 | | Re: Uncertain Definition of a Ship Type...? —Tony Priestman
|
| | | On Sat, 6 May 2000, Bruce Schlickbernd (<Fu5MI1.M3F@lugnet.com>) wrote at 20:06:01 (...) I'm curious now. If a mast is aft of the rudder, isn't it in the sea? (25 years ago, 6-May-00, to lugnet.pirates)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Uncertain Definition of a Ship Type...? —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | (...) a (...) Not necessarily. While it isn't necessarily anything of a statement about real ships, take a look at the Skull's Eye Schooner. The mizzenmast is just about above the tail edge of the rudder. I looked through my ship books, and didn't (...) (25 years ago, 7-May-00, to lugnet.pirates)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Uncertain Definition of a Ship Type...? —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | (...) a (...) That entirely depends on where the rudder is in relation to the extreme above- waterline stern. If you have sufficient rear overhang, the rudder-post (which is what counts here) will be forward of that. I've always felt yawls look (...) (25 years ago, 7-May-00, to lugnet.pirates)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Uncertain Definition of a Ship Type...? —Tony Priestman
|
| | | | On Sun, 7 May 2000, Bruce Schlickbernd (<Fu64x8.n2H@lugnet.com>) wrote at 02:43:56 (...) Ah. Didn't think of that. Thanks. Given that the rudder was generally not very good for manoeuvring, having a sail as far back as possible increases the (...) (25 years ago, 7-May-00, to lugnet.pirates)
|
| | | | |
