Latin sail and sindhbad sailor. Latin sails, latin sail rigs Set latin sail without mast
May 3rd, 2013
Where is the Arabian Gulf located?
V recent times Arabian Gulf Arabian monarchies, bursting with petrodollars and a sense of their own importance, like to call the good old Persian Gulf, in the warm waters of which, along with the Indian Ocean, since ancient times, soldiers from the cold north of the East European Plain wanted to wash their boots. Which is also, in general, not only East European, but also from ancient times - the Russian Plain.
This is, you know, a battle for geography, which is also immediately a battle for history.
As you name the place, then the descendants will perceive it.
As long as we remember that the huge plain in the east of Europe is not only East European, but also, first of all, the Russian plain - the Russians cannot be defeated in their home.
I must say that the situation with the Persian Gulf offends the Persians, who are now also Iranians. It hurts so much that the Persians register all sorts of things on the Internet, or write lengthy articles in this Pedivikia of yours, citing all sorts of maps as an example and proving that the Persian Gulf was never called the Arabian Gulf until the era of Saudi arrogance and free petrodollars!
The Persian Gulf appears everywhere - on medieval maps, and on the maps of modern times, and (oh, horror!) Even on the map of the Saudi oil giant Saudi Aramco, published in gray 1952, when the Saudis were still nomads, and Gavar was still large and filled with oil , but not .
And I must say that the Persians are right!
After all, their ancestors drove the proud Bedouins throughout the Arabian Peninsula from the time of Darius I to the arrival of modern European conquerors of modern times in the vastness of the Near and Middle East.
Timid Bedouins on their one-humped camels never even thought about the conquest of Persia until they came up with their own version of the monotheistic religion - this "weapon of mass memorial destruction." This, of course, is about Islam.
"There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet."
It was Islam that gave the Arabs the chance to defeat the Persians in their centuries-old struggle. Not for long, but in the bright and turbulent period of the Arab Renaissance, which would later be called the Golden Age of Islam.
Although, it is more accurate to call this time the time of the Islamic Agrarian Revolution and the era of the Latin sail.
Although there is nothing to do with Latin, Roman faith or Europe, this sail has absolutely no.
Europe, as it often happened then, and before, and after, simply took the name of the invention.
As it happened in history, in geography or in science.
A triangular sail on an oblique rail fixed to a mast is not a European invention at all. It was invented in the Indian Ocean.
Near the place that was called the Arabian Gulf in the Middle Ages. Which is now called the Red Sea. Well, the "Latin sail" was originally called the "Arab sail" in the Middle Ages.
Like this.
The Europeans stole the sail from the Arabs, and the Arabs are trying to steal the Persian Gulf from the Persians before our very eyes.
Thank God, while everything is calm on the Russian Plain.
But our story is about the sail.
The principle of operation of a Latin sail is fundamentally different from the principle of operation of a straight sail, about which we had a part of our story. It is installed not across, but practically along the wind, and the driving force of the sail is a component of the difference in wind pressure between the concave and convex parts of the sail. A similar effect is achieved with an airplane wing. , when, due to the longer path along the convex part of the wing of the aircraft, the air there is forced to accelerate, which, according to Bernoulli's law for the propelling air, creates a pressure difference and a lifting force.
The main advantage of the Latin sail is that it has less resistance to the movement of the vessel when working with the wind, which does not blow strictly along the bow-stern line.
This allows, if desired and necessary, to use a weak wind more efficiently and allows you to go steeper to the wind than when using a straight sail.
So why did the domination of the straight sail last so long?
Straight sails are much simpler than oblique sails and you do not need to strain very hard to control them. A raised straight sail will work with both a tailwind and winds that are slightly different from the tailwind. A straight sail does not need to change from tack to tack (change of the ship's course) with a slight change in the direction of the tailwind, while the use of oblique sails in this case requires constant attention from the crew. A straight sail could be raised and sail (as long as the wind was blowing in the stern), but oblique sails constantly require both brain and hand work.
Therefore, sadly, the approach "row the rowers, the sun is still high" somewhat closed the way for Greece and Rome to improve the straight sail.
V currently there is no evidence of the presence of Latin sailing equipment in the Mediterranean until the end of the ninth century, that is, neither the Byzantines, let alone the Italians, did not know the oblique "Latin" sail, and after almost two centuries from the beginning of the action Arab ships in the Mediterranean, which were the first to show the Europeans the "Arab sail".
However, the real revolution in navigation did not take place when an oblique Arab sail was finally solemnly hoisted onto the galley, but when a completely different idea arose in the minds of Europeans - to create a ship that would be completely devoid of oar thrust, but at the same time it would be enough seaworthy to challenge the open ocean.
The creator of the European "throw to the West" was another Heinrich, this time of Portuguese descent.
Portuguese Infant Prince Henry the Navigator, successfully crossed the Spanish cog and Arab dhow, creating on their basis the famous caravel- the first ship with combined sailing equipment.
Hanseatic cog
The Spanish kogi of that time - small merchant ships - were solid and quite seaworthy ships, although their sailing equipment left much to be desired. They had one huge square sail, which allowed them to sail only with a fair wind. As a matter of fact, the European cog of the 15th century model still followed the traditions of Greek and Roman "pottery making", using all the same approaches to the creation of ships.
Kog, with minor modifications, was used by Mediterranean ships, ships of England and even ships of the Hanseatic Trade Union.
Meanwhile, Henry the Navigator, being the governor of Ceuta, often visited the port there and looked at the ships of the Arabs, Turks, Indians and other eastern peoples. His attention was especially attracted by the Arabian dhows, light on the move, whose "Arab" sailing equipment allowed the crew to deftly maneuver even against the wind, in addition, their ships already had a keel and a hinged stern rudder.
Arab dhow
Therefore, Henry, creating a new seagoing vessel - the caravel, borrowed many important details from the Arabs, in particular the oblique, now "Latin" sail, more developed than that of the koga, the keel and the hinged side rudder.
Portuguese caravel.
The throw of Europe to the West began in 1418, just 3 years after the Battle of Agincourt, during which the other Henry the Fifth, the future king of the united England and France, was utterly defeated by the French knights and before his wonderful wedding with Catherine of Valois.
This event, so important for the further history of Europe, then took place near an inconspicuous island near the coast. inhospitable Africa.
It was there, far from the Hundred Years' War, which had already tired the peoples of France and England, in a small bay off the island of Madeira, that a small sailing ship was anchored - the Portuguese caravel we described above with combined straight and oblique, now seems to be rightfully "Latin" sails ...
The colonization of Madeira, which, in fact, began in that very year 1418, can be called a turning point in the history of Europe.
Zarku, a knight in the service of Prince Henry the Navigator, discovered this island, one might say, by chance.
It must be said that the European sailors of the 15th century, in contrast to their Arab counterparts, who by that time had already sailed to the shores of Malaysia and Indonesia for several centuries, were terribly uneducated and superstitious. European unfortunate sailors were afraid to meet something unfamiliar outside Europe: from generation to generation of sailors, stories were passed about mythical monsters living in the depths of the ocean and easily destroying ships, about the sunny heat of the tropics, burning ships, about the fact that the water is beyond the equator it becomes impossible for swimming, boiling from the heat.
In December 1418, Zarku and Tristau Vas Teixeira, equipped by Henry the Navigator on a long voyage, traveled more than 2 thousand miles south of the ports of Portugal along the coast of Africa. Suddenly a violent storm began; a ship with two noble Portuguese aboard went off course and was nailed by the wind towards Porto Santo, a tiny islet that we now know was only 60 miles northeast of Madeira. They named it that (meaning the Holy Port) in gratitude for being saved from an imminent shipwreck.
Madeira's only population at that time was a colony of sea lions and many species of birds of all colors and sizes. Trying to determine where to sail further from tiny Porto Santo, one day at sunset Zarco saw on the horizon, where the sun was setting, some strange shadows that resembled the outlines of the earth. Zarku did not forget about this, and when he and Tesqueir set off again a week later, he changed course and sent his caravel straight towards the land that he saw. Having reached the unknown island, which was much larger than Porto Santo, the sailors, lowering their sails, took these lands under their authority, guardianship and protection in the name of the king, Prince Henry and the Order of Christ. Walking around the island and having fun for the sake of giving names to wooded mountains, hills and valleys, the cavaliers at the same time assigned the name to the island they discovered, which from now on began to be called "Ilha da Madeira" (Ilha da Madeira), which translated from Portuguese means "Island overgrown with forest ". After wandering a little through the new land and erecting a wooden cross on the shore in honor of its opening, the Portuguese embarked on their caravel and departed for their native lands.
Thunderstorm in Madeira. Probably, it was this kind of weather that brought Zarka and Teixeira here.
It must be said that neither the virgin forest of Madeira, nor the sea lions, nor many of the bird species of this uninhabited island have not survived to this day.
Colonization of Madeira by the Portuguese after the discovery of the island of Zarcu began almost immediately. In 1419, the Portuguese explorer João Gonçalves Jarco, having arrived on the island after Zarcu and Teixeira, was still amazed at the huge number of sea lions living in the beautiful bay, relatives of monk seals, in Portuguese called “lobush”. Since then, the second city of the island in terms of its current size, but the first in time of foundation, is called Camaru de Lobos.
Already in 1424, the current capital of Madeira, Funchal, was founded. The name of the city comes from the wild fennel growing here in large quantities, in Portuguese "funchu".
Sea lions, fish and vegetables were the first Portuguese settlers to eat in Madeira. However, the question immediately arose about the deployment of full-scale agriculture in Madeira. The first crop of settlers was wheat, which was in dire need of continental Portugal.
For the purpose of growing grain, the evergreen lowland forests of Madeira were completely cut down. "Island overgrown with forest" turned into a "deserted island"
Now only small areas of evergreen forests have survived. If Madeira was more or less saved mountainous relief islands, then on the neighboring Canary Islands, which fell under the skating rink of the Europeans a little earlier, the forests were reduced to almost zero.
Forests were cut down for firewood, building material and the release of land for agricultural needs on such a scale that, for example, on the island of Gran Canaria, only 1% of the forest area was preserved, and on the relatively prosperous island of Tenerife, this figure does not exceed 10%, and continues to decline so far.
As expected, this deforestation has led to significant soil erosion and dramatic climate change and a drop in wheat yields in both the Canary Islands and Madeira.
To avoid a crisis among the colonists, Heinrich the Navigator ordered the cultivation of sugar cane in Madeira for the production of "sweet salt", which was rare in Europe at that time, and because of this was considered a seasoning.
But if in Madeira only trees, birds and sea lions were affected, in other places the situation with colonization was by no means so calm.
The Canary Islands are located near Madeira, a little closer to Africa.
Back in the XII century Canary Islands reached by the Arab sailors. French sailors visited the Canaries in 1334, but France did not go beyond these first landings - the country, together with England, plunged into the abyss of the Hundred Years War for a long time.
In 1344, Pope Clement VI "grants" the islands to the Spanish kingdom of Castile. This devilish union of the Roman Church and European colonialism, we will later see more than once in history.
"In the name of the Lord! In his name!"
The problem was that the Canaries, unlike Madeira, were quite populated.
Before the arrival of Europeans on the islands, they were inhabited by the Guanche tribes. Their development, of course, was at the level of the Stone Age, but they, nevertheless, very successfully engaged in cattle breeding and primitive agriculture. Animal skins were used as clothing. They knew how to mummify their leaders. The Guanchi tribes even left behind the Guimar pyramids - an amazing monument of megalithic architecture of the Stone Age, literally "brick by brick" from the meager stones of the Canary Islands.
In 1402, the French Jean de Bettencourt and Gadifer de La Salle, on behalf of the Crown of Castile and Leon, begin the seizure of the islands.
The tribes from Gran Canaria out of kindness and ignorance greeted the Europeans (King Guarnardarfa even spoke in favor of the conclusion of an alliance), while the tribes inhabiting Tenerife tried to resist, fighting with arrows with stone tips and slings. In 1404, King Henry III of Castile proclaims Jean de Bettencourt as King of the Canaries. Portugal, which also claimed the Canary Islands, recognized them as Spanish possession only under a treaty of 1479.
The last battles on the island of Tenerife took place at the end of the 15th century. In May 1494, the Guanches defended their island, but in December 1495, after the Guanches were weakened by a plague epidemic, the Spaniards completely took over the archipelago. On July 24, 1496, the last prince of the Guanches, Imeninchia, surrendered, who later, which is also very typical for Europeans, was killed by them while in captivity.
On September 29, the winner, Alonso de Lugo, announced the complete submission of the Canary Islands.
They died fighting. Anaterv, one of the kings of the Guanches. What he really was, we will never know.
Now the Guanches do not exist.
According to the description of the colonialists, the island of Tenerife was inhabited by tall, white-skinned, red-haired and blue-eyed people... Norman Jean de Betancourt described in detail the strange language of the Guanches, who supposedly could understand the speech of their fellow tribesmen, without uttering a sound and only moving their lips, and also whistling to talk at a distance of up to 15 kilometers.
The Guanches have the characteristic features of the Cro-Magnons, the most ancient population of Europe. The extinct race, to which the Guanches belonged, are called mechtoid; carriers of this race inhabited northern Africa until the beginning of the Neolithic and were assimilated or destroyed by carriers of the Mediterranean race.
The very first records about the Guanches were made in 1150 by the Arab geographer Al-Idrisi in the book "Nuzhat al-mushtak". In it, Idrisi reports on a voyage made by Arab sailors from Lisbon to explore the islands southwest of the Iberian Peninsula.
According to him, the Arabs, after a fairly long voyage, reached a certain island, "which seemed to them uninhabited, but cultivated fields were soon discovered on it." Approaching the island, the sailors found themselves surrounded on all sides by people on barges, who brought them to the shore, “to the village, whose inhabitants are in large numbers were fair-haired, with long flaxen hair, and women of rare beauty". One of the residents knew Arabic and asked where they came from.
Guanches still pose many mysteries to researchers. After all, all that the "enlighteners" and "missionaries" have reliably left us are their megaliths and several mummies of the leaders of the Guanches. Initially, the number of mummies, presumably, was in the thousands, but today only a few Guanche mummies have survived, which are in several museum collections. The rest were immediately destroyed by the colonialists, along with the last
I'm sure this mummy also contains haplogroup R1a or R1b. Guanches are Europeans.
After the discovery of Guanche mummies by the Spaniards in the early 16th century, many of them were ground into powder and sold in Europe under the guise of a medicine for abdominal pain. Later, this process was stopped for objective reasons - there were simply no mummies.
However, if you think that the process of destruction real story The Canary Islands is a matter of bygone days, then you are deeply mistaken. In 1933, already in the enlightened twentieth century, in the southern part of the island of Tenerife, the most large cemetery mummies of Guanches, containing 60 to 74 mummies. However, after the discovery, it was immediately almost completely plundered.Seeing "abdominal pain" and the accompanying diarrhea devoured Europe both in the 15th and 20th centuries.
The colonialists are still afraid of the ghosts of the past.
The ghosts they killed tall, white-skinned, fair-haired and blue-eyed people, with long flaxen hair, and women of rare beauty.
In the collection of skulls. On the conquered Canaries.
"Guaya echey efiai nash sahana"."Let me live my life defending my homeland." This is a phrase in the Guanche language that the colonialists wrote down.
The land of Guanchinefre became the Canary Islands.
Will the Russian Plain simply become East European?
I think not already.
The most heated debate revolved around the question of whether the Latin sail is of Mediterranean origin or whether it originally appeared in the Indian Ocean and was introduced into the Mediterranean by the Arabs. Supporters of the second version cite the following arguments in support of it. The Latin sail was widely known under the name of the "Arab sail", borrowing which the navigators of the West greatly increased the efficiency of their fleet. Further, there is no evidence of the presence of Latin weapons in the Mediterranean before the end of the ninth century, i.e. almost two centuries after the beginning of the operation of Arab ships in the Mediterranean (George F. Hourani, ArabSeafaringintheIndianOceaninAncientandEarlyMedievalTimes(Princeton, 1951)).
Our Arabist Shumovskiy T.A. unambiguously resolves this issue. In his book “ Arabs and the sea"(1964, p. 173), he writes:
“Carried by Arab sailors from the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean and becoming the property of Europe, the bow-stern triangular sail revolutionized European sailing. The transition from a primitive single-mast ship with a rectangular sail to three-masted ships with an Arab triangle made it possible for a sailing ship to go against the wind, that is, practically in. any direction favorable to him, whence arose the technical ability to carry out the expeditions of Columbus, Vasco da Gama, Magellan and their successors. "
R.Bowen (Richard LeBaron Bowen, “Arab Dhows of Eastern Arabia,” TheAmericanNeptune 9 (1949): 92) also believes that the Indian Ocean is most likely the homeland of the Latin sail, since in the evolution of sailing equipment discussed above from direct to Latin, it is in the Indian Ocean that there are intermediate sail modifications between them. In the Mediterranean, however, no sails were found that could be considered the predecessors of the Latin. At the same time, R. Bowen believes that it would be wrong to attribute the invention of the Latin sail to the Arabs. He believes that the Arabs showed themselves as seafarers too late to be considered the inventors of the Latin sail. According to this authoritative scholar, the Arabs adopted the knowledge of maritime affairs from the Persians, together with marine dictionary, principles of navigation and, possibly, Latin sailing equipment. And only then the Arabs moved the Latin sail to the Mediterranean Sea. This hypothesis is confirmed by the alleged fact that the first images of a Latin sail in the Mediterranean fine arts appeared in the ninth century. In this regard, it is pertinent to cite the remark of Van Doorninck given in the collection AHistoryofSeafaringBasedonUnderwaterArcheology,(ed. George F. Bass (London, 1972), p. 146) that illustrators of manuscripts tended to work with traditional stereotyped forms and rarely innovate their art. So the triangular Latin sails may have appeared long before their images were used in illuminated handwritten texts. Consequently, this fact gives rise to the statement only that the Latin sails in the Mediterranean appeared " no later than"In the 9th century. But the main difficulty in advancing this hypothesis is that, as the same Bowen stated in an earlier study, there is no evidence of the use of the Latin sail in the western Indian Ocean before the Portuguese arrived there. And yet, despite the most careful scientific research, it was not possible to find a single literary or figurative evidence of the types of sailing equipment used in the western Indian Ocean before XV century.
γλώσσα
galea_galley
The meaning of the problem is as follows: try to establish who invented the Latin sail? Arabs, Mediterranean Europeans or some "third force". Agree that the emergence of Latin sailing equipment was dictated by some circumstances, otherwise why change such a successful straight sail to Latin.
Relative to the Columbus era. I am on your side in relation to the criticism of Shumovsky, for this I have cited a quote from him to show that he is blinded by the idea that all progress in the development of the ship in this era is the work of the Arabs. But I could not help but bring her, tk. then the reasoning would be one-sided, not taking into account the opinions of all participants in the discussion. (By the way, the karakka had mixed sailing equipment: straight and Latin.)
And one more thing: I am not a supporter of the idea of the global advantage of the Latin sail over the straight one. And I don't discuss the obvious. I just think, paraphrasing our bronze classic, that if a Latin sail appears in the history of a ship, then it's for something.
Well, in this aspect, the problem is hardly solvable. Most likely, the oblique sail was invented by unknown fishermen, since it is they who are interested in its advantages: we gain in maneuverability at the expense of speed. Arabs as nomads (with the exception of the Yemeni Arabs) have little maritime tradition. Mediterranean Europeans had a strong maritime tradition from the Phoenicians, through the Greeks, to the Romans. Traditions are usually very conservative and there was no particular need for innovation in the Mediterranean basin in the 1st millennium. Most likely, the oblique sail was introduced into ocean shipping by those who were vitally interested in the development of sea communications. After the collapse of the Rim-Sassanids-Han link, the Great Silk Road was cut by the Turks. China's trade with the West went to sea through the mediation of India. Look there for nautical innovation - the oblique sail is just one of them. Another compass, astronavigation, knowledge of seasonal winds (by the way, an oblique sail is useless without a keel).
There are 2 shipping centers in Western India:
a) Northwest - Gujarat, largely thanks to Iranian immigrants (Gulf of Cambay)
b) Southwest - Tamils (Cochin).
Tamils are perhaps even preferable, since they are more closely connected with the sea, however, their history, including the sea, is a solid white spot.
The advantage of an oblique sail over a straight sail is fundamental, it allows you to return to the starting point with a constant wind (not at all angles), which is impossible with a straight sail.
Yet the invention of fore-and-aft sails, usually called oblique or Latin, is more logical for the Indian Ocean basin with its steady monsoon winds. Straight sail is most effective in tailwinds, while fore-and-aft sails are useful in traverse winds such as sailing from India to the Red Sea in both SW and NE monsoons. Another important advantage of fore-and-aft sails is the ability to take advantage of daily breezes while coastal sailing.
γλώσσα 2
Caravel is Hanseatic cog armed with a latin sail. It is the invention of the caravels by the Catalans that is considered the main breakthrough technology that made it possible to carry out the Great Geographical Discoveries. A natural question arises as to why the northern peoples did not think of the Latin sail. As you know, innovation occurs where there is a need for it. A straight sail is more convenient and more efficient than an oblique sail, its only drawback is that it does not allow you to go steeply to the wind. V North seas(North Sea, Baltic, Biscay) with their variable wind conditions, this disadvantage is largely leveled. If the wind is unfavorable, you can always wait and sooner or later (rather early) the wind will change. Not so in the area of the Tradewinds.Trade winds blow in one direction for years. For sailors dependent on the wind, the question is not about the efficiency of using the wind, but about the simple possibility of returning to the starting point. So, the difference between Latin and straight sails is that the first one allows you to do this, and the second one does not. Getting into the trade wind zone (south of 30 degrees, the "Sea of Darkness" off the coast of Morocco) a sailor with a square sail could easily reach the shores of America, but had no opportunity to return back. The oblique Latin sail (in the presence of a keel and rudder) made it possible to sail across the northeastern trade wind and thus reach the coast of Africa, where, using the coastal breeze, return to the North. He also allowed caravels to cross the southeastern trade wind south of the Equator and enter the Western Winds Zone in order to round Africa from the south (accidentally opening Brazil at the same time). An interesting point is that once global circulation was opened up and served mariners, the need for an oblique sail was significantly reduced. Now sailors returning from the Indies climbed to the North to America, around the Azores anticyclone and followed to Europe on a passing wave using straight sails all the way.
Currently, the Latin sail is used on small sailing ships: abroad - on light dinghy, in our country - as an auxiliary sail on sailing-rowing and sailing-motor ships. The advantages of a Latin sail with two slats connected in the tack corner are obvious: simplicity and reliability (low mast, semi-balanced, simplified descent and ascent). However, installed on an ordinary mast, such a sail on a tack has a significant drawback: on one of the tacks, it necessarily falls on the mast, while the shape of the sail is distorted, its thrust is significantly reduced, and the drag increases. In addition, it is difficult to regulate the belly depending on the strength of the wind.
These disadvantages can be eliminated. For example, install a light L-shaped mast by placing the sail between the posts - in this case, it works equally well on both tacks. For effective adjustment of the sail belly, it is necessary to make the lower and upper rails somewhat stronger and stiffer than is usually done, and connect the ends of the rails at the clew and nokbenzel corners with a bowline cable. If the lower rails of such a sail are pulled down with a guy-rope attached near the mast, then both rails will bend, and the sail will become flatter. The bowline allows you to bend the rails and keeps the leech taut. When the wind increases on squalls, the flatter sail does not flush, and its twisting is also reduced. In a light wind, without lowering the sails, you can make it fuller by releasing the guy line.
In the manufacture of the sails, the strips are initially assembled by pivoting them in the tack corner and with a bowline of the required length at the rear ends. The slats are given the maximum deflection and the panels are cut out along the resulting rigid triangular frame, the outlines of which along the lower and upper luffs should repeat the sickles formed by the slats. In this position, the sail will be practically flat, developing relatively low lift and drag. When the bend of the slats decreases, the released part of the tissue in the form of sickles along the luff forms a belly. With straight rails, the belly of the sail is usually 10-15%.
For ease of cutting the sail and increasing its service life, the clew angle is taken equal to 90 °, and the panels are laid parallel to the luff. It is convenient to place the slats in the pockets sewn to the luffs. This improves the aerodynamic quality of the sail and makes it easier to attach to the battens. The width of the pockets is selected within four to six diameters of the slats.
The L-shaped mast is secured with stays, but they can be replaced with one rigid pipe running from the top of the mast to the bow of the vessel.
The history of the origin of the Latin (oblique) sail is lost in the depths of time. It appeared in the Mediterranean Sea from the Arabs, then the Europeans borrowed it. But the Arabs also borrowed it, most likely from the Persians. This brings to mind the famous Sindbad the sailor, who, according to his name, was neither an Arab nor a Persian, but a native of the Indian province of Sindh. This version has not yet been expressed anywhere, but I really like it. In this regard, it is interesting to re-read the Arabic (?) Tales told by Scheherazade. The name of this princess sounds interesting, it definitely has Iranian origin. Thus, sailing in the Indian Ocean has its deepest origins. But it was the oblique sail that allowed people to sail against the wind. The presence of currents and monsoons in the Indian Ocean should have stimulated the creators of this discovery. After all, it was thanks to the oblique sail that Columbus swam across Atlantic Ocean... This article details the origin of the oblique sail.
"It is known that one of the hallmarks of a medieval galley was the presence of Latin sailing equipment. We will definitely talk about the origin of Latin sails on galleys, but now I would like to say a few words about the history of the emergence of oblique, including Latin, sails in general. Who and when So, as usual in such cases, there is no shortage of hypotheses, sometimes mutually exclusive, colored by poorly hidden attempts to assert national priorities (the postulate “Russia is the homeland of elephants” applies not only to Russia and not only to elephants). The principle of operation of a Latin sail is fundamentally different from that of a straight sail, it is installed not across, but practically along the wind, and the driving force is a component of the pressure difference between the concave and convex parts of the sail, in exactly the same way as the lift force of an airplane wing is formed. Latin sail - it has less resistance It is more proactive and more effective in light winds and allows you to sail steeper towards the wind than with straight sail. So why did the domination of the straight sail last so long?
There was only one reason why the large rectangular sail remained for many, many centuries on ships sailing the Nile. This river is known to flow from south to north, while the prevailing winds blow from north to south. Consequently, when the ship descended downstream, the spars were chopped and the rowers got down to business. On the way back, a steady tailwind was blowing, which did not require maneuvering to follow upstream. The simplicity in the construction of straight sails and their control contributed to their long dominance on the Egyptian, and then other Mediterranean ships. Straight sail does not need to change from tack to tack with a slight change in the direction of the tailwind, while the use of oblique sails in this case requires constant attention from the crew.
Most likely, the transition from straight sail to Latin sail looks like this. Using a straight sail, mariners have noticed that when the ship is not sailing exactly in forewind, the sail's efficiency can be improved by turning it so that it is perpendicular to the wind. If this technique is used when the vessel has a keel or a steering device (or better, both together), then you can choose the course of the vessel relative to the wind in a wider range, and not just move along the direction of the wind.
If the wind direction approaches the traverse, i.e. the boat is sailing close to the backstay, this technique starts to work worse, however, the drop in driving force can be partially compensated if the leech of the sail is directed towards the wind. This method works well if the leech is taut, which can be achieved by tilting the windward part of the upper yard (or gaff) down. Using a straight sail in this way is a direct way to the invention of a Latin sail, possibly through the intermediate use of a quadrangular lug (luger) sail (when a quadrangular sail is attached with the luff to the lath, with the lath and the lower soft luff of the sail protruding in front of the mast). Campbell, in his study "The Latin Sail in World History" (Journal of World History, Spring 1995), believes that the specific shape of the Latin sail of the Indian Ocean increases the plausibility of this hypothesis: the short edge of the leech is possibly a remnant of the original luff of the straight sail. However, this remains only a hypothesis, not supported by material evidence. Development of oblique sailing in the zone The Pacific and South-East Asia followed its own paths, independent of the development of the sail in the Mediterranean, which confirms the hypothesis of two, and possibly three independent directions of development of the Latin sail.
The most heated debate revolved around the question of whether the Latin sail is of Mediterranean origin or whether it originally appeared in the Indian Ocean and was introduced into the Mediterranean by the Arabs. Supporters of the second version cite the following arguments in support of it. The Latin sail was widely known under the name of the "Arab sail", borrowing which the navigators of the West greatly increased the efficiency of their fleet. Further, there is no evidence of the presence of Latin weapons in the Mediterranean before the end of the ninth century, i.e. almost two centuries after the beginning of the operation of Arab ships in the Mediterranean (George F. Hourani, Arab Seafaring in the Indian Ocean in Ancient and Early Medieval Times (Princeton, 1951)).
Our Arabist Shumovskiy T.A. unambiguously resolves this issue. In his book "The Arabs and the Sea" (1964, p. 173), he writes:
“Carried by Arab sailors from the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean and becoming the property of Europe, the bow-stern triangular sail revolutionized European sailing. The transition from a primitive single-mast with a rectangular sail to three-masted ships with an Arab triangle made it possible for a sailing vessel to go against the wind, that is, practically in. any direction favorable to him, whence arose the technical ability to carry out the expeditions of Columbus, Vasco da Gama, Magellan and their successors. "
R.Bowen (Richard LeBaron Bowen, “Arab Dhows of Eastern Arabia,” The American Neptune 9 (1949): 92) also believes that the Indian Ocean is most likely the birthplace of the Latin sail, since in the evolution of sailing rigging from direct to Latin, it is in the Indian Ocean that there are intermediate modifications of the sail between them. In the Mediterranean, however, no sails were found that could be considered the predecessors of the Latin. At the same time, R. Bowen believes that it would be wrong to attribute the invention of the Latin sail to the Arabs. He believes that the Arabs showed themselves as seafarers too late to be considered the inventors of the Latin sail. According to this authoritative scholar, the Arabs adopted the knowledge of naval affairs from the Persians along with the naval vocabulary, the principles of navigation and, possibly, Latin sailing equipment. And only then the Arabs moved the Latin sail to the Mediterranean Sea. This hypothesis is confirmed by the alleged fact that the first images of the Latin sail in the Mediterranean art appeared in the ninth century. In this regard, it is pertinent to quote Van Doorninck's comment in A History of Seafaring Based on Underwater Archeology (ed. George F. Bass (London, 1972), p. 146) that illustrators of manuscripts tended to work with traditional stereotyped forms and rarely innovated their art. So the triangular Latin sails may have appeared long before their images were used in illuminated handwritten texts. Therefore, this fact gives rise to the statement only that the Latin sails in the Mediterranean appeared "no later than" in the 9th century. But the main difficulty in advancing this hypothesis is that, as the same Bowen stated in an earlier study, there is no evidence of the use of the Latin sail in the western Indian Ocean before the Portuguese arrived there. True, there were suggestions that the rake (luger) sail could have been brought into the western part of the Indian Ocean by Greek merchants who traded with India during the era of Roman rule. And yet, despite the most careful scientific research, no literary or pictorial evidence has been found of the types of sailing equipment used in the western Indian Ocean prior to the 15th century. Cited by J. Hurani in support of the hypothesis that the Arabs used the Latin sail, evidence from the Arab poetry of the 9th-10th centuries. do not stand up to scrutiny. Poetic images compare ship sail in the distance with a whale's fin or fountain. On this basis, J. Hurani concludes that he means rather a Latin than a straight sail. But the whale does not have a dorsal fin, and the fountain released by the whale looks more like a cloud of steam than any particular shape. It is rather a purely romantic image that does not provide a clue to the shape of the sail. The surviving characteristics of the sail of Arab ships, which Ibn Majid (15th century) cites, do not clarify the issue either. He points out that the ratio of the length of the leeward to the length of the leeward is 10: 13.5, that is, the sail is almost straight, and it is more a luger than a Latin sail (Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean before the Coming of the Portuguese (London, 1971 ), p. 52.) "
We all know from history Ancient Rome about the existence of galleys, and galleys with many tiers of oars. The most popular was the trière (three rows of oars), but it came to five (penteres), although the existence of the latter is similar to a legend. However, the galleys had masts and sails. But they were used auxiliary. What happened in the following centuries that drove out the rowers and set the sail as the main mover?
Rowing boats have been in use for thousands of years. They were built back in Ancient egypt, and Odysseus traveled on such a rowing vessel. The Vikings built rowing drakkars, and the Rusichs built boats. They all had sails, but at some point such ships remained only in the river fleet. And the sail is to blame for this.
On the old rowing ships there was a straight sail. On the mast, a crossbar (yarn) was made and a canvas was hung. It's a good thing, the ancient Egyptians used it to the fullest. But the Egyptians were lucky - their winds mainly blow from north to south - that is, clearly upstream of the Nile. Therefore, they sailed upward under a rectangular sail, and the river flowed downward.
A straight sail is ideal if the wind is fair. It blocks a large flow and the thrust is rather big. However, a tailwind (fordewind), no matter how much you desire it, is not often encountered. If the wind is slightly different from exactly aft, you can correct this by turning the yacht so that the wind is perpendicular to the sail. Up to a crosswind. It should also be borne in mind that the ship will demolish, even if the bow is directed exactly according to the compass.
Straight sails were also used at sea, but it was simply dangerous - the wind, which changed direction and began to blow from the front hemisphere, carried the ship out into the open sea, and resisting the wind on oars was often an unsuccessful idea. Therefore, the same Phoenician sailors were engaged only in coastal voyages (that is, while the coast was visible), and the problem, as we see, was not even the absence of a compass. Outings to the open sea were made only where constant trade winds blow.
However, sometime around the 9th century, there was a revolution in sailing equipment. The oblique sail was invented. Who and where is unknown. Either the Arabs invented it and brought it to India, or in India they invented and instilled it in the Arabs. That very first oblique sail began to be called "Latin".
If you look at the picture of a ship with a Latin sail, then the difference with a straight sail is not great - they just turned the yarn exactly along the axis of the ship and lowered the front end down.
However, at the same time, the very principle of operation has radically changed. With the wind from the front hemisphere (beydewind), this sail works on the principle close to the wing (this is how they tried to build wings for the first aircraft), moreover, now there are sports yachts that have a vertical wing instead of a sail. Let the wing have a special profile and shape - but this is a really rigid wing.
This is one of the "non-obvious" inventions. Having carried out a thought experiment, it is impossible to assume that when the forces acting on the sail in a headwind add up, a force will be obtained that pushes the ship forward. It is now impossible to say which random experiment led to this, but it could have happened a thousand years earlier (or later).
The implementation effect was revolutionary. An oblique sail can sail upwind at an angle of about 20 degrees. Now only a storm could carry it out into the open sea, tearing the sails and breaking the mast. A serviceable ship could easily go against the wind - tacks, that is, a zigzag.
However, if the stranger decides to introduce an oblique sail, then specifically the Latin sail can only be a transitional stage. Of course, its implementation is extremely cheap, it is carried out with minimal spars and rigging adjustments. The Latin sail, although rarely, is still used today - on small boats. However, the Latin sail is not as efficient and comfortable. Already a luger sail will be more efficient. And then there is a sprint sail, a gaff sail, a Lyngström sail ... Now the most popular on yachts is the Bermuda oblique sail, on small ships it can be controlled by one person - he can change tack simply by turning the rudder.
The popadants have a lot to say in naval affairs, but the oblique sail is one of the main inventions that must be introduced without fail.
91 comments Latin sail
This is all wrong.
The friction force has nothing to do with it. The frictional force in this case can only warm up the surface against which the air is rubbing. But we don't have a supersonic plane.
For the rest, you have described how a straight sail works. And he cannot cope with the wind from the front hemisphere in any way.
And I even posted a picture of how the oblique sail works - pay attention.
There really is a different principle.About the fact that the keel helps to "catch on the water" - this is complete nonsense.
And in general - the only thing on ships that “clings to water” is a hydrofoil, but it is found too infrequently.«
Keel so that you can put the mast higher and when strong wind protect yourself from overturning, there is no question of any "engagement". "
On sailing dinghies, if you do not lower the centerboard, the roll on the tack is not very strong, but it blows away (drifts, in fact) in a completely creepy way.> About the fact that the keel helps to "catch on the water" - this is complete nonsense.
The keel so that you can put the mast higher and in strong winds to protect yourself from overturning, there is no question of any "engagement".This is nonsense. Keel ballast is used for this purpose, but there is usually no ballast on the centerboard (retractable keel). And what, the centerboard does not make sense? Why do they do it? The keel plate itself is needed precisely and only in order to create thrust using multidirectional resistance to the movement of the ship relative to the air and relative to the water. In common parlance, "catch on the water." That is why the keel has such a tuyere. But the correct body already "clings" to the water by the side, since its resistance when moving to the side is greater than forward. Therefore, the keel is not required. But yes, the keel is better. And yes, also because ballast can also be placed at its end, and keel ballast is more effective than usual.
> And in general - the only thing on ships that “clings to water” is a hydrofoil, but it is too rare.
1. It does not exist on ships. It is found on courts.
2. There is also a propeller and a propeller, a rudder. All of the above has a wing profile. The only difference is that at the rudder this profile is symmetrical, while for propellers (both vane and propeller) this is the profile of not the entire propeller as a whole, but of each individual blade.
3. The keel also has the same profile. Again, symmetrical.The fact that asymmetric profiles are more effective for creating lateral force at such speeds does not change the essence. In addition, the task is to create an anti-drift force, not a force perpendicular to the course. That's why
4. For water below the waterline not only movers cling and wing.
That is, you think that the component of the force P, designated as T, does not exist ??? 😀
Uzhos, how they only swim in real life ...>> No. Explain
The ship is on the medium section, the airship is not.
Putting a sail on an airship is like a water sail on a submarine. It will not move faster, because it is still inside the current. And the difference in speed hot air balloon and the air flow is zero.>> This is a mechanical model, not pure sailing
What does mechanical mean? Is it on wheels ??? It is an almost round sailboat without any keel. And the sail is oblique - it can go up to 30 degrees against the wind. It would not be so clumsy - it would be 20 degrees.
>>
They also cannot explain Ohm's law, although electrons seem to flow there too. So what? Are you surprised that any law has limits of application?>> My please:
> They cannot explain all of the lift or lift when flying upside down.
Upside down is just possible, it is impossible to explain the lift during flight through Bernouli's law way down head.
> Uh-huh. The thrust vector P and the wind vector C. The angle is DULL. Those. the thrust is not directed towards the wind. In your picture.
So sharp or dull? You will decide.
Without anisotropy of the hydrodynamic drag of the hull and / or keel, there will be no angle at all.
>> So the figure of 30 degrees upwind for THIS boat was taken from your imagination
Yes, in this case, I just figured it out, I confess 😀
There are two scissors on the sides of the boat, in theory it should be enough for stabilization, especially since the article emphasizes that “it all resembles working on a windsurfer, only instead of a standing position - sitting” But of course I didn’t swim on this.>> So where does the D component go?
And the ship takes down. It just does not blow away critically, because the water is 800 times denser. And I will say more - it can demolish any ship, even one with a balance keel that goes under the water by three meters. Yes, even the armored battleships, which have no sails - only very homeopathic.
And in order to minimize and compensate for this drift, a fixed steering wheel is needed. This is a separate topic, I will not mix everything in one article.
>> Drakkar. Length to width ratio 1: 3 or 1: 3.5
Where is the flat bottom of the drakkar? There, the hull shape is just semicircular and the constructive keel is very pronounced - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Vikingshipkils.jpg/385px-Vikingshipkils.jpg IMHO, quite enough.
Another question is how exactly to constructively put an oblique sail on a drakkar. There, firstly, a removable mast, and secondly, the method of holding the mast, which greatly interferes with the Latin sail. Well, the rigging needs to be changed, and a straight rudder should be installed.
It is also possible that due to the fact that the efficiency of an oblique sail is lower, it must be set larger in size, and the mast cannot be increased - the drakkar will capsize (here is the effect of a low draft, and not what you suppose).
My IMHO - they did not put on the drakkar, not because it was ineffective, but because it was necessary to change the design itself.
That is, as a technology demonstrator, it is suitable, but as for commercial use it is not.
Absolutely the same situation with "Turbinia", where the steam turbine took up all the space in the body and had no use except for demonstration.>> The Vikings were not idiots when they did not set the slanting sails that were well known in their day.
But this is pure rut. The heyday of the Viking raids was the 6-8th century, and the oblique sail only appeared in the 9th among the Arabs. He came to Europe exactly with the end of the Viking raids. I even tried to find materials if it is related. It is possible that the ships with an oblique sail that appeared simply began to move away from the drakkars to the wind, the effectiveness of the raids fell and they stopped.
Once again - this is my personal version, I have not found confirmation. Maybe you will be able to confirm or deny it.
There can be many reasons for the termination of the Viking raids - from the construction of castles, which cannot be taken on the move, to the too low side of the drakkar, which made it possible to shoot through all its contents from a higher ship.>> Read any professional article:
Didn't it bother you that the keel in the article is a constructive keel, and not a balanced or ballast keel? It also says - "method of building entire hulls" plank-built "over a dugout keel piece". And by the way - in the picture No no keel, not even a straight rudder. And even in the fragment that you posted - "reducing leeway". That is, we are talking about optimization (there are generally "all hull and sail design features must be compromises"), and the U-shaped body is enough to go against the wind. Perfect confirmation of my words about a catamaran without keel!
However, thank you very much for the article - it seemed to me that it was impossible to go with an oblique sail without a straight rudder, and here is proof of the opposite. I need to look for more material for an article about the steering wheel. If you find anything else on the topic of steering, drop it.
About the last article - could you upload it as a pdf and throw it to me? Otherwise it's very shallow, it's hard for me to read, but the pictures are very interesting - they have an oblique sail drawn around the 8th century.
Let me summarize, ok?
There are design features that can be attributed to various reasons. And the question "why" falls apart into a mulillin-two answers, which still contradict each other. This is me about the keel. About constructive keel, balancer and ballast. And about the mast. And about the rigging. And about a lot that can be said so. Moreover, on different ships, these design features converge in opposite results - a pleasure yacht without a keel will turn over, and a catamaran, as you have shown, floats perfectly against the wind, and so on. I prefer not to touch such things (if you do not directly indicate for what narrow conditions it was made).
And there are design features that are the same for everyone - this is the type of sail. A phase transition took place between the direct and the Latin, and the properties of the system changed radically. These are the points I try to describe.
Addition: I found such a miracle http://indigenousboats.blogspot.com/2011/08/raft-wackos-and-quackos.html It always seemed to me that with such masts it was impossible to set an oblique sail ...
"And by the way - there is neither a keel, nor even a straight rudder in the picture." The rudder is used only for changing course, and straight-line movement is considered there. And besides the keel, the anisotropy of the hydrodynamic resistance is provided by the contours of the hull itself, so the presence of the keel is not essential. Keel and hull work together anyway. The sail differs fundamentally from the superstructures.
>> About the invention of the oblique sail in ancient Rome in the English wiki 10 (!) Links to sources
I looked, really interesting, it looks like the story with the Latin sail could turn out to be much more dramatic, like with cats.
This is one of the lost knowledge of Ancient Rome. And then this is one more reason for the Middle Ages to develop this technology.
And one should not write "these sails were invented by the Romans", because they invented the ball bearing, but no one saw it until the 18th century. Yes, and the population of Rome exceeded a million people, and until the next million-plus city had to wait almost two millennia.I was based on domestic sources, but they do not mention Rome, moreover, there are suggestions that the Arabs received an oblique sail from the Indian Ocean.
>> Considering that these sails were invented by the Romans, and the straight sails were doing just fine in the 19th century (look at windjammers) I think it looks more like the coexistence of bows and crossbows than a new generation of technology
Windjammers without oblique sails have never been! Let the area of the straight lines for them noticeably exceed the area of the oblique, but starting from the 12th century the ships without oblique sails were not built. Even on small caravels, whose main sails were straight sails, there were enough oblique sails. Yes, at first the "caravel" was only with obliques, oddly enough.
That is, I repeat it for the eighth time, probably - only with straight sails in the open sea is impossible.
And the whole point of oblique sail - but lets go back. If this is not a revolution, then I really don't know what a revolution is.>> As a techie, the description of the physics of maneuvering in the article makes me allergic.
As a techie, I did not describe maneuvering in the article, but only mentioned it. Reread if that.
Maneuvering needs to be described separately and a lot.
And, by the way, the types of oblique sails are also needed separately - there are five main ones.
This article is an introduction to the use of sails.I alone saw a straight sail on the drakar and could not distinguish its bow from the stern?
>> It's just that our popular (and maybe special) editions have not yet reflected this change.
Well, or I haven't looked in for a long time. It is necessary to adjust the article.
>> oblique sails did not disappear after the collapse of the empire, just their percentage dropped sharply in the new conditions
I'm afraid the percentage has dropped to zero. This happened with many things - with the same astrolabe, and if it were not for the Arabs, they would have reinvented.
And here even the Arabs did not use it. It is possible that they also reinvented.>> We need navigation and ships with a large displacement
Just the displacement is the last thing you need.
The average Roman trierem is in the region of 45 meters (and there were 80 meters each), and the quadriremes with quinqueremes swam, they are even fatter.
Fleagman Columbus "Santa Maria" - up to 25 meters.
And, by the way, the same drakkars never went to America. Knorrs walked - in comparison with the pelvis drakkars.And the Romans were not bad at all with navigation. The maps were not bad, they knew how to navigate by the stars better than the medieval ones. The only thing is that there was no compass (or we don't know about it, which may well be). The Vikings had a "sun stone" - a polarizer that showed where the sun was, when there were clouds or fog.
There was not enough political will - there was no need, he could cope with his provinces.
Yes, and there were no suitable people (I will lay out the wrong article - my opinion is why the era geographical discoveries it was Europe that began).
In this situation, it will be tough for the hitman to introduce a new one ...>> These little critters can even fly
Aerodynamic quality 1.5 is close to "none". The Boeing 747 has an aerodynamic quality of 15.
Well, then - I, perhaps, in vain broke about another principle of oblique sail? 😀
And in general - http://science.compulenta.ru/722131/
Especially interesting: “in theory, the design of this one-seater sailboat allows sailing with three times the wind speed”.Have you looked at the link? There the oblique sail allows you to move three times faster speed wind. This is not available with direct.
And with the wheels attached, there is a video on YouTube, where a cart with a propeller accelerates faster than the speed of the wind ...P.S. And in general - here in the topic about triplex they require an article about encryption ...
The mechanics there are extremely complex, in addition to everything they require a "gearbox" to digest very large torques. Everything is so complicated that it will be almost easier to make the windroots turn the generators, and put the electric motors on the propellers.
What will it cost only to make braking devices for rotors! What will happen during a storm? After all, the move cannot be lost - it will turn sideways to the wave.
And how much will this whole set weigh? There are a lot of problems that can be solved with modern technologies, but not then.
>> And about the keelless yacht - it sank
And what is the keel of the "Kruzenshtern"? At the Cutty Sark? Yes, Columbus's caravel after all!
The keel is needed for an 11-meter yacht with a 17-meter mast (and it would be useful for the battleship Vaza).
And yes - it reduces drift downwind, but all normal ships are bypassed in displacement.This I mean, the keel is not a prerequisite.
The problem is that, as a rule, slaves or convicts sat on the oars. And for them - if the device does not work, then for the better. I would not be surprised if they broke the oars and I personally wonder - but in how many minutes will they break the pedal drive?
Heh, not that situation - the person responsible for the breakdown is immediately visible, and after the demonstrative execution of the saboteur and flogging to a pulp of everyone who could see and be silent ... they will be cared for and cherished, adnaka.
What are you talking about! And why then were slaves given only the crudest tools and slave power was a deterrent to the development of technology?
You underestimate human ingenuity!What are you talking about! 🙂 Regarding the "deterrent" and "rough tools" - this is, you know, 90% ideological cliché. The closest example is the penicitic system of the 20th century. Both production and sharashki ...
Yea Yea. And the slogans "catch up and overtake". And the actual loss in the Cold War is simply because the economy did not pull (and the sharages were abandoned earlier as unproductive).
The Burmese have insane requirements for the strength of the sailcloth and the mast needs to be completely disproportionate. Without synthetic fiber and duralumin profile IMHO, there will be no gain over gaffer. Neither elongation, nor airtightness, nor a clean leading edge can be achieved. In old Soviet magazines (KiYa, YuT) there are technologies for gluing a mast profile out of wood, but how much work it is, and how it will be used without epoxy - I have no positive thoughts.
By the way, I was looking for the "initial" design of the Bermuda weapons (including on this resource). The one that is attributed to "Bermuda fishermen". And what do you think? Not found. But on the English-language sites of used sailboats, ALL serial fishing sailboats come either with a gaff or with lugernm weapons. For example: http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives/skanner%2024/skanner-24.htm
Those. Bermuda weapons are duralumin and dacron. Not earlier.Burmuda insane requirements for the strength of the sailcloth and the mast is needed completely disproportionate.
In general, it should be noted that the ideal design of a hitting sail is chinese junk... A sail can be made from any shit, even grass. At the same time, a very minimal command can be controlled with the sail, and it is removed in a matter of seconds, simply sliding along the mast (which is very important in case of a sudden wind).
It will turn out LESS and MORE EXPENSIVE than gaff, slat or Latin.
From that strip of flax that can go to the straight sail of hexacons, you can make a Bermuda for a 12-meter yacht. For the Bermuda sail is a wing with a fair lengthening. And the straight line has more width than the height.
For good aerodynamics, cutting edge bermuda sail should be as tight as possible. Those. and without wind loads, there is enough stress in the sail. And a cable inserted into the edge will not completely solve the problem. Those. Vikings with woolen cloth and Polynesians with braided sails will not appreciate the solution at all.
Since there is an excess of stress in the sail, they wear out faster. At the beginning of the 20th century, Bermuda sails were placed on steam yachts and even seaplanes http://strangernn.livejournal.com/977766.html. But only as an AUXILIARY mover. But where the sail was the MAIN propulsion, there was entirely gaff armament. From Blue Knows to Thomas Lawson. On the same topic, the current story of the already mentioned Scanner. Even with a dacron, haffle sails are more durable than Bermuda sails. Yachtsmen - FSUs, but the same fishermen - no.
There is really a version of the Bermuda sail - "Swift", but this is for something very small.you can also make a sail of the same area for a 24-meter yacht as for a "hexaconter". if speed and maneuverability are not important. it will still be more than that of the heavy and expensive ‘hexacons’.
Wasn't it in order to facilitate control and reduce the load on the winches on windjammers, they made two sails instead of one?
ps
historically, the Bermuda sail was just the sail for fishermen. as I understand it, both because of aerodynamic efficiency and because of the ease of control with it.These drawings
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/47/St._George%27s_Harbour_circa_1864.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Royal_Navy_-_Bermuda_Sloop2.jpeg
I've already come across. For me, the height of the masts in them does not correlate with my ideas about the technologies available to fishermen. With such a ratio of height to diameter, masts should be glued from profiled boards of a length commensurate with the body. For the British advice note - I believe (by the way, the Baltimore haffle clipper-schooner has ordinary composite masts. Two). I don't believe in a fishing boat.
Plus, on the first engraving, the scheme of attaching the leading edge of the sail to the mast is clear - slack. Those. slit - like a gaff. With corresponding consequences for aerodynamics. Those. if there is anything left, it is only the simplicity of sailing in one hand. And then only at the stage of setting the sail. In the second picture - nichrome is not clear. the upper corner of the sail is above the cable attachment point.
First, the team. In the Chinese port, you will not find specialists in working with European sails, but experienced sailors who sailed on junks are heaps of there. And the crew is constantly updated material - sailors die, get sick, run away, etc.
Secondly, the price. Good sailcloth in China is an imported material, and therefore expensive. Local materials for sailing can be found not only in the port, in every village. And the rigging and sails are a PERMANENT consumable. Those. it is more profitable for any ship owner to switch to local, cheap consumables, and not to look for an import from Europe.
However, the junky's sail is highly praised for its maneuverability and controllability, as well as for the fact that it is easily repaired. For a European sail, a gap is a complete loss of functionality. For a junky, a small nuisance that can be easily repaired almost without losing a move.it is unclear why the Chinese sailing armament is better than the European one? what advantages does it have? if even the Europeans who settled in those parts often preferred exactly the Chinese sailing equipment?
Yes, there are solid pluses, with the exception of a few points:
1. Image. Do as narrow-eyed savages do? You will not sell it in Europe under any sauce.
2. The Chinese sail is slightly less efficient than the European sails. The difference is not an order of magnitude, but there is. In a battle between sailboats, it can be critical.
3. The mast is required much thicker and stronger, because it does not have a standing rigging that transfers the force from the sails to the hull. Since it stands on its own, it requires not only its own strength, but also a strong attachment to the keel. However, the people calculated that the weight of an ordinary mast + standing rigging is greater than the weight of a solid Chinese mast.
4. Due to the requirements for the mast, it is difficult to make it the same height as the European ones (which, however, is not very necessary given the shape of the Chinese sail).1. This sail requires minimal steering effort. We pull the halyard, the sail rises. We release the halyard, the sail folds. ALL!!! In the event of a sudden squall (and it happens), the sail is removed within a few seconds!
2. As a consequence, a minimal team is required. No need to tie / untie a bunch of knots in a hurry. One person can stand watch and steer the entire vessel without leaving the helm.
3. The sail can be made of any shit, the Chinese weaved sails from some kind of grass. The big canvas of the Bermuda sail is already beyond fantasy, if you do not have a serious weaving production.
4. Rigging is two orders of magnitude easier, you don't need a lot of precious hemp. You do not need to grind it all, knit, etc.If you start from scratch (well, something like Ancient Rome), then a Chinese sail would be perfect there. Since the 13-14th century, this idea is known to everyone and is not used due to the above disadvantages. Sailors are insanely conservative people, and changes have always come very slowly, and then there's the issue of image ...
That is, it is easier than not to confuse the wet part. Ochepyatka.
Is it possible to use a set of oars of different lengths outside the hull? This is actually more complicated. But if you raise the bottom row and lower the top row, the oars will collide. And asynchrony excludes inphase.
"Also, with a longer than usual end of the oar inside the hull, the rower will be forced to run across the deck." No. He will not run. It's just that his paddle will turn at a smaller angle. Accordingly, his strokes are shorter. But if you perverted, then you can implement it. Another thing is that a marine circus will turn out instead of a mass ship.
I’m a PhD in general. And he never claimed that it was absolutely not realizable. Unlike some. But the enthusiasts did not build the fleet. And let me give you a link to a pedal submarine on hydrofoils and say that this is the Raketa boat? What was considered when determining the class of the ship? That was the question. Not what is the maximum number of rows of oars.
And the problem is not the weight of the oars. The problem is in the moment of inertia, more precisely, in the fact that this moment is different for oars of different rows.
-
not really.
they sailed a couple of miles at 9 knots. And 7 knots were made long enough.
And I advise you to look at the pictures I have given 🙂
they are especially good together with the phrase “with modern men on the oars”, there are very different guys sitting on the oars.
>> when the forces acting on the sail in a headwind add up, a force will be obtained that pushes the ship forward, it is impossible
If we mean only the strength of the wind, then this is not true (perhaps the point is in a not quite clear wording). The wind creates a force in the same direction as the wind through friction. Due to the "reflection" of the wind and Newton's third law, a force perpendicular to the plane of the sail is created. The wing profile maximizes the second component. But it is easy to see that this creates a force that pulls the vessel PERPENDICULARLY with the wind, not against it. To go against the wind, you must use the resistance of the water. The narrow hull of the ship has high resistance to the normal, perpendicular thrust component and low resistance to the tangential component. This allows you to slightly "turn" the thrust vector towards the wind. That is why sailing boats have a keel, often retractable. The keel helps to "catch" on the water and turn the thrust vector. If a stranger places an oblique sail on a vessel whose hull is not sufficiently resistant to sideways movement, he will find that it is not possible to go upwind.
You can also sail against the wind with a regular sail. It's just that an oblique sail works much more efficiently in this mode.
>> About the fact that the keel helps to "catch on the water" - this is complete nonsense.
It is very simple to show that there is a “reliance” on water. If the support on the water is not important, then a sailboat is no different from a glider. This means that if you put an oblique sail on the glider, then it will go against the wind. But the wind always blows on the glider). From the point of view of physics, there is no difference whether the glider flies at a speed of 100 km / h relative to the earth or flies at a speed of 50 km / h and a wind of 50 km / h is blowing in its face. We've got a glider that can fly forever!)
The sail can create force working at an angle to the wind. But this angle will always be sharp. It is also extremely easy to prove this. See the law of conservation of momentum.
>> I beg you to ask first, and then write, ok?
I advise you to google "sail against wind keel", read and think. Good?
So you can link to the source with your explanation, or will we throw pictures like two people? My please:
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/sailing.html
http://irmest.narod.ru/zflash/flafiz04.htm
>> So you think that the component of the force P, designated as T, does not exist ??? 😀
>> Uzhos, as they only swim in real life ...
Finally, it started slowly. So are we talking about the components or the whole thrust of the sail? Traction can be broken down into components in an infinite number of ways.
And please specify, where does the second component D go? Just don't use water. We don't rely on it.)
>> What does mechanical mean? Is it on wheels ??? It is an almost round sailboat without any keel. And the sail is oblique - it can go up to 30 degrees against the wind. It would not be so clumsy - it would be 20 degrees.
The blades on the sides are mechanics. In my opinion, this is a toy model to demonstrate the transformation of wave energy into rolling oars. A link about this thing going upwind under sail, please.
A summary of these articles: when ships are propelled, their bottom is flattened. This improves maneuverability and makes it easier to land. As soon as the role of the sails increases, the shape of the hull becomes V-shaped, for better hydrodynamic quality. The popadants who set the oblique sail on the drakkar will have their heads blown off for lousy results.
And further. The English wiki says that since the 6th century AD. most of the ships from the Mediterranean carried just such sails. And he was familiar to the Romans (that's why he is Latin).
>> Having carried out a thought experiment, it is impossible to assume that when the forces acting on the sail in a headwind add up, there will be a force pushing the ship forward.
Again. One sail can only pull sideways from the wind. Not to meet. The forward pull is generated by the addition of the forces acting on the sail and on the hull.
>> the oblique sail only appeared in the 9th among the Arabs. He came to Europe exactly with the end of the Viking raids
About the invention of the oblique sail in ancient Rome in the English wiki 10 (!) Links to sources. About “from the 6th century AD most of the ships from the Mediterranean carried just such sails. ”4 more. What is your reference base?
>> drakkar ... as a demonstrator of technology, he will fit
I am not a sailor or a yachtsman. But I think if these comrades hear about the drakkars briskly going against the wind, they will be new "mounted crossbowmen".
>> About the last article - could you upload it as a pdf and throw it to me? Otherwise it's very shallow, it's hard for me to read, but the pictures are very interesting - they have an oblique sail drawn around the 8th century.
There is no login. You can Ctrl - + 'and Print Screen'
>> And there are design features that are the same for everyone - this is the type of sail. A phase transition took place between the direct and the Latin, and the properties of the system changed radically. These are the points I try to describe.
Considering that these sails were invented by the Romans, and straight sails were doing fine in the 19th century (look at windjammers), I think this looks more like the coexistence of bows and crossbows than a new generation of technology pushing back the old (how the same bows practically supplanted throwing spears).
As a techie, the description of the physics of maneuvering in the article makes me allergic. That's why it sold out)
>> I was based on domestic sources, but they do not mention Rome, moreover, there are suggestions that the Arabs received an oblique sail from the Indian Ocean.
Well, I would not rely solely on our old men in this matter.
>> Such theories have been superseded by unequivocal depictions of lateen-rigged Mediterranean sailing vessels which pre-date the Arab invasion.
>> Further inquiries into the appearance of the lateen rig in the Indian Ocean and its gulfs show a complete reversal of earlier scholarly opinion on the direction of diffusion, now pointing to an introduction by Portuguese sailors in the wake of Vasco da Gama's arrival in India in 1500.
Those. until recently, in the west, it was also believed that oblique sails came from Indian Ocean... But new findings have changed the mind to the opposite. It's just that this change has not yet been reflected in our popular (and maybe special) editions.
>> one of the lost knowledge of Ancient Rome. And then this is another reason for the Middle Ages to develop this technology.
As I understand it, oblique sails did not disappear after the collapse of the empire, but their percentage has sharply decreased in the new conditions. In the same Mediterranean they used them. In the Baltic and Atlantic - straight lines. A straight sail is better than an oblique sail when sailing on coastal routes with favorable winds. V open ocean neither in antiquity nor in the Middle Ages did they stick in, because for this one oblique sails are not enough. We need navigation and ships with a large displacement. Well, the knowledge that there is something there, besides the end of the world)
On navigation, in principle, there are already articles, but here is a good article about the features of the construction big ships would not hurt. Frames, keels, stringers, midships ... Something tells me that assembling a ship with minimal use of nails is a hemorrhoid.
By the way, using windsurfs as an example was not very fair. These little critters can even fly)
http://www.zaosi.com/images/pod_sila.png
>> Aerodynamic quality 1.5 is close to "none". The Boeing 747 has an aerodynamic quality of 15.
Niht !! I require windsurfing with 7-10 quality and fitted wheels. Many-many. We will swim and fly and ride and conquer the world!
In one of the books I read about the creation by the character of a seaworthy ship with a sail of the "windrotor" type, the main advantage of which was the movement of the ship at a decent speed, even with a headwind, alternative "sails"
The popadants would have to run back into the past with oblique sails. For the Latin sail has been known since the 4th century BC, and the sprint sail has been known since the Roman era.
How many times was convinced that an absolutely correct thesis can be completely ruined by an incorrect wording.
Let me clarify.
The modern straight sail is quite suitable for tacking downwind. But this requires a large trained crew. Nowadays, such things are done only by training sailboats (eg "Kruzenshtern") to train cadets.
But with the Romans, the straight sail with the outside was completely different! Essentially just a rag on a stick. And in this case, setting it in the Latin (Arabic) manner allows you to dramatically increase the ability to walk at different angles to the wind. And the range of permissible wind force is expanding. That is, we have a sharp increase in efficiency at a minimum cost - the classic technology of a hit.
As for the keelless yacht, it sank :) Bernoulli, of course, is a hero, but without a centerboard, you will drift into the wind at a much higher speed.
I read about the arrangement of boats on rowing traction - damn it, a propulsion device would really give them a lot without these idiotic oars, at least based on rowing wheels with a bicycle drive. So many hemorrhoids! Synchronization schemes for multiple rows of oars are not much more complicated than a single drive.
I read about the construction of boats on rowing traction - damn it, a propulsion device would really give them a lot without these idiotic oars, at least based on rowing wheels with a bicycle drive. So many hemorrhoids! Synchronization schemes for multiple rows of oars are not much more complicated than a single drive.
Mneeee. Don't take your ancestors for idiots. The efficiency of a person on a paddle is much higher than that of a person on a bicycle drive. Row with the whole body, all muscles are involved.
I wanted to ask those who are in the subject. Why not immediately invent a Bermuda sail instead of a Latin one? It's not bad either. And it would be very nice to invent a centerboard.
>>> Why shouldn't the beggar immediately invent a Bermuda sail, instead of a Latin one?
The gaff flower IMHO is more interesting, its thrust on most courses is almost twice as high, and the center of windage is lower at the same time.
And among genoa or gennaker to put on acute courses ...
And if a stranger tries to make a Bermuda sail in the 3rd century BC, will it turn out worse than a haffle or Latin sail, or nothing at all? After all, the hitman could not read this site, and will try to make a structure familiar to him. It still seems to me that for a certain area the sails of Bermuda will work, although not as well as we would like. It is necessary that it at least surpass straight sails in its ability to go upwind.
About straight antique sails. Tough guys, namely the Phoenicians, pushed with straight classic sails and into the open ocean. In particular, Phoenician coins have been found in the Azores. And this is 1/3 of the way to America.
For example here in more detail. http://www.seapeace.ru/seafarers/pioneers/263.html There is generally a speech about visiting America by Phoenicians.
But, as I understand it, in a headwind, they relied on the oars, and the sail was removed.
In addition, with straight sail, you can sail the open sea to India from Africa. With the monsoon wind there, after half a year with the monsoon wind back.
Regarding the title topic:
Dear kraz, it seems like the truth did not understand that in addition to the point of application of force on the sail, a second point of application of force on the underwater part of the hull is needed, and the angle of the course to the wind directly depends on the ratio of the areas of the sail and the underwater part of the hull, precisely for a proportional increase in the side area underwater part and fin keels are used on modern yachts, and high longitudinal keels on sailing ships of past centuries. on lighter centerboard and slotted bots, for the same, creating an additional side area, centerboards and slotted holes are used, respectively. The ballast function of keels and fins' false keels (which, strictly speaking, are not keels), began to be used only with the advent of sports shipbuilding, before that - the keel, a purely power element of the hull and ... will be able to take no angle to the wind.
It was rightly noticed that the obstacle to the use of Bermuda sails on large ships was the excessive height of the masts. But not only this, the Bermuda sail is indeed more effective on sharp courses, but fatally not effective on full, in comparison with direct, gaff system or sprint, the most profitable and therefore the most demanded compromise, which also allows keeping the spar height within reasonable limits ... Therefore, gaff ships are still in use. He himself once outright overtook a larger Bermuda rig, a yacht, on a gaffer boat. The course was, of course, full to the wind, on a sharp course, of course the effect would have been the opposite.
But in general, the title article correctly reflects the main points of the properties of straight and oblique sail equipment, the details are adjusted with a file and a sledgehammer in place.
In addition to all of the above and the "ease" of introducing an oblique sail in antiquity, I would like to add that (for a ship that is not scanty in size), it needs a rudder at least with a tiller lever or a steering gear instead of steering oars (with long tacks of a headwind or crosswind, the ship heels heavily, therefore one oar is above the water and useless, and the other is under water and uncontrollable), as well as to make cardinal measurements in the ship's hull, which were made in the Middle Ages - a serious frame, high sides and a different length-to-width ratio. It is also desirable to protect the hull from diagonal twisting and strengthen / connect the hull plating not on dowels, as it was predominantly in antiquity, but on nails.
And if you do not make at least some of these hull improvements, the ship will simply fall apart sooner or later.
recently I read about Lorch - a Far Eastern and Indo-Chinese ship with a European hull, but with a Chinese sail, which became fucking popular after I got acquainted with European shipbuilding in those parts
if the better the European flat-bottomed junky body is clear
it is not clear why the Chinese sailing armament is better than the European one? what advantages does it have? if even the Europeans who settled in those parts often preferred exactly the Chinese sailing equipment?
> although the existence of the latter is like a legend.
Then until ten (decera): there is such a legend too.
Rey is finally masculine.
If the wind is not blowing exactly to the stern, then in no case should it blow perpendicular to the sail. Although the angle between the wind and the sail should be greater than between the wind and the traverse (the direction perpendicular to the course). But not perpendicular. Set it perpendicularly - always go ashore and never again go aboard the sailboats.
Because on a sailing ship such a miracle of Yudo is simply dangerous.
But what about the decera? There are generally 10. But... Are you even sure you were counting the rows of oars? Who has ever seen a multi-row galley? There may be different options. For example, oars can be positioned more often than rowers are seated. The rowers sit in two rows, not on top of each other, but farther and nearer from the side. And the oars simply have different lengths from the oarlocks to the inside of the hull. And alternate. If the rower in the second row is pushing the oar while the rower in the first row is pulling the paddle, the rower in the first row will get the paddle on his back. But if you manage to row such oars synchronously and in phase, then everything is in order. The question is how. But it will be easier to solve it not to confuse the wet part of the oars, which are located in two vertical rows. Because there is less difference in moment of inertia and water resistance. But this is also problematic. Or was it how many rowers were holding the same oar? Galleys also existed in the Russian Empire. How many rows of oars?
// the oars just have different lengths from the oarlocks to the inside of the hull.
It is impossible to row synchronously with such a set of oars.
In addition, with a longer than usual end of the oar inside the hull, the rower will be forced to run on the deck.
// Who ever saw a multi-row galley?
http://mtdata.ru/u29/photo0E22/20430584338-0/huge.jpeg
Anyone who starts to arrange scandals-intrigues-investigations about the impossibility of three-row triremes google "Trerema Olympia"
https://im0-tub-ru.yandex.net/i?id=cc319aec41ca57173ca209521b6a3633-l&n=13
Enthusiasts built it back in 1987 and swam normally. 7 knots for a 45 ton boat is not so bad.
Everything is filmed, described in the articles, there is a film, but all the same idiots crawl out who say that it is impossible to put the oars in three rows, they say heavy, etc.
