, if there was a sudden squall strain.




The Publisher
*****


Mar 9, 2010, 9:17 AM

Post #4 of 8 (12848 views)
Shortcut
Re: [The Publisher] Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships [In reply to] Log-In to Post/Reply
Scuttlebutt 3043

From Ted Jones:
With a fore-and-aft sailplan one eases or dumps the sheet or rounds up to minimize the affect of a knockdown. Square riggers do not have that option which makes it obligatory to have built-in weak points as was true in the glory days of sail. They lost sails, carried away spars, but the ships survived -- mostly. Building them too strong will, inevitably, end in disaster and often has: Pamir, Albatross, Pride of Baltimore, Marques; to name, off the top of my head, a few which will never be seen again.




The Publisher
*****


Mar 9, 2010, 9:20 AM

Post #5 of 8 (12841 views)
Shortcut
Re: [The Publisher] Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships [In reply to] Log-In to Post/Reply
Scuttlebutt 3044

From Charles J. Doane:I have to disagree with Ted Jones's characterization of the losses of Pamir, Albatross, Pride of Baltimore, and Marques as being due to a lack of "built-in weak points." All these incidents are discussed and dissected in great detail in Dan Parrott's authoritative book Tall Ships Down, and none of Mr. Parrott's scholarship supports Mr. Jones's opinion. Pamir's rig in fact carried away before she sank; the others were largely stability casualties. For more on Albatross in particular vis a vis the recent loss of Concordia, you can check out http://www.wavetrain.net/...5-song-of-the-sirens


The Publisher
*****


Mar 9, 2010, 9:21 AM

Post #6 of 8 (12840 views)
Shortcut
Re: [The Publisher] Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships [In reply to] Log-In to Post/Reply
Scuttlebutt 3045

From Scott Truesdell:
A major factor in the evolution of sailing as an amateur recreation (as opposed to a dangerous job) was the adoption of fore-and-aft sails instead of square sails as the primary motive power. Fore-and-aft sails can be handled entirely from on deck and no one is required to climb into the rigging to shorten sail when things get blustery. The clipper ship era was brought down not only by steam, but also by the attrition of able bodied seaman capable of managing the huge sails on the extreme clippers. Even when cut down to more manageable sizes, the sails on these craft were huge and it took skill and experience and a measure of luck to simply stay alive.

As the experienced seamen abandoned ship for the gold rushes of California and Australia, their replacements were drawn from a steadily declining pool of less skilled sailors. Square rigged boats are harder to sail. And they are less safe. Likewise, Marconi rigs are less exhausting to operate than gaff rigs. Exhaustion most definitely plays a role in the safe handling of any craft. How many accounts of abandoned boats have you read that did not include the word "exhausted?"

Also, remember that those boats were designed and built to make a quick profit, not to last for any significant length of time. The crew worked non-stop on repairs. As the ships got larger, they had to invent new technologies just to keep them in one piece. Most of those grand ships didn't last more than a dozen years before they were used up or wrecked. Many were lost after a year or two... or less.

I lovingly understand the romantic attraction of those old ships and bygone eras but I hold no delusions regarding their superiority on any level other than cargo capacity.


tallshipstock
*

Mar 10, 2010, 9:15 AM

Post #7 of 8 (12761 views)
Shortcut
Re: [The Publisher] Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships [In reply to] Log-In to Post/Reply
Please can we get away from the fallacy that square sails can only be handed (shortened) by sailors going aloft. They are worked from deck using buntlines and clewlines which are a type of vertical brail that run down the sail. The advantage of square rig is that the power plant can be dowsed, or increased, as conditions require by a core crew of maybe a dozen men.


The Publisher
*****


Mar 12, 2010, 12:04 PM

Post #8 of 8 (12615 views)
Shortcut
Re: [The Publisher] Questioning safety of square-rigged tall ships [In reply to] Log-In to Post/Reply
From Tim Patterson:
To piggyback on what Richard Eberhard wrote, I would observe the following: many of the large sail training ships were originally designed as cargo vessels. These ships were designed to carry large amounts of something across oceans or up and down coastal waters. When they were not so employed, they sailed in ballast.

Many of these ships are not carrying anything like the cargo or ballast that they were designed for. This is a formula for trouble. I was near both the Marquesa in 1984 coming out of a major storm and several years later near the Pride of Baltimore in a very shifty, even scary set of wind patterns. In both cases, I was on a Spronk designed catamaran named Skyjack, and in both cases we experienced what I consider the scariest thing at sea: a white squall. Had we been under full sail, we would have flipped. Fortunately we were not.


From Ben Fuller, Cushing ME:
I suggest that we wait for the investigation of the Transportation Safety Board before ascribing something as simple as sail cloth to the loss of the vessel (Concordia). We don't know what sails were up, whether the vessel was running down wind or hove to. We don't know if water tight doors were closed and dogged, hatches sealed. The analysis of training ship losses, starting with Parmir done by Daniel S. Parrot in Tall Ships Down, looks at down flooding: loss of watertight integrity through human, structural or design failure as the prime cause, with in the case of Pamir, shifting cargo. Many vessels survived being on their beam ends in the days of merchant sail because watertight integrity was maintained and the cargo did not shift. Crews had the time to cut away the rig and let the masts go over the side if needed to come upright. Training ships with windowed cabins and many through deck openings would be especially vulnerable.



Viewing the Forums: No members and 701 guests
 
 


Search for (options) Contact Forum Forum FAQS Markup Tags Forum Rules