Re: [bolger] Can I "Endeavor" to Learn More?
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 12:53 PM, Harry W. James wrote:
for both Hornblower and Aubrey and though I wish O'brien
had written more books I have not yet had a desire to reread
the Aubrey books I have. Same for Hornblower.
hal
> The funny thing is I have not yet reread any ofInteresting that you said that. I too have complete sets
> them, and I will reread Hornblower any time I can.
for both Hornblower and Aubrey and though I wish O'brien
had written more books I have not yet had a desire to reread
the Aubrey books I have. Same for Hornblower.
hal
They most certainly are, and the 28 gun Frigate "Rose" designed by
Bolger, is currently staring as the "Sophie" in a movie based on the
series, filming in Baja. Russell Crow stars as Aubrey, kind of a
miscasting I think as Aubrey is built on the lines of John Goodman not
Crowe. I own all 18 volumes and enjoyed them immensely, they will give
you a feel of the lives and times of the period better than any other
books I have ever read. The funny thing is I have not yet reread any of
them, and I will reread Hornblower any time I can.
HJ
Hal Lynch wrote:
Bolger, is currently staring as the "Sophie" in a movie based on the
series, filming in Baja. Russell Crow stars as Aubrey, kind of a
miscasting I think as Aubrey is built on the lines of John Goodman not
Crowe. I own all 18 volumes and enjoyed them immensely, they will give
you a feel of the lives and times of the period better than any other
books I have ever read. The funny thing is I have not yet reread any of
them, and I will reread Hornblower any time I can.
HJ
Hal Lynch wrote:
>
>>
> You might also check out the Aubrey - Maturin books by Patrick
> Obrien they are a good read.
>
> hal
>
>
On Friday, October 25, 2002, at 11:37 PM, Harry W. James wrote:
Obrien they are a good read.
hal
> I can not recommend the Hornblower series too highly. They are allYou might also check out the Aubrey - Maturin books by Patrick
> still
> in print and you can usually find them in a good used book store.
> Forester and Arthur Ransom were the staples of my early reading. If you
> do decide to dive in to Hornblower make sure to get the Hornblower
> Companion also by Forester, especially if you are not familiar with the
> period or the ships. It is also offers very good insight into the
> creative process.
Obrien they are a good read.
hal
Life AND Times, I was going too fast for pre-coffee.
Justin
Justin
> > I would add, The Life an Times of Horatio Hornblower by CN Parkinson.
I would add, The Life an Times of Horatio Hornblower by CN Parkinson.
Also, Two Years Before the Mast by RH Dana is a good day to day
foremast hand's account of square riggers. In Dana's book he takes time off
from Harvard to sign on a coastal trader bound for California as a foremast
hand.
Justin
Also, Two Years Before the Mast by RH Dana is a good day to day
foremast hand's account of square riggers. In Dana's book he takes time off
from Harvard to sign on a coastal trader bound for California as a foremast
hand.
Justin
> I can not recommend the Hornblower series too highly. They are all still
> in print and you can usually find them in a good used book store.
> Forester and Arthur Ransom were the staples of my early reading. If you
> do decide to dive in to Hornblower make sure to get the Hornblower
> Companion also by Forester
This is true for the fleet actions. The single ship duels are another
story. They were fought under about any condition, and often with great
skill. The casualty rates were often horrendous.
Hj
wmrpage@...wrote:
story. They were fought under about any condition, and often with great
skill. The casualty rates were often horrendous.
Hj
wmrpage@...wrote:
>
> In a message dated 10/25/02 7:08:55 AM Central Daylight Time,
>teakdeck@...writes:
>
> > There are so many mysteries. How did these ships do battle?
>
> Mostly, they did battle on calm seas, in low winds, under shortened sail, in
> or near sight of land and when both opposing commanders decided to offer
> their fleets up to the chances of battle. The solid shot that was used made
> any number of hits survivable by the vessel on the receiving end, however
> awful the consequences were to the crew.
>
>
Irving Johnson's famous film Around Cape Horn about going around the
Horn in an old Square Rigger will give you some more appreciation of the
real conditions. You can get it at Mystic Seaport on line store for
$29.95.
I can not recommend the Hornblower series too highly. They are all still
in print and you can usually find them in a good used book store.
Forester and Arthur Ransom were the staples of my early reading. If you
do decide to dive in to Hornblower make sure to get the Hornblower
Companion also by Forester, especially if you are not familiar with the
period or the ships. It is also offers very good insight into the
creative process.
HJ
Horn in an old Square Rigger will give you some more appreciation of the
real conditions. You can get it at Mystic Seaport on line store for
$29.95.
I can not recommend the Hornblower series too highly. They are all still
in print and you can usually find them in a good used book store.
Forester and Arthur Ransom were the staples of my early reading. If you
do decide to dive in to Hornblower make sure to get the Hornblower
Companion also by Forester, especially if you are not familiar with the
period or the ships. It is also offers very good insight into the
creative process.
HJ
>
> C.S. Forester's Hornblower series seems to be a good place to study sailing ship handling in combat.
> He apparently studied that exhaustively as research for his books.
>
> Yup, the sailors surely did have to go aloft to tie and untie sails although they could brail them
> up from on deck. The commonest reason to go aloft was to reef the sails. Each sail had to be
> individually reefed. No, the ship didn't head up to allow that to be done, it didn't have to. The
> yard to which the square sail was attached could be braced around so that most of the load was off
> the sail. The accounts of attempting to reef a half frozen sail made of very heavy canvas while it
> attempted to flog the sailors off the yard are harrowing.
> Picture it being done in winter in a gale in the southern ocean in the pitch dark of midnight.
>
> Lightning's 24 hour run was a record which stood until the end of the twentieth century when it was
> broken by a large very high tech racing catamaran which would have sunk at the dock if they had tried
> to load even a part of the clipper's cargo.
>
> It sound as though you're having fun with your boat. Just remember that the force of the wind on your
> sails and rig increases as the square of the wind's velocity. The increase stability you gained with
> the trimaran rig allows her to stand up to more wind but that wind puts a lot more strain on the
> rigging etc.
> Jim
>
>teakdeck@...wrote:
>
> > I've found this discussion about the Ship to be very interesting but I'm not
> > sure everything adds up. Here's what I heard or read do far:
> >
> > - These big square rigged ships had to sail off the wind (just how off seems
> > to be a debate).
> > - They were highly dependent on wind conditions to maneuver in and out of
> > anchorages.
> > - They were capable of some incredible speeds (I read that the tea clipper
> > ship Lightning sailed over 400 miles in a single day! About 18 MPH.
> > - Conditions on board were cruel.
> > - They were deathly afraid of being trapped on a lee shore.
> > - An account I read of a passenger said the boat was laden with sail and
> > heeled over to a very sharp angle. That would imply sailing up wind, to some
> > degree, wouldn't it?
> >
> > It seems I've only learned enough to ask more questions.
> >
> > There are so many mysteries. How did these ships do battle?
> >
> > What exactly did the sailors do when they went aloft to work the sails? I
> > mean, the lines were there were halyards to raise sails and downhauls to
> > lower sails. Did they go aloft to tie and untie the sails? Did the ship point
> > into the wind when these operations took place?
> >
> > To some degree these elements apply to my own boat building and sailing
> > experience. Having converted my Windsprint into a trimaran, I was able to
> > stand up to stronger winds this summer. But I broke some rigging and nearly
> > broke of the rudder. These trials occurred while going upwind, I'm sure.
> > Apparently conditions are cruel aboard my ship because the preferred crew,
> > wife and daughter, have to be pressed into sailing with me. Navigating in and
> > out of the downtown marina was always a harrowing experience for me until I
> > entered the age of steam (more exactly the age of electric motors) and
> > discovered how much easier it is to motor out of the harbor.
> >
> > Anyway, thanks all for the enlightenment. I'm going to do some more reading.
> >
> > Mike Masten
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
> - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> Mostly, they did battle on calm seas, in low winds, under shortenedsail, in
> or near sight of land and when both opposing commanders decided tooffer
> their fleets up to the chances of battle.Actually, the Battle of Jutland (the great dreadnought sea battle of
WWI) fits this description pretty well too. Except for the shortened
sail part, of course. They were out of sight of land, but only a
day's travel or less.
PHV
In a message dated 10/25/02 7:08:55 AM Central Daylight Time,
teakdeck@...writes:
or near sight of land and when both opposing commanders decided to offer
their fleets up to the chances of battle. The solid shot that was used made
any number of hits survivable by the vessel on the receiving end, however
awful the consequences were to the crew.
There was a notable exception to this during the Napoleonic Wars when a
British fleet chased a French fleet on to a lee shore during a rising gale.
It was considered remarkable at the time and is still regarded as a
remarkable battle today.
Generally speaking, when two fleets met, the fleet to windward had the option
of giving battle or fleeing, as the leeward fleet could not come to windward
faster in any coordinated way than the windward fleet could get away. Hence
the importance of having the "weather guage" for aspiring Nelsons who wished
to press home an attack.
Apart from other considerations, if the seas were running high, a warship
could not open its lower gun ports without risking sinking. As the heavier
guns were on the lower decks, this materially reduced its firepower. When
seas and wind got high enough, it was all the crews could do to survive.
Fighting another vessel at the same time was out of the question.
The proximity to land is largely explained by the need for the fleets to meet
each other in order to do battle. In the absence of airplanes, satelites and
radar, this generally meant that a fleet seeking battle had to lurk near a
known or presumed destination of the opposing fleet.
There is a vast corpus of literature on these subjects out there. Good
reading to you!
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
teakdeck@...writes:
> There are so many mysteries. How did these ships do battle?Mostly, they did battle on calm seas, in low winds, under shortened sail, in
or near sight of land and when both opposing commanders decided to offer
their fleets up to the chances of battle. The solid shot that was used made
any number of hits survivable by the vessel on the receiving end, however
awful the consequences were to the crew.
There was a notable exception to this during the Napoleonic Wars when a
British fleet chased a French fleet on to a lee shore during a rising gale.
It was considered remarkable at the time and is still regarded as a
remarkable battle today.
Generally speaking, when two fleets met, the fleet to windward had the option
of giving battle or fleeing, as the leeward fleet could not come to windward
faster in any coordinated way than the windward fleet could get away. Hence
the importance of having the "weather guage" for aspiring Nelsons who wished
to press home an attack.
Apart from other considerations, if the seas were running high, a warship
could not open its lower gun ports without risking sinking. As the heavier
guns were on the lower decks, this materially reduced its firepower. When
seas and wind got high enough, it was all the crews could do to survive.
Fighting another vessel at the same time was out of the question.
The proximity to land is largely explained by the need for the fleets to meet
each other in order to do battle. In the absence of airplanes, satelites and
radar, this generally meant that a fleet seeking battle had to lurk near a
known or presumed destination of the opposing fleet.
There is a vast corpus of literature on these subjects out there. Good
reading to you!
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
So far your impressions seem to be about the same as mine. One thing my
great grandfather, who was an able seaman on sailing ships said was that
when he started working on steam ships, it was like moving into a hotel.
That was how much he considered the conditions to be an improvement over
sail.
Stuart
on 26/10/02 1:06 AM,teakdeck@...atteakdeck@...wrote:
great grandfather, who was an able seaman on sailing ships said was that
when he started working on steam ships, it was like moving into a hotel.
That was how much he considered the conditions to be an improvement over
sail.
Stuart
on 26/10/02 1:06 AM,teakdeck@...atteakdeck@...wrote:
> I've found this discussion about the Ship to be very interesting but I'm not
> sure everything adds up. Here's what I heard or read do far:
>
> - These big square rigged ships had to sail off the wind (just how off seems
> to be a debate).
> - They were highly dependent on wind conditions to maneuver in and out of
> anchorages.
> - They were capable of some incredible speeds (I read that the tea clipper
> ship Lightning sailed over 400 miles in a single day! About 18 MPH.
> - Conditions on board were cruel.
> - They were deathly afraid of being trapped on a lee shore.
> - An account I read of a passenger said the boat was laden with sail and
> heeled over to a very sharp angle. That would imply sailing up wind, to some
> degree, wouldn't it?
Mike,
There is a book written by Alan Villiers about the last of the great grain races from Australia to
England that is quite informative about sailing one of the old ships commercially, lots of pictures.
C.S. Forester's Hornblower series seems to be a good place to study sailing ship handling in combat.
He apparently studied that exhaustively as research for his books.
Yup, the sailors surely did have to go aloft to tie and untie sails although they could brail them
up from on deck. The commonest reason to go aloft was to reef the sails. Each sail had to be
individually reefed. No, the ship didn't head up to allow that to be done, it didn't have to. The
yard to which the square sail was attached could be braced around so that most of the load was off
the sail. The accounts of attempting to reef a half frozen sail made of very heavy canvas while it
attempted to flog the sailors off the yard are harrowing.
Picture it being done in winter in a gale in the southern ocean in the pitch dark of midnight.
Lightning's 24 hour run was a record which stood until the end of the twentieth century when it was
broken by a large very high tech racing catamaran which would have sunk at the dock if they had tried
to load even a part of the clipper's cargo.
It sound as though you're having fun with your boat. Just remember that the force of the wind on your
sails and rig increases as the square of the wind's velocity. The increase stability you gained with
the trimaran rig allows her to stand up to more wind but that wind puts a lot more strain on the
rigging etc.
Jim
teakdeck@...wrote:
There is a book written by Alan Villiers about the last of the great grain races from Australia to
England that is quite informative about sailing one of the old ships commercially, lots of pictures.
C.S. Forester's Hornblower series seems to be a good place to study sailing ship handling in combat.
He apparently studied that exhaustively as research for his books.
Yup, the sailors surely did have to go aloft to tie and untie sails although they could brail them
up from on deck. The commonest reason to go aloft was to reef the sails. Each sail had to be
individually reefed. No, the ship didn't head up to allow that to be done, it didn't have to. The
yard to which the square sail was attached could be braced around so that most of the load was off
the sail. The accounts of attempting to reef a half frozen sail made of very heavy canvas while it
attempted to flog the sailors off the yard are harrowing.
Picture it being done in winter in a gale in the southern ocean in the pitch dark of midnight.
Lightning's 24 hour run was a record which stood until the end of the twentieth century when it was
broken by a large very high tech racing catamaran which would have sunk at the dock if they had tried
to load even a part of the clipper's cargo.
It sound as though you're having fun with your boat. Just remember that the force of the wind on your
sails and rig increases as the square of the wind's velocity. The increase stability you gained with
the trimaran rig allows her to stand up to more wind but that wind puts a lot more strain on the
rigging etc.
Jim
teakdeck@...wrote:
> I've found this discussion about the Ship to be very interesting but I'm not[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> sure everything adds up. Here's what I heard or read do far:
>
> - These big square rigged ships had to sail off the wind (just how off seems
> to be a debate).
> - They were highly dependent on wind conditions to maneuver in and out of
> anchorages.
> - They were capable of some incredible speeds (I read that the tea clipper
> ship Lightning sailed over 400 miles in a single day! About 18 MPH.
> - Conditions on board were cruel.
> - They were deathly afraid of being trapped on a lee shore.
> - An account I read of a passenger said the boat was laden with sail and
> heeled over to a very sharp angle. That would imply sailing up wind, to some
> degree, wouldn't it?
>
> It seems I've only learned enough to ask more questions.
>
> There are so many mysteries. How did these ships do battle?
>
> What exactly did the sailors do when they went aloft to work the sails? I
> mean, the lines were there were halyards to raise sails and downhauls to
> lower sails. Did they go aloft to tie and untie the sails? Did the ship point
> into the wind when these operations took place?
>
> To some degree these elements apply to my own boat building and sailing
> experience. Having converted my Windsprint into a trimaran, I was able to
> stand up to stronger winds this summer. But I broke some rigging and nearly
> broke of the rudder. These trials occurred while going upwind, I'm sure.
> Apparently conditions are cruel aboard my ship because the preferred crew,
> wife and daughter, have to be pressed into sailing with me. Navigating in and
> out of the downtown marina was always a harrowing experience for me until I
> entered the age of steam (more exactly the age of electric motors) and
> discovered how much easier it is to motor out of the harbor.
>
> Anyway, thanks all for the enlightenment. I'm going to do some more reading.
>
> Mike Masten
>
>
?
the money for a weeks sailing , and do it If you google under Sail
training Association yuod probably find one . Go for a proper fore
and aft rigged ship to truelly appreciate what they can do.
they can sail to windward , sideways , backwards,
they sail better well healed over. When you get half way up the Main
mast there is a sweet spot where the whole boat pivots around you. an
amazing sensation when you let your mind and body soak it up.
the masts may look tall but there is an urge in almost every one to
get to the top. One one trip we had a seventy y. old grt ganny on our
watch . her family had sent her on a 3 day trip as a birthday gift.
When we docked. she was sitting at the top of the main . 33metres
above the deck , not holding on , waving to the kids . It was her
second time aloft on that trip.
.
pay the money and do it .
As a member of the sail training assoc of western australia I am
asked to volunteer to sail the barquentine Leeuwin II each year when
she visits our nearest Port. Of the 4 trips I've done I only paid for
1 . Many STA's are screaming out for members to help crew ,repair ,
paint, rig the ships.
By the way , the three worst jobs on a trip are 1. stow the anchor
chain after leaving a polluted port.
2. going over the side to scrub the hull when coming to a new port.
this is to remove the stuck on vomit.(true)
3. getting on your hands and knees and Holy Stoneing the TEAK DECK.
cheers Paul
>sails? I
> What exactly did the sailors do when they went aloft to work the
> mean, the lines were there were halyards to raise sails anddownhauls to
> lower sails. Did they go aloft to tie and untie the sails? Did theship point
> into the wind when these operations took place?sailing
>
> To some degree these elements apply to my own boat building and
> experience. Having converted my Windsprint into a trimaran, I wasable to
> stand up to stronger winds this summer. But I broke some riggingand nearly
> broke of the rudder. These trials occurred while going upwind, I'msure.
> Apparently conditions are cruel aboard my ship because thepreferred crew,
> wife and daughter, have to be pressed into sailing with me.Navigating in and
> out of the downtown marina was always a harrowing experience for meuntil I
> entered the age of steam (more exactly the age of electric motors)and
> discovered how much easier it is to motor out of the harbor.reading.
>
> Anyway, thanks all for the enlightenment. I'm going to do some more
>MNike, Can i suggest you do as I did, and go find a tall ship , pay
> Mike Masten
the money for a weeks sailing , and do it If you google under Sail
training Association yuod probably find one . Go for a proper fore
and aft rigged ship to truelly appreciate what they can do.
they can sail to windward , sideways , backwards,
they sail better well healed over. When you get half way up the Main
mast there is a sweet spot where the whole boat pivots around you. an
amazing sensation when you let your mind and body soak it up.
the masts may look tall but there is an urge in almost every one to
get to the top. One one trip we had a seventy y. old grt ganny on our
watch . her family had sent her on a 3 day trip as a birthday gift.
When we docked. she was sitting at the top of the main . 33metres
above the deck , not holding on , waving to the kids . It was her
second time aloft on that trip.
.
pay the money and do it .
As a member of the sail training assoc of western australia I am
asked to volunteer to sail the barquentine Leeuwin II each year when
she visits our nearest Port. Of the 4 trips I've done I only paid for
1 . Many STA's are screaming out for members to help crew ,repair ,
paint, rig the ships.
By the way , the three worst jobs on a trip are 1. stow the anchor
chain after leaving a polluted port.
2. going over the side to scrub the hull when coming to a new port.
this is to remove the stuck on vomit.(true)
3. getting on your hands and knees and Holy Stoneing the TEAK DECK.
cheers Paul
I've found this discussion about the Ship to be very interesting but I'm not
sure everything adds up. Here's what I heard or read do far:
- These big square rigged ships had to sail off the wind (just how off seems
to be a debate).
- They were highly dependent on wind conditions to maneuver in and out of
anchorages.
- They were capable of some incredible speeds (I read that the tea clipper
ship Lightning sailed over 400 miles in a single day! About 18 MPH.
- Conditions on board were cruel.
- They were deathly afraid of being trapped on a lee shore.
- An account I read of a passenger said the boat was laden with sail and
heeled over to a very sharp angle. That would imply sailing up wind, to some
degree, wouldn't it?
It seems I've only learned enough to ask more questions.
There are so many mysteries. How did these ships do battle?
What exactly did the sailors do when they went aloft to work the sails? I
mean, the lines were there were halyards to raise sails and downhauls to
lower sails. Did they go aloft to tie and untie the sails? Did the ship point
into the wind when these operations took place?
To some degree these elements apply to my own boat building and sailing
experience. Having converted my Windsprint into a trimaran, I was able to
stand up to stronger winds this summer. But I broke some rigging and nearly
broke of the rudder. These trials occurred while going upwind, I'm sure.
Apparently conditions are cruel aboard my ship because the preferred crew,
wife and daughter, have to be pressed into sailing with me. Navigating in and
out of the downtown marina was always a harrowing experience for me until I
entered the age of steam (more exactly the age of electric motors) and
discovered how much easier it is to motor out of the harbor.
Anyway, thanks all for the enlightenment. I'm going to do some more reading.
Mike Masten
sure everything adds up. Here's what I heard or read do far:
- These big square rigged ships had to sail off the wind (just how off seems
to be a debate).
- They were highly dependent on wind conditions to maneuver in and out of
anchorages.
- They were capable of some incredible speeds (I read that the tea clipper
ship Lightning sailed over 400 miles in a single day! About 18 MPH.
- Conditions on board were cruel.
- They were deathly afraid of being trapped on a lee shore.
- An account I read of a passenger said the boat was laden with sail and
heeled over to a very sharp angle. That would imply sailing up wind, to some
degree, wouldn't it?
It seems I've only learned enough to ask more questions.
There are so many mysteries. How did these ships do battle?
What exactly did the sailors do when they went aloft to work the sails? I
mean, the lines were there were halyards to raise sails and downhauls to
lower sails. Did they go aloft to tie and untie the sails? Did the ship point
into the wind when these operations took place?
To some degree these elements apply to my own boat building and sailing
experience. Having converted my Windsprint into a trimaran, I was able to
stand up to stronger winds this summer. But I broke some rigging and nearly
broke of the rudder. These trials occurred while going upwind, I'm sure.
Apparently conditions are cruel aboard my ship because the preferred crew,
wife and daughter, have to be pressed into sailing with me. Navigating in and
out of the downtown marina was always a harrowing experience for me until I
entered the age of steam (more exactly the age of electric motors) and
discovered how much easier it is to motor out of the harbor.
Anyway, thanks all for the enlightenment. I'm going to do some more reading.
Mike Masten