Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

I Googled some pics of the Trust's brigs (they are brigs according to
definition because the pictures showed they are both square-rigged on
both masts with no fore-and-aft sails on the masts) and they are nice
looking boats.

Must try harder on the old observational skills, matey.

They *do* have a fore-and-aft sail on the after mast. It seems to be
a common feature of virtualy all sizeable vessels of this era that at
least the after mast always has at least one gaff sail. One must
presume there must have been a technical reason for this.

The distinction between brig and brigantine is simply whether the
after mast is *exclusively* fore-and-aft or *also* has square sails.

"Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
...
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

I Googled some pics of the Trust's brigs (they are brigs according to
definition because the pictures showed they are both square-rigged on
both masts with no fore-and-aft sails on the masts) and they are nice
looking boats.

Must try harder on the old observational skills, matey.

They *do* have a fore-and-aft sail on the after mast. It seems to be
a common feature of virtualy all sizeable vessels of this era that at
least the after mast always has at least one gaff sail. One must
presume there must have been a technical reason for this.

The distinction between brig and brigantine is simply whether the
after mast is *exclusively* fore-and-aft or *also* has square sails.


The photos I Googled showed both of them sailing together and neither on
had a fore and aft sail on the mainmast. Both masts were square-rigged
from top to bottom.

http://www.tallshipsyouthtrust.net/d...t=693&doc=6823

This means they are rightly called 'brigs.' If they were fitted with a
gaff mainsail at some time earlier or later then they should be called
'brigantines.' See the link with illustrations I posted further up this
thread.

I hope this helps.

Wilbur Hubbard

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

The photos I Googled showed both of them sailing together and neither on
had a fore and aft sail on the mainmast. Both masts were square-rigged
from top to bottom.

http://www.tallshipsyouthtrust.net/d...t=693&doc=6823

That picture shows them from ahead which makes it difficult to see
whether the gaff sails on the main masts are present.

Go to their homepage http://www.tallshipsyouthtrust.net and there
is a photo of one of them from less directly ahead, where you can
clearly see a gaff sail on the after mast (and the mainsail, i.e.
the bottom-most square sail on the main mast, is present, but furled).

On the menu along the left, click on "The Ships" (which takes you to
the page you mentioned, with the photo of the two side by side), and
then on "Our Tall Ships". This takes you to a page which contains a
photo from the quarter, which makes it a bit clearer.

On the same page there is also a sail plan with names, and the gaff
sail is identified as a "spanker".

This means they are rightly called 'brigs.'

We're agreed on that, at least.

If they were fitted with a
gaff mainsail at some time earlier or later then they should be called
'brigantines.'

Not if the gaff sails were there *as well as* the square sails.

A brigantine has no (provision to set) square sails on the after mast
at all, but if a brig (which of course has square sails on both masts)
also carries a spanker (as it usually does), that doesn't make it a
brigantine.

"Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
k...
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

The photos I Googled showed both of them sailing together and neither
on
had a fore and aft sail on the mainmast. Both masts were
square-rigged
from top to bottom.

http://www.tallshipsyouthtrust.net/d...t=693&doc=6823

That picture shows them from ahead which makes it difficult to see
whether the gaff sails on the main masts are present.

Go to their homepage http://www.tallshipsyouthtrust.net and there
is a photo of one of them from less directly ahead, where you can
clearly see a gaff sail on the after mast (and the mainsail, i.e.
the bottom-most square sail on the main mast, is present, but furled).

But, on the picture I linked to one can see square sails all the way
down to the deck. You cannot run a squaresail and a fore and aft
mainsail on the mainmast at the same time.


On the menu along the left, click on "The Ships" (which takes you to
the page you mentioned, with the photo of the two side by side), and
then on "Our Tall Ships". This takes you to a page which contains a
photo from the quarter, which makes it a bit clearer.

On the same page there is also a sail plan with names, and the gaff
sail is identified as a "spanker".

This means they are rightly called 'brigs.'

We're agreed on that, at least.

If they were fitted with a
gaff mainsail at some time earlier or later then they should be
called
'brigantines.'

Not if the gaff sails were there *as well as* the square sails.

Not so. A brigantine often flies topsails above the gaff mainsail on the
mainmast provided the wind isn't too stiff.


A brigantine has no (provision to set) square sails on the after mast
at all, but if a brig (which of course has square sails on both masts)
also carries a spanker (as it usually does), that doesn't make it a
brigantine.

POPPYCOCK! The mainsail does not preclude the use of square rigged
topsails. Look at the illustrations I linked to in another post and
you'll see it for yourself.

Wilbur Hubbard

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:


"Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
k...
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

The photos I Googled showed both of them sailing together and neither
on
had a fore and aft sail on the mainmast. Both masts were
square-rigged
from top to bottom.

http://www.tallshipsyouthtrust.net/d...t=693&doc=6823

That picture shows them from ahead which makes it difficult to see
whether the gaff sails on the main masts are present.

Go to their homepage http://www.tallshipsyouthtrust.net and there
is a photo of one of them from less directly ahead, where you can
clearly see a gaff sail on the after mast (and the mainsail, i.e.
the bottom-most square sail on the main mast, is present, but furled).

But, on the picture I linked to one can see square sails all the way
down to the deck.

So what? We've already agreed they're brigs, not brigantines, and
the owners also describe them as brigs. It's a matter of fact that
they are equipped to carry up to five square sails on the main mast,
and a spanker as well.

You cannot run a squaresail and a fore and aft
mainsail on the mainmast at the same time.

Says who? There's no reason you can't have the spanker and the mainsail
(this being the bottom-most squaresail on the main mast) set at the same
time. It won't be optimal, of course, since the spanker would probably
be blanking half the mainsail, which is why -I suppose- you would often
tend to see the main furled when the spanker is up (and in principle
vice versa, but perhaps not in practice).

If they were fitted with a
gaff mainsail at some time earlier or later then they should be
called 'brigantines.'

Not if the gaff sails were there *as well as* the square sails.

Not so. A brigantine often flies topsails above the gaff mainsail on the
mainmast provided the wind isn't too stiff.

If it *can* fly *any* squaresails on the mainmast then it's not a
brigantine but a brig.

A brigantine has no (provision to set) square sails on the after mast
at all, but if a brig (which of course has square sails on both masts)
also carries a spanker (as it usually does), that doesn't make it a
brigantine.

POPPYCOCK! The mainsail does not preclude the use of square rigged
topsails.

Of course it doesn't, but if the mainmast has any squaresails on it
*at all*, top, bottom, or middle, then it's a brig. A brigantine's
main mast is *always exclusively* fore and aft rigged and never ever
carries any square sails at all at all.

Look at the illustrations I linked to in another post and
you'll see it for yourself.

Which one?

"Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
news
So what? We've already agreed they're brigs, not brigantines, and
the owners also describe them as brigs. It's a matter of fact that
they are equipped to carry up to five square sails on the main mast,
and a spanker as well.


No WE haven't established any such thing. We don't agree here. I say if
it has a fore and aft mainsail then it's a brigantine. You say it's a
brig. I say it's a brig only if it's square rigged all the way.


Says who? There's no reason you can't have the spanker and the
mainsail
(this being the bottom-most squaresail on the main mast) set at the
same
time. It won't be optimal, of course, since the spanker would
probably
be blanking half the mainsail, which is why -I suppose- you would
often
tend to see the main furled when the spanker is up (and in principle
vice versa, but perhaps not in practice).


I should have said you DO NOT use them both at the same time. The
picture of the two brigs sailing together clearly show square rigged on
both masts all the way to the deck.

If it *can* fly *any* squaresails on the mainmast then it's not a
brigantine but a brig.

Wrong! the only thing that makes it a brigantine is the fact it carries
a gaff mainsail. If it carries no gaff mainsail then it's a brig.


A brigantine has no (provision to set) square sails on the after
mast
at all, but if a brig (which of course has square sails on both
masts)
also carries a spanker (as it usually does), that doesn't make it a
brigantine.

Wrong again. We've all seen pictures of brigantines using square sails
above the gaff main. This doesn't make them a brig because a brig
carries no gaff mainsail.


POPPYCOCK! The mainsail does not preclude the use of square rigged
topsails.

Of course it doesn't, but if the mainmast has any squaresails on it
*at all*, top, bottom, or middle, then it's a brig. A brigantine's
main mast is *always exclusively* fore and aft rigged and never ever
carries any square sails at all at all.

I disagree. By defintion a brig carries no fore and aft sails. By
definition a brigantine carries a fore and aft mainsail.

Which one?


I can't find it. It must not have got posted for some reason. Maybe I
can find it again. Probably deleted it or something when busy putting a
boot up Martin's arse.

Wilbur Hubbard

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

"Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
news
So what? We've already agreed they're brigs, not brigantines, and
the owners also describe them as brigs. It's a matter of fact that
they are equipped to carry up to five square sails on the main mast,
and a spanker as well.

No WE haven't established any such thing. We don't agree here.

What do you disagree with? That the two TSYT ships are brigs,
or that it's a fact that they can carry 5 squares and a spanker
on their main masts? The TSYT website confirms both!

I say if it has a fore and aft mainsail then it's a brigantine.

I'd agree.

You say it's a brig.

No.

I say it's a brig only if it's square rigged all the way.

I'd disagree.

A spanker isn't a gaff mainsail, it's much smaller than a mainsail on
a brigantine would be. I'm not sure what its exact purpose is, but
I guess it may be to help keep the vessel out of irons should it
attempt to tack other than by wearing ship.

I should have said you DO NOT use them both at the same time. The
picture of the two brigs sailing together

So you *DO* agree they TSYT vessels are brigs.

clearly show square rigged on
both masts all the way to the deck.

Indeed they do, but you can't tell from that picture whether the
spankers are also set (or if not set, then at least present). Are
you trying to imply that if they were, it would make a difference?

Are you trying to imply that the other pictures (which show views from
a better angle, and where you can see that the spanker *is* set
and the square main is present but not set) are of brigantines?

These other pictures are of (one of) the *same* ships! It doesn't
change from being a brig to being a brigantine simply by putting up
a different partial selection of its available sails, such as by
setting the spanker, just like a cutter does not become a sloop when
it takes down one of its two jibs.

What makes it a brig is that it *has* a square mainsail (you say)
or that it *has* any square sails on the main mast (I say) available
to set, not whether it is (or they are) actually set at any particular
moment, just as what makes a one-masted boat a cutter is that it *can*
set two jibs.

If it *can* fly *any* squaresails on the mainmast then it's not a
brigantine but a brig.

Wrong! the only thing that makes it a brigantine is the fact it carries
a gaff mainsail. If it carries no gaff mainsail then it's a brig.

Then we disagree. The definitions I've seen refer to whether the
main mast (which is the after mast) *is square rigged* (which I take
to mean that it's capable of setting square sails), not whether it
has a square mainsail (being the bottom sail on the main mast).

Show me an authoritative independent definition which supports your
version.

On 2007-08-24 17:33:32 -0700, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

Wrong! the only thing that makes it a brigantine is the fact it carries
a gaff mainsail. If it carries no gaff mainsail then it's a brig.

Brig:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Washington