Sea Forum SEA FORUM is intended to elicit provocative and informative discussions on a wide range of topics. The first Forum is a report of a discussion of the values of the foreand-aft schooner versus the square rigger. Peter Stanford of the South Street Seaport initiated the discourse with following comments by Stanley Gerr and John Lyman.
inflict,'' Parker concludes. It has also been observed that hasty construction, poor materials, overloading, short crews, even inadequate pumps, all contributed to the vulnerability of the schooners. The schooner experience, a phenomena of the latter days of sail, should be examined in some kind of perspective.
PETER STANFORD:
COMMENTS: STANLEY GERR:
One wonders how satisfactory big foreand-afters really were in ocean trade. Some of our big West Coast schooners traded to Africa and Australia but the reports of this voyaging were not always happy. The long unstayed stretch of the lower masts and the strains put one the hull and gear by huge free-swinging gaffs and booms, seem to make the schooner a less seaworthy type than the square rigger in which the West did most of its ocean voyaging under sail. Alan Villiers, an accomplished sailor, has noted that the Europeans developed square rigged ships for the angry oceans they sailed while the Arabians and Chinese developed big fore-and-afters for their easier ocean passages between Asia and Africa. How good was the big fore-and-after, truly, in deep-sea trade? One notices, certainly, heavy losses in the big American and Canadian schooners, particularly in winter North Atlantic gales. Contrast this with the tough North Atlantic packet service of the 1820's, over a half century earlier. In that decade, these little square riggers went without a loss at sea (although there were ships driven ashore in thick or heavy weather) and made their West-East crossings in three weeks and the return in four. The big hard-driven square rigged clippers of the 1840's and 50's had little loss. Like the packets, these ships sailed without regard to unfavorable season and sought only a good offing from the shore for safety. The big Down Easters that succeeded these flyers were sailed on a similar manner. "The proportion of schooners which foundered at sea appears to be very high," John Parker argues. The loss came in ocean voyages. "By cautious short runs the strict coaster was able to avoid encounters with the great Atlantic storms and all the strains and damage they were able to
8
There are, of course, quite a few implicit variables in this question. For instance, what is "successful" and which of the many types of deep-sea fore-and-afters is referred to. I will assume that you are concerned only with the American schooner rig. In this connection, I will say, flat out, that compared with the square rigger, the big American schooner was not a successful type for ocean trading. Under the conditions of deep-sea voyaging, the big fore-and-after tends to behave like an "energy sponge," in contrast to the square rigger which is an "energy reflector." Most voyages are carried out running "down" one or another of the prevailing wind systems, sometimes for weeks on end. The sea runs along in a fairly steady procession of more or less orderly wave patterns with a through to crest height of 15 to 20 feet on the average. There is also a wave velocity such that roughly a couple of waves will pass under the hull of the vessel every minute or so. Secondly, the big schooner rig is characterized, at least partly, by the relatively unconstrained motion of boom and gaff when the vessel is running free. I don't think anyone who has experienced it can forget the enormous patterns traced by boom and gaff as the vessel pitches and sceQds in the following sea. It is this continuous motion of heavy booms and gaffs, relative to the rest of the vessel, which is the key to my argument. When you get 60, 70 and 80 foot spanker booms and 30 and 35 foot booms on other masts, as well as three or more gaffs, all making tremendous gyrations about their ¡ point of suspension (whether gooseneck or jaw), it is clear that an enormous amount of energy is involved here. Most of this energy is wasted because it is not driving the vessel along, but only producing relative motion of the parts. The rest is energy absorbed from