Improved lateen sail. The lateen sail and the Sindhbad sailor The use of lateen sails on modern ships

May 3rd, 2013

Where is the Arabian Gulf located?
Recently, the Arabian monarchies, bursting with petrodollars and a sense of self-importance, like to use the phrase Arabian Gulf 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, in general, is not only Eastern European, but also, since ancient times, the Russian Plain.
This is, you know, a battle for geography, which is also immediately a battle for history.
Whatever you call the place, that’s how the descendants will perceive it later.
As long as we remember that the huge plain in the east of Europe is not only Eastern European, but also, first of all, the Russian Plain - the Russians cannot be defeated in their home.

It must be said that the situation with the Persian Gulf greatly offends the Persians, who are now also Iranians. It’s so offensive that the Persians register all sorts of things in their name on the Internet, or write lengthy articles in this Pediwiki of yours, citing all sorts of maps as examples and proving that never until the era of Saudi arrogance and free petrodollars was the Persian Gulf called the Arabian!
The Persian Gulf appears everywhere - on medieval maps, and on maps of modern times, and (oh, horror!) even on the map of the Saudi oil giant Saudi Aramco, released in 1952, when the Saudis were still nomads, and Ghawar was still large and filled with oil. , but not .

And, I must say, the Persians are right!
After all, their ancestors drove the proud Bedouins throughout the Arabian Peninsula, starting from the time of Darius I and ending with the arrival of modern European conquerors of modern times in the vastness of the Near and Middle East.
The timid Bedouins on their one-humped camels could never even think of conquering Persia until they came up with their own version of a monotheistic religion - this “weapon of mass memetic destruction.” We are, of course, talking about Islam.

“There is no god but Allah, and Magomed is his prophet.”
It was Islam that gave the Arabs a chance to defeat the Persians in their centuries-old struggle. Not for long, but in the bright and stormy period of the Arab Renaissance, which would later be called the Golden Age of Islam.

Although, it would be more accurate to call this time the time of the Islamic Agrarian Revolution and the era of the lateen sail.

Although this sail has nothing to do with Latin, Roman faith or Europe has absolutely no.
Europe, as often happened then, and before, and after, simply appropriated the name of the invention.
How this happened in history, in geography or in science.

A triangular sail on an oblique batten attached to a mast is not a European invention at all. It was invented in the Indian Ocean.
Near the place that in the Middle Ages was called the Arabian Gulf. Which is now called the Red Sea. Well, the “Latin sail” was originally, in the Middle Ages, called the “Arab sail”.
Like this.
The Europeans stole the sail from the Arabs, and before our eyes the Arabs are trying to steal the Persian Gulf from the Persians.
Thank God, so far everything is calm on the Russian Plain.
But our story is about a sail.

The principle of operation of a lateen sail is fundamentally different from the principle of operation of a straight sail, about which we had part of our story. It is installed not across, but almost 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 on an airplane wing. , when, due to a larger path along the convex part of the aircraft wing, the air there is forced to accelerate, which, according to Bernoulli’s law for moving air, creates a pressure difference and lift.
The main advantage of a lateen sail is that it provides less resistance to the movement of the vessel when working with wind that does not blow strictly along the bow-stern line.
This allows, if desired and needed, to use light winds more effectively and allows you to sail steeper to the wind than when using a straight sail.
So why did the dominance of the straight sail last so long?

Straight sails are much simpler than slanting sails and you don’t have to work hard to control them. A raised straight sail will work in both tailwinds and winds slightly different from tailwinds. A straight sail does not need to switch from tack to tack (change 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 hoisted and sailed (as long as the wind was blowing in the stern), but oblique sails constantly require the work of both the brain and the hands.

Therefore, sadly, the approach “row rowers, the sun is still high” in some ways closed the way for Greece and Rome to improve the straight sail.

At the moment, there is no evidence of the presence of Latin sailing weapons in the Mediterranean Sea until the end of the ninth century, that is, neither the Byzantines, nor especially the Italians knew the oblique “Latin” sail, and after almost two centuries had passed since the beginning of the operation of Arab ships in the Mediterranean, who were the first to show the “Arab sail” to the Europeans.

However, the real revolution in navigation occurred not when the oblique Arabian sail was finally solemnly installed on 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 traction, but at the same time it would be sufficient seaworthy to challenge the open ocean.

The creator of the European “throw to the West” was another Henry, this time of Portuguese origin.
The Portuguese prince-infant Henry the Navigator successfully “crossed” Spanish when and Arabic dhow, creating on their basis the famous caravel- the first ship with a combined sailing rig.

Hanseatic Kog

The Spanish kogi of that time - small merchant ships - were durable and quite seaworthy vessels, although their sailing weapons left much to be desired. They had one huge square sail, which allowed them to sail only with a fair wind. In fact, the European ship of the 15th century still followed the traditions of Greek and Roman “shipbuilding”, using the same approaches to creating ships.
Cog, with minor modifications, was used by Mediterranean ships, and 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 light-moving Arabian dhows, whose “Arabian” 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.

Arabic dhow

Therefore, Henry, when creating a new seaworthy vessel - a caravel, borrowed many important details from the Arabs, in particular, an oblique, now “Latin” sail, more developed than that of a koga, a keel and a hinged side rudder.

Portuguese caravel.

Europe's push to the West began in 1418, just 3 years after the Battle of Agincourt, during which another Henry, the Fifth, the future king of a united England and France, completely defeated the French knights and before his wonderful wedding with Catherine of Valois.

This event, so important for the further history of Europe, took place near an inconspicuous island off the coast of inhospitable Africa.
It was there, far from the Hundred Years' War that 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 seemingly truly “Latin” sails .
The colonization of Madeira, which, in essence, began in that very year 1418, can be called a turning point in the course of European history.
Zarku, a knight in the service of Prince Henry the Navigator, discovered this island, one might say, by chance.

It must be said that European sailors of the 15th century, unlike their Arab colleagues, who by that time had already sailed for several centuries right up to the shores of Malaysia and Indonesia, were terribly uneducated and superstitious. European would-be sailors were afraid of encountering anything unfamiliar outside of Europe: stories were passed down from generation to generation of sailors about mythical monsters living in the depths of the ocean and easily destroying ships, about the solar heat of the tropics burning ships, about the water beyond the equator becomes impossible to swim, boiling from the heat.

In December 1418, Zarco 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 strong storm began; a ship with two noble Portuguese on board lost its course and was driven by the wind to Porto Santo, a tiny island, which, as we now know, was only 60 miles northeast of Madeira. They named it that way (meaning the Holy Port) in gratitude for saving it from 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 next from tiny Porto Santo, one day at sunset Zarku saw on the horizon, where the sun was setting, some strange shadows that resembled the earth in outline. 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 he had dreamed of. Having reached an unknown island, which was much larger than Porto Santo, the sailors, lowering the 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 giving names to the wooded mountains, hills and valleys for fun, the gentlemen at the same time assigned the name to the island they discovered, which from now on became known as “Ilha da Madeira”, which translated from Portuguese means “Island overgrown with forest.” " After wandering a little around the new land and erecting a wooden cross on the shore in honor of its discovery, the Portuguese boarded their caravel and departed for their native land.

Thunderstorm in Madeira. It was probably this weather that brought Zarca and Teixeira here.

It must be said that neither that virgin forest of Madeira, nor the sea lions, nor many of the bird species of this uninhabited island have survived to this day.
The colonization of Madeira by the Portuguese began almost immediately after the discovery of the island of Zarco. In 1419, the Portuguese explorer João Gonçalves Jarco, arriving on the island after Zarco and Teixeira, was still amazed by the huge number of sea lions living in the beautiful bay, relatives of the monk seals, called “lobos” in Portuguese. Since then, the second city of the island in terms of its current size, but the first in terms of its foundation, has been 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 that grows here in large quantities, called “funshu” in Portuguese.

Sea lions, fish and vegetables became the first food of the Portuguese settlers in Madeira. However, the question immediately arose about the development of full-scale agriculture in Madeira. The settlers' first crop was wheat, which was in dire need of continental Portugal.
The evergreen lowland forests of Madeira were completely cut down for the purpose of growing grain. "Forested island" turned into "deserted island"
Now only small areas of evergreen forests have survived. If Madeira was more or less saved by the mountainous terrain of the island, then on the neighboring Canary Islands, which fell under the skating rink of Europeans a little earlier, the forests were reduced to almost zero.
Forests were cut down for firewood, building material and to free up land for agricultural needs on such a scale that, for example, on the island of Gran Canaria only 1% of the forest area remained, and on the relatively prosperous island of Tenerife this figure does not exceed 10%, and continues to decline to this day.
Predictably, this deforestation led to significant soil erosion and a sharp change in climate and a drop in wheat yields in both the Canaries and Madeira.

To avoid a crisis among the colonists, Henry the Navigator ordered the cultivation of sugar cane in Madeira to produce “sweet salt,” which was rare in Europe at that time and was therefore considered a seasoning.

But if in Madeira only trees, birds and sea lions were affected, then in other places the situation with colonization was by no means so calm.

Next to Madeira, a little closer to Africa, are the Canary Islands.

Back in the 12th century, Arab sailors reached the Canary Islands. French navigators visited the Canaries in 1334, but France did not go further than 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 “granted” the islands to the Spanish kingdom of Castile. We will see this devilish alliance of the Roman Church and European colonialism more than once in history.
"In the name of the Lord! In his name!"

The problem was that the Canaries, unlike Madeira, were a completely populated place.
Before Europeans arrived on the islands, they were inhabited by Guanche tribes. Their development, of course, was at the level of the Stone Age, but they, nevertheless, were very successful in cattle breeding and primitive agriculture. Animal skins were used as clothing. They knew how to mummify their leaders. The Gua Nche tribes even left behind the Guimar pyramids - an amazing monument of megalithic architecture of the Stone Age, built literally “brick by brick” from the meager stones of the Canaries.

In 1402, the French Jean de Bettencourt and Gadifer de La Salle, on behalf of the crown of Castile and Leon, began to seize the islands.

The tribes of Gran Canaria, out of kindness and ignorance, welcomed the Europeans (the king of Guarnardarfa even advocated an alliance), while the tribes inhabiting Tenerife tried to resist, fighting with stone-tipped arrows and slings. In 1404, the Castilian king Henry III proclaimed Jean de Betancourt king of the Canaries. Portugal, which also laid claim to 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 possession of the archipelago. On July 24, 1496, the last prince of the Guanches, Imenenchia, surrendered, who later, which is also very typical for Europeans, was killed by them in captivity.
On September 29, the winner Alonso de Lugo announced the complete subjugation of the Canary Islands.

They died fighting. Anaterv, one of the Guanche kings. We will never know what he really was like.

Now the Guanches do not exist.
According to the description of the colonialists, the island of Tenerife was inhabited tall, white-skinned, red-haired and blue-eyed people. The 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 communicate by whistling at a distance of up to 15 kilometers.

The Guanches have characteristic features of the Cro-Magnons, the oldest population of Europe. The disappeared race, to which the Guanches belonged, is 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 first records about the Guanches were made in 1150 by the Arab geographer Al-Idrisi in the book “Nuzhat al-mushtaq”. 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 rather long voyage, reached a certain island, “which seemed uninhabited to them, but cultivated fields were soon discovered on it.” Approaching the island, the sailors found themselves surrounded on all sides by people on barges, who took them ashore, “to a village whose inhabitants are in considerable 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.

The Guanches still pose many mysteries to researchers. After all, all that the “enlighteners” and “missionaries” reliably left us were their megaliths and several mummies of Guanche leaders. The number of mummies was originally believed to be in the thousands, but today only a few Guanche mummies survive, housed in several museum collections. The rest were immediately destroyed by the colonialists, along with the last

I am sure that 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 cure for abdominal pain. Later, this process was stopped for objective reasons - there were simply no more mummies.

However, if you think that the process of destroying the real history of the Canary Islands is a thing of the past, then you are deeply mistaken. In 1933, already in the enlightened twentieth century, the largest cemetery of Guanche mummies was discovered in the southern part of the island of Tenerife, containing from 60 to 74 mummies. However, after discovery it was immediately almost completely looted Apparently, “abdominal pain” and the accompanying diarrhea consumed Europe in both 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.

The history of the origin of the lateen (oblique) sail is lost in the depths of time. It appeared in the Mediterranean Sea among the Arabs, then it was borrowed by Europeans. But the Arabs also borrowed it, most likely from the Persians. Here we recall the famous Sinbad the Sailor, who, judging by 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 is definitely of Iranian origin. Thus, navigation in the Indian Ocean has its deep 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 sailed across the Atlantic Ocean. This article describes in detail the origin of the oblique sail.

"It is known that one of the distinctive features of a medieval galley was the presence of lateen sails. We will definitely talk about the emergence of lateen sails on galleys, but now I would like to say a few words about the history of the emergence of oblique, including lateen, sails in general. Who and when invented the lateen sail - unknown. Therefore, as usual in such cases, there is no shortage of hypotheses, sometimes mutually exclusive, colored by poorly hidden attempts to establish 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 lateen sail is fundamentally different from the principle of operation of a straight sail: it is installed not across, but almost 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 lifting force of an airplane wing is generated. lateen sail - it has less resistance to movement, is used more effectively in light winds and allows you to go steeper to the wind than when using a straight sail. So why did the dominance 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 went downstream, the spar was cut and the rowers took over. On the way back, there was a steady tailwind, which did not require tacking to follow the upstream. The simplicity in the design of straight sails and their control contributed to their long-term dominance on Egyptian and then other Mediterranean ships. A 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.

The most likely transition from a straight sail to a lateen sail is as follows. Using a square sail, sailors noticed that when the ship was not sailing exactly in the jibe, the efficiency of the sail could be increased by turning it so that it was perpendicular to the wind. If this technique is used when the vessel has a keel or a steering device (or better yet, both together), then the vessel's course relative to the wind can be chosen over a wider range, rather than simply moving along the direction of the wind.

If the wind direction is approaching the beam, i.e. the ship is sailing close to the backstay course, this technique begins to work worse, however, the drop in the driving force can be partially compensated if the windward luff of the sail is directed towards the wind. This method works well if the windward luff is pulled tight, which can be achieved by tilting the windward portion of the top yard (or gaff) down. Using a straight sail in this way is a direct path to the invention of the lateen sail, perhaps through the intermediate use of a quadrangular rack (lugger) sail (when a quadrangular sail is attached by the upper luff to the rake, with the latch and lower soft luff of the sail protruding in front of the mast). Campbell, in his study "The lateen sail in world history" (Journal of World History, Spring 1995), believes that the specific shape of the Indian Ocean lateen sail increases the plausibility of this hypothesis: the short windward luff is perhaps a remnant of the original luff of a straight sail. However, this remains only a hypothesis, not confirmed by material evidence. The development of oblique sails in the Pacific Ocean and Southeast 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 in the development of the lateen sail.

The most heated debate revolved around the question of whether the lateen sail is of Mediterranean origin or whether it originally appeared in the Indian Ocean and was brought to the Mediterranean by the Arabs. Supporters of the second version provide the following arguments in support of it. The lateen sail was universally known as the “Arab sail,” by borrowing which Western sailors significantly increased the efficiency of their fleet. Further, there is no evidence of the presence of Latin weapons in the Mediterranean until the end of the ninth century, i.e. after almost two centuries had passed since the beginning of the action 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 T.A. Shumovsky clearly resolves this issue. In his book “The Arabs and the Sea” (1964, p. 173) he writes:

“Brought by Arab sailors from the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea and becoming the property of Europe, the bow-stern triangular sail revolutionized European sailing. The transition from the primitive single-mast with a rectangular sail to three-masted ships with an Arabian triangle made it possible for a sailing ship to sail against the wind, that is, almost in. in any direction favorable to him, from where the technical possibility arose 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 lateen sail, since in the evolution of sailing weapons discussed above from straight to Latin, it is in the Indian Ocean that intermediate modifications of the sail are present. In the Mediterranean Sea, no sails were found that could be considered the predecessors of the Latin one. At the same time, R. Bowen believes that it would be wrong to attribute the invention of the lateen sail to the Arabs. He believes that the Arabs showed themselves to be seafarers too late to be considered the inventors of the lateen sail. According to this authoritative scientist, the Arabs adopted maritime knowledge from the Persians, along with a maritime vocabulary, principles of navigation, and, possibly, Latin sailing weapons. And then the Arabs moved the lateen sail to the Mediterranean Sea. This hypothesis is allegedly confirmed by the fact that the first images of lateen sails in Mediterranean fine art appeared in the ninth century. In this regard, it is appropriate to quote Van Doorninck's remark, quoted in A History of Seafaring Based on Underwater Archaeology, (ed. George F. Bass (London, 1972), p. 146) that manuscript illustrators, as a rule, worked with traditional stereotypical forms and rarely introduced innovations into their art. So triangular lateen sails may have appeared long before their images began to be used in illuminated manuscript texts. Consequently, this fact provides the basis for the statement only that lateen sails in the Mediterranean Sea appeared “no later than” in the 9th century. But the main difficulty in promoting this hypothesis is that, as Bowen stated in an earlier study, there is not a single evidence of the use of the lateen sail in the western Indian Ocean before the arrival of the Portuguese there. True, there were suggestions that the rack (luger) sail could have been brought to the western part of the Indian Ocean by Greek merchants trading with India during the era of Roman rule. And yet, despite the most careful scientific searches, not a single literary or pictorial evidence has been found of the types of sailing weapons used in the western Indian Ocean before the 15th century. Evidence from Arabic poetry of the 9th-10th centuries cited by J. Hourani to support the hypothesis that the Arabs used the lateen sail. do not stand up to any criticism. Poetic imagery compares a ship's sail in the distance to the fin of a whale or the fountain it produces. On this basis, J. Hourani concludes that this refers to a lateen sail rather 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 specific shape. This is rather a purely romantic image that does not give a clue to the shape of the sail. The surviving characteristics of the sails of Arab ships, which are cited by Ibn Majid (15th century), do not clarify the issue. He points out that the ratio of the windward luff to the leeward length is 10:13.5, i.e. the sail is almost straight, and it is more of a lugger than a lateen sail (Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean before the Coming of the Portuguese (London, 1971 ), p. 52.)"

We all know from the history of Ancient Rome about the existence of galleys, and galleys with many tiers of oars. The most popular was the trireme (three rows of oars), but there were also five (pentera), although the existence of the latter is like a legend. However, the galleys had masts and sails. But they were used auxiliary. What happened in subsequent centuries that displaced rowers and made the sail the main mover?

Boats with rowers have been used for many thousands of years. They were built back in Ancient Egypt, and Odysseus traveled on just such a rowing vessel. The Vikings built rowing longships, and the Russians built longships. They all had sails, but at some point such vessels remained only in the river fleet. And the sail is to blame for this.

The ancient rowing ships had straight sails. A crossbar (yardarm) was made on the mast and canvas was hung. It’s a good thing, the ancient Egyptians used it to its fullest. But the Egyptians were lucky - their winds predominantly blow from north to south - that is, clearly upstream of the Nile. Therefore, they sailed upward under a rectangular direct sail, and downward they were carried by the current of the river.

A straight sail is ideal if the wind is fair. It blocks a large flow and the thrust is quite considerable. However, tailwinds (jibes), no matter how much you wish for them, do not occur often. If the wind is slightly different from exactly astern, you can correct this by turning the yard so that the wind is perpendicular to the sail. Up to the side wind. It should also be taken into account that the ship will drift even if the bow is pointing exactly along 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 into the open sea, and resisting the wind with oars was often a bad idea. Therefore, the same Phoenician sailors were engaged only in coastal navigation (that is, while the coast was visible), and the problem, as we see, was not even the lack of a compass. Outings into the open sea were made only where constant trade winds blew.

However, somewhere around the 9th century, a revolution occurred in sailing. The oblique sail was invented. By whom and where is unknown. Either the Arabs invented it and brought it to India, or they invented it in India 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 lateen sail, the difference with a straight sail is small - the yard was simply turned exactly along the axis of the ship and the front end was lowered down.

However, the principle of operation itself has radically changed. When there is wind from the forward hemisphere (close-hauled), this sail operates on a principle close to a wing (this is exactly how they tried to build the wings of the first airplanes); moreover, now there are sports yachts that have a vertical wing instead of a sail. The wing may have a special profile and shape, but it 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 adding the forces acting on the sail in a headwind, the result will be a force pushing the ship forward. Now it is impossible to say what random experiment led to this, but it could have happened a thousand years earlier (or later).

The effect of the implementation was revolutionary. An oblique sail can go against the wind at an angle of about 20 degrees. Now only a storm could carry it out to the open sea, tearing the sails and breaking the mast. A serviceable ship could easily sail against the wind - on tacks, that is, in a zigzag.

However, if the victim decides to introduce an oblique sail, then the lateen sail can only be used as a transitional stage. Of course, its implementation is extremely cheap, it is carried out with minimal adjustments to the spar and rigging. The lateen sail, although rarely, is still used today - on small boats. However, the lateen sail is not so efficient and convenient. A lugger sail will be more efficient. There are also a sprint sail, a gaff sail, a Lyngström sail... Nowadays the most popular on yachts is the Bermuda oblique sail; on small ships it can be operated by one person - he can change tacks simply by turning the steering wheel.

There is a lot to say to a newbie in maritime affairs, but the oblique sail is one of the main inventions that must be introduced without fail.

91 comments Latin sail

>> when adding the forces acting on the sail in a headwind, the result will be a force pushing the ship forward, it is impossible

If we mean only wind forces, then this is not true (perhaps the matter is not entirely clear in the formulation). The wind creates a force directed in the same direction as the wind due to the force of friction. Due to the “reflection” of the wind and Newton’s third law, a force is created perpendicular to the plane of the sail. The wing profile allows the second component to be maximized. But it is easy to see that this allows you to create a force that pulls the ship PERPENDICULAR to the wind, and not against it. To go against the wind, you need to use the resistance of the water. The narrow hull of the vessel provides great resistance to the normal, perpendicular thrust component and little resistance to the tangential component. This allows you to slightly “turn” the thrust vector towards the wind. This is why sailing boats have a keel, often retractable. The keel helps to “catch” the water and rotate the thrust vector. If a sailor puts a slanting sail on a ship whose hull does not sufficiently resist sideways movement, he will find that it is impossible to sail against the wind.

You can sail against the wind with a regular sail. It’s just that an oblique sail in this mode works much more efficiently.

• This is all wrong.

  Friction has nothing to do with it at all. The friction force in this case can only heat up the surface against which the air rubs. But we don’t have a supersonic plane.
  For the rest, you described how a straight sail works. And there is no way he can cope with the wind from the front hemisphere.
  And I even posted a picture of how a slanting sail works - pay attention.
  There really is a different principle.

  About the fact that the keel helps to “catch onto the water” is complete nonsense.
  
  And in general, the only thing on ships that “clings to the water” is the hydrofoil, but it is too rare.

  • «
    The keel is so that you can put the mast higher and protect yourself from capsizing in strong winds; there is no talk of any “engagement.”
    On dinghies, if you don’t lower the centerboard, it doesn’t heel too much on the tack, but it drifts into the wind (drifts, essentially) in a completely creepy way.

    >The fact that the keel helps to “catch onto the water” is complete nonsense.
    The keel is so that you can put the mast higher and protect yourself from capsizing in strong winds; there is no talk of any “engagement”.

    This is nonsense. Keel ballast is used for this purpose, but the centerboard (retractable keel) usually does not have ballast. So what, the daggerboard doesn’t make sense? Why do they do it? The keel plate itself is needed precisely and only to create thrust, using multidirectional resistance to the movement of the ship relative to the air and relative to the water. In common parlance, “to catch on to the water.” That is why the keel has such a tuyere. But the correct hull already “clings” to the water on its side, since its resistance when moving sideways is greater than forward. Therefore, a keel is not required. But yes, it's better with a keel. And yes, including because ballast can also be placed at its end, and keel ballast is more efficient than usual.

    >And in general, the only thing on ships that “clings to the water” is the hydrofoil, but it is too rare.

    1. It doesn’t exist on ships. It occurs on courts.
    2. There is also a propeller and a winged propeller, a steering wheel. All of the above have a wing profile. The only difference is that for the steering wheel this profile is symmetrical, but for the propellers (both the wing and the propeller) it is not the profile of the entire propeller, but of each individual blade.
    3. The keel also has the same profile. Again symmetrical.

    The fact that at such speeds asymmetric profiles are more effective in creating lateral force does not change the essence. In addition, the task is to create a force that prevents drift, and not a force perpendicular to the course. That's why

    4. For water below the waterline Not only the movers cling and wing.

>> About the fact that the keel helps to “catch onto the water” - this is complete nonsense.

It is very easy to demonstrate that “reliance” on water exists. If 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, 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 a glider flies at a speed of 100 km/h relative to the ground 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!)

A sail can create a force that operates at an angle to the wind. But this angle will always be acute. This is also extremely easy to prove. See the law of conservation of momentum.

>> I kindly ask you to take an interest first and then write, ok?

I advise you to type “sail against wind keel” into Google, read and think. Fine?

So can we link to the source with your explanation, or are we going to throw around pictures like they did? Mine please:
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/sailing.html
http://irmest.narod.ru/zflash/flafiz04.htm

• That is, you think that the component of force P, designated as T, does not exist??? 😀
  It’s terrible how they swim in real life...

  >>No. Explain
  The ship is on the media section, the airship is not.
  Putting a sail on an airship is like putting a water sail on a submarine. It will not move faster, because it is still inside the flow. And the difference in the speed of the balloon and the air flow is zero.

  >>This is a mechanical model, not a purely sailing model

  What does mechanical mean? Is it on wheels??? It is an almost round sailboat without any keel. And the sail is oblique - it can sail up to 30 degrees against the wind. If it weren’t so clumsy, it would be 20 degrees.

  >>
  They also cannot explain Ohm’s law, although electrons seem to flow there too. And what? Are you surprised that any law has limits of application?

  >>Mine please:

  >They cannot explain all the lift or lift when flying upside down.

  Upside down is just possible, it is impossible to explain the lifting force during flight using Bernouli's law down head.

  >Uh-huh. Thrust vector P and wind vector C. Angle OBSTLUDE. Those. the thrust is not directed towards the wind. In your own picture.

  So sharp or dull? You will decide.

  Without anisotropy of the hydrodynamic resistance of the hull and/or keel, there will be no angle at all.

>> So you think that the component of force P, designated as T, does not exist??? 😀
>> It’s terrible how they swim in real life...

Finally, it started slowly. So are we talking about the components or the entire thrust of the sail? Thrust can be broken down into components in an infinite number of ways.

And please clarify, where does the second component D go? Just don't attract 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 sail up to 30 degrees against the wind. If it weren’t so clumsy, it would be 20 degrees.

The blades on the sides are mechanical. In my opinion, this is a toy model to demonstrate the conversion of wave energy into the swing of oars. A link about sailing this thing against the wind, please.

Summary of these articles: when ships move on rowing propulsion, their bottom is made flat. This improves maneuverability and makes it easier to land on shore. As soon as the role of sails increases, the hull shape becomes V-shaped for better hydrodynamic quality. The guy who put a slanting sail on a longship will have his head blown off for lousy results.

And further. The English wiki says that since the 6th century AD. most ships from the Mediterranean Sea carried just such sails. And it was familiar to the Romans (that’s why it’s Latin).

>> Having carried out a thought experiment, it is impossible to assume that when adding the forces acting on the sail in a headwind, the result will be a force pushing the ship forward.

Again. One sail can only pull sideways from the wind. Not towards. The force that pulls forward is formed by the addition of the forces acting on the sail and on the hull.

• >>So the figure of 30 degrees upwind in relation to THIS boat came from your imagination

  Yes, in this case I just pretended, I repent 😀
  There are two doors on the sides of the boat, in theory it should be enough for stabilization, especially since the article emphasizes that “all this is reminiscent of working on a windsurfer, only instead of a standing position, it’s sitting.” But of course, I didn’t swim on this.

  >>So where does component D go?

  And the ship is blown away. It just blows away not critically, because water is 800 times denser. And I’ll say more - it demolishes any ship, even one whose balancing keel goes three meters under the water. Yes, it even blows away armored battleships, which don’t even have sails - only in a very homeopathic way.

  And in order to minimize and compensate for this drift, you need a fixed steering wheel. 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 longship? There, the hull shape is just semicircular and the structural 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 install an oblique sail on a longship. There, firstly, there is a removable mast, and secondly, a method of holding the mast, which greatly interferes with the lateen sail. Well, the rigging needs to be changed and a straight rudder installed.
  It is also possible that, due to the fact that the efficiency of the oblique sail is lower, it must be made larger, but the mast cannot be enlarged - the longship will capsize (this is the effect of a shallow draft, and not what you assume).
  My IMHO is that they didn’t put it on the longship, not because it was ineffective, but because it was necessary to change the design itself.
  That is, it is suitable as a technology demonstrator, but not for commercial use.
  Absolutely the same situation with the Turbinia, where the steam turbine occupied all the space in the body and had no use except for demonstration.

  >>The Vikings were not idiots when they did not set slanting sails, which were well known in their time.

  But this is pure racing. The heyday of Viking raids was in the 6th-8th centuries, 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 to see if this was related. It is possible that the ships with oblique sails that appeared simply began to move away from the longships into 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 can confirm or refute this.
  There could be many reasons for the end of Viking raids - from the construction of castles, which were impossible to take on the move, to the side of the longship being too low, which made it possible to shoot through its entire contents from a higher ship.

  >>Read any professional article:

  Didn’t it bother you that the keel in the article is a structural keel, and not a balancer or ballast one? 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 hull is enough to sail against the wind. Excellent confirmation of my words about a catamaran without a keel!

  However, thank you very much for the article - it seemed to me that it was impossible to sail with a slanting sail without a straight rudder, but here is proof of the opposite. Apparently, I need to look for more material for the 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 send it to me? Otherwise, it’s very small, it’s difficult for me to read, but the pictures are very interesting - they have a slanting sail drawn in the area of ​​the 8th century.

  Let me summarize, okay?

  There are design features that can be explained by various reasons. And the question “why” falls apart into multiple or two answers, which still contradict each other. I'm talking about the keel. About the structural, balancing and ballast keel. And about the mast. And about the rigging. And this can be said about a lot of things. Moreover, on different ships these design features converge into opposite results - a pleasure yacht without a keel will capsize, but a catamaran, as you showed, floats perfectly against the wind anyway. I prefer not to touch such things (unless you 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 occurred between direct and Latin and the properties of the system changed radically. These are the points I try to describe.

  Addition: I found this miracle http://indigenousboats.blogspot.com/2011/08/raft-wackos-and-quackos.html It always seemed to me that with such masts it is impossible to set a slanting sail...

  • “And, by the way, in the picture there is neither a keel nor even a straight rudder.” The rudder is used only to change course, and there rectilinear movement is considered. And in addition to the keel, the anisotropy of hydrodynamic resistance is ensured by the contours of the hull itself, so the presence of a keel is not fundamental. The keel and hull still work together. The sail is fundamentally different from the superstructure.

>> 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 there are 10 (!) links to sources. About “from the 6th century AD. most ships from the Mediterranean carried just such sails” 4 more. What is the reference base of your sources?

>> drakkar... it will be suitable as a technology demonstrator

I am not a sailor or a yachtsman. But I think that if these comrades hear about longships running briskly against the wind, then these will be new “mounted crossbowmen.”

>> About the last article - could you upload it as a pdf and send it to me? Otherwise, it’s very small, it’s difficult for me to read, but the pictures are very interesting - they have a slanting sail drawn in 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 occurred between direct and 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 ones were doing great in the 19th century (look at windjammers), I think this is more like the coexistence of bows and crossbows than a new generation of technology pushing aside the old (as the same bows practically replaced throwing spears).

As a technician, the description of the physics of tacking in the article makes me allergic. That's why I broke up)

• >>About the invention of the oblique sail in ancient Rome in the English wiki 10(!) links to sources

  I looked, it’s really interesting, it looks like the story with the lateen sail may turn out to be much more dramatic, like with cats.
  This is one of the lost knowledge of Ancient Rome. And then this is another reason for a person who finds himself in the Middle Ages to develop this technology.
  And you shouldn’t write “these sails were invented by the Romans,” because they also invented the ball bearing, but no one saw it until the 18th century. And the population of Rome exceeded a million people and we had to wait almost two millennia for the next million-plus city.

  I relied on domestic sources, but they don’t mention Rome; moreover, there are suggestions that the Arabs received a slanting sail from the Indian Ocean.

  >>Given that these sails were invented by the Romans, and straight ones were doing just fine in the 19th century (look at windjammers) I think this is more like the coexistence of bows and crossbows than a new generation of technology

  Windjammers without There have never been slanting sails! Let the area of ​​their straight lines noticeably exceed the area of ​​oblique ones, but starting from the 12th century ships without no slanting sails were built. Even on small caravels, whose main ones were straight sails, there were enough oblique sails. Yes, at first the “caravel” was only with obliques, oddly enough.

  That is, I repeat it probably for the eighth time - only with straight sails it is impossible to sail into the open sea.
  And the whole point of an oblique sail is that it allows you to return. If this is not a revolution, then I don’t know what a revolution is.

  >>As a techie, the description of the physics of tacking in the article makes me allergic.

  As a technician, I did not describe tacking in the article, but only mentioned it. Re-read if necessary.
  Tacking needs to be described separately and extensively.
  And, by the way, the types of oblique sails also need to be separated - there are five main ones.
  This article is an introduction to using sails.

  Am I the only one who saw a straight sail on a longship and couldn’t tell its bow from its stern?

>> I was basing it on domestic sources, but they don’t mention Rome, moreover, there are suggestions that the Arabs received a slanting sail from the Indian Ocean.

Well, I wouldn't rely solely on our old guys 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, the West also believed that slanting sails came from the Indian Ocean. But new discoveries have changed the opinion to the opposite. It’s just that this change has not yet been reflected in our popular (and maybe special) publications.

>> one of the lost knowledge of ancient Rome. And then this is another reason for a person who finds himself in the Middle Ages to develop this technology

As I understand it, slanting sails did not disappear after the collapse of the empire, their percentage simply decreased sharply in the new conditions. They were used in the same Mediterranean Sea. In the Baltic and Atlantic - direct. A straight sail is better than a slanted one when sailing along coastal routes with tailwinds. Neither in antiquity nor in the Middle Ages did they venture into the open ocean, since oblique sails alone were not enough for this. We need navigation and ships with large displacement. Well, the knowledge that there is something there other than the end of the world)

In principle, there are already articles on navigation, but a good article about the features of building large 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 creatures can even fly)
http://www.zaosi.com/images/pod_sila.png

• >>It’s just that this change has not yet been reflected in our popular (and maybe special) publications.

  Well, or I haven't looked for a long time. The article needs to be edited.

  >>oblique sails did not disappear after the collapse of the empire, their percentage simply decreased 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 not for the Arabs, they would have reinvented it.
  And even the Arabs didn’t use it here. It is possible that they were reinvented.

  >>Need navigation and ships with large displacement

  Just displacement is the last thing you need.
  The average Roman trireme was around 45 meters (and there were 80 meters), and quadriremes and quinqueremes swam, they were even fatter.
  Flyagman Columbus "Santa Maria" - up to 25 meters.
  And, by the way, those same longships never went to America. The knorrs walked - compared to the longships, they were pelvises.

  And the Romans were quite good at 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 case). 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 here - there was no need, they could cope with their provinces.
  And there weren’t any suitable people (I’ll probably post an article on why it was Europe that began the era of geographical discoveries).
  In this situation, it will be a little difficult to introduce new things to the newcomer...

  >> These little creatures can even fly

  Aerodynamic quality 1.5 is close to “none”. The Boeing 747 has a lift-to-drag ratio of 15.
  Well, then - am I wasting my time about another principle of a slanting sail in vain? 😀
  And in general - http://science.compulenta.ru/722131/
  Particularly interesting: “theoretically, the design of this single-seater sailboat allows sailing at three times the wind speed.”

>> Aerodynamic quality 1.5 is close to “none”. The Boeing 747 has a lift-to-drag ratio of 15.

Nicht!! I require windsurfing with quality 7-10 and attached wheels. Lots and lots. We will swim and fly and ride and conquer the world!

• Did you look at the link? There, an oblique sail allows you to move three times faster than the speed of the wind. This is not available with direct.
  And with 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 are asking for an article about encryption...

In one of the books I read about the character’s creation of a seaworthy vessel with a “windrotor” type sail, the main advantage of which was the movement of the vessel at a decent speed, even with a headwind, alternative “sails”

• The mechanics there are extremely complex; in addition, they require a “gearbox” that can handle very high torques. Everything is so complicated that it would almost be easier to make the windrots spin the generators and put electric motors on the propellers.

  How much will it cost just to make brake devices for the rotors! What will happen during a storm? After all, you can’t lose your move - he’ll turn sideways towards 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.

The victim would have to run far into the past with slanting sails. For the lateen sail has been known since about the 4th century BC, and the sprint sail has been known since the Roman era.

How many times have I been convinced that an absolutely correct thesis can be completely ruined by incorrect formulation.
Let me clarify.

A modern straight sail makes it quite possible to tack into the wind. But this requires a large, trained crew. Nowadays, only training sailing ships (for example, Kruzenshtern) do such things to train cadets.
But the Romans had a straight sail with an external one that was completely different! Essentially just a rag on a stick. And in this case, installing 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 with a minimum of costs - a classic hit-or-miss technology.
And about the keelless yacht - I smiled :) Bernoulli, of course, is a hero, but without a centerboard you will drift into the wind at a much higher speed.

• >>And about the keelless yacht - I smiled

  What kind of keel does the Kruzenshtern have? At the Cutty Sark? Yes, at Columbus's caravel after all!
  A 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 in the wind, but all normal ships make do with displacement.

  What I mean is that the keel is not a prerequisite.

I read about the construction of oar-powered boats - damn, a propulsion system would really give them a lot without these idiotic oars, at least based on paddle wheels with a bicycle drive. So many hemorrhoids! The synchronization schemes for the operation of numerous rows of oars are not much more complicated than a single drive.

• The problem is that, as a rule, slaves or convicts sat on the oars. And for them, if the device doesn’t work, then it’s for the better. I wouldn’t be surprised if they broke the oars, and I personally wonder how many minutes will it take them to break the pedal drive?

  • Heh, that’s not the situation - the person responsible for the breakdown is immediately visible, and after the demonstrative execution of the saboteur and the flogging half to death of everyone who could see and remain silent... they will be cared for and cherished, after all.

    • What are you saying! Why then were slaves given only the crudest tools and slave power was a limiting factor in the development of technology?
      You underestimate human ingenuity!

      • What are you saying! 🙂 Regarding the “deterrent factor” and “crude instruments” - this, you know, is 90% an ideological cliche. The closest example is the penitentiary system of the 20th century. And production, and sharashkas...

        • Sure sure. And the slogans “catch up and overtake.” And the actual loss in the Cold War was simply because the economy couldn’t handle it (and the sharazhki were abandoned earlier as unproductive).

I read about the construction of oar-powered boats - damn, a propulsion system would really give them a lot without these idiotic oars, at least based on paddle wheels with a bicycle drive. So many hemorrhoids! The synchronization schemes for the operation of numerous rows of oars are not much more complicated than a single drive.

Meeeee. Don't take your ancestors for idiots. The efficiency of a person on an oar is much greater 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 know. Why shouldn’t a stranger immediately invent a Bermuda sail, instead of a Latin one? It's not bad either. And it wouldn’t be a bad idea to invent a daggerboard.

• Burmudas have insane requirements for the strength of canvas and need a completely disproportionate mast. Without synthetic fiber and a duralumin profile, IMHO there will be no advantage over a gaff profile. No elongation, no airtightness, no clean leading edge can be achieved. In old Soviet magazines (KiYa, YuT) there are technologies for gluing a mast profile from wood, but how much work it is, and how it will be operated without epoxy - I have no positive thoughts.
  By the way, I was looking for the “original” design of Bermuda weapons (including on this resource). The one attributed to the “Bermudian fishermen”. So what do you think? Have not found. But on English-language websites of used sailing boats, ALL serial fishing sailboats come with either a gaff or a lugger rig. For example: http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives/skanner%2024/skanner-24.htm
  Those. Bermuda weapons are duralumin and dacron. Not earlier.

  • Burmuday has insane requirements for the strength of the canvas and the mast needed is completely disproportionate.

    In general, it should be noted that the ideal design of a landing sail is a Chinese junk. A sail can be made from any shit, even grass. At the same time, the sail can be controlled with a very minimal command, and it can be retracted in a matter of seconds, simply sliding along the mast (which is very important in case of sudden wind).

>>>Why doesn’t a stranger immediately invent a Bermuda sail, instead of a Latin sail?

The gaff flower is IMHO more interesting, its thrust on most courses is almost twice as high, and the center of sail is lower at the same time.

And in the middle, put a genoa or gennaker on sharp courses...

And if someone tries to make a Bermuda sail in the 3rd century BC, will it turn out worse than a gaff or Latin sail, or will it not work out at all? After all, the stranger might not have read this site, and will try to make a design that is familiar to him. It still seems to me that with a certain sail area the bermuda will work, although not as well as I would like. It must at least be superior to straight sails in its ability to sail against the wind.

• It will turn out to be SMALLER and MORE EXPENSIVE than a gaff, rake or Latin one.
  From the strip of flax that can be used for the straight sail of a hexacontera, you can make a Bermuda sail for a 12-meter yacht. For the Bermuda sail is a wing with a fair amount of elongation. And a straight line has a width greater than its height.
  To obtain good aerodynamics, the leading edge of the Bermuda sail should be as tight as possible. Those. and without wind loads there is enough stress in the sail. And a cable embedded in the edge will not completely solve the problem. Those. Vikings with woolen fabric and Polynesians with wicker 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 installed on steam yachts and even seaplanes http://strangernn.livejournal.com/977766.html. But only as an AUXILIARY mover. But where the sail is the MAIN mover, it was entirely gaff weapons. From Blue Nose to Thomas Lawson. On the same topic is the current history of the already mentioned Scanner. Even with Dacron, gaff sails are more durable than Bermuda sails. Yachtsmen don’t give a fuck, but the same fishermen don’t.
  There is indeed a variant 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 hexacontera. if speed and maneuverability are not important. it will still be larger than that of the heavy and expensive ‘hexacontera’.
    But wasn’t it in order to make control easier and reduce the load on the winches on windjammers that 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 them. For me, the height of the masts in them does not correlate with my ideas about the technologies available to fishermen. Masts with such a height-to-diameter ratio must be glued from profiled boards of a length commensurate with the hull. I believe in the British advice note (by the way, the Baltimore gaff clipper schooner has ordinary composite masts. Two). I don’t believe it for a fishing boat.
      Plus, the first engraving shows the scheme for attaching the leading edge of the sail to the mast - the slack line. Those. the gap is the same as for the gaff one. With corresponding consequences for aerodynamics. Those. if anything remains, it is only the ease of controlling the sail with one hand. And then only at the stage of setting the sail. In the second picture, nothing is clear. the upper corner of the sail is above the point where the shrouds are attached.

About straight antique sails. Cool guys, namely the Phoenicians, ventured into the open ocean with straight classic sails. In particular, Phoenician coins were found in the Azores. And this is 1/3 of the way to America.
For example, more details here. http://www.seapeace.ru/seafarers/pioneers/263.html There is generally talk about the Phoenicians visiting America.
But, as I understand it, when there was a headwind, they relied on the oars and removed the sail.

In addition, with a straight sail you can sail the open sea to India from Africa. With the monsoon wind there, half a year later with the monsoon wind back.

Regarding the title topic:
Dear kraz, it seems that I really didn’t understand that in addition to the point of application of force on the sail, a second point of application of force is needed on the underwater part of the hull, and the angle of course to the wind directly depends on the ratio of the areas of the sail and the underwater part of the hull, precisely for the proportional increase in the lateral area underwater part and fin keels are used on modern yachts, and high longitudinal keels on sailboats of past centuries. on lighter daggerboards and daggerboards, for the same purpose, to create additional lateral area, daggerboards and daggerboards are used, respectively. The ballast function of keels and fin 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 ... the creator of a side support for the possibility of tacking against the wind, without which any sail system would not work will be able to take any angle to the wind.

It was correctly noted that an 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 really more effective on sharp courses, but fatally ineffective on full courses, in comparison with the straight one, the gaff system or the sprint system is the most profitable and therefore the most in demand, a compromise that also allows you to keep the height of the spar within reasonable limits . That's why gaff ships still sail today. I myself once outright outran a larger Bermuda-rigged yacht on a gaff 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 sailing 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 of not minuscule size) it requires a rudder with at least a tiller lever or a steering mechanism instead of steering oars (with long tacks of a headwind or side wind, the ship heels strongly, so one oar is above the water and useless, and the other is under water and uncontrollable), as well as introducing fundamental measurements into the hull of the vessel, which were made in the Middle Ages - a serious frame, high sides and a different length-width ratio. It is also desirable to protect the hull from diagonal twisting and strengthen/connect the hull plating not with dowels, as was predominantly the case in antiquity, but with nails.
And if you don’t make at least some of these hull improvements, the ship will simply fall apart sooner or later.

I recently read about Lorch - a Far Eastern and Indo-Chinese ship with a European hull, but with a Chinese sail, which became incredibly popular after people in those parts became familiar with European shipbuilding

if the better the European hull of a flat-bottomed junk is clear

It’s not clear why Chinese sailing weapons are better than European ones? what advantages does it have? even if the Europeans who settled in those parts often preferred Chinese sailing weapons?

• Firstly, the team. In the Chinese port you will not find specialists in working with European sails, but there are plenty of experienced sailors sailing on junks there. And the team is constantly updated material - sailors die, get sick, run away, etc.
  Secondly, the price. Good canvas in China is an imported material, and therefore expensive. Local materials for sails can be found not only in the port, but in every village. And rigging and sails are a CONSTANT consumable. Those. It is more profitable for any ship owner to switch to local, cheap consumables, rather than look for imports from Europe.
  However, the junk sail is highly praised for its maneuverability and controllability, as well as for the fact that it is easy to repair. For a European sail, a rupture is a complete loss of functionality. For a junk, it’s a minor nuisance that can be easily repaired with almost no loss of movement.

  It’s not clear why Chinese sailing weapons are better than European ones? what advantages does it have? even if the Europeans who settled in those parts often preferred Chinese sailing weapons?

  Yes, there are solid advantages, with the exception of a few points:

  1. Image. Do what the narrow-eyed savages do? You will not sell this in Europe under any circumstances.
  2. The Chinese sail is slightly less efficient than European sails. The difference is not an order of magnitude, but it is there. In a battle between sailboats it can be critical.
  3. The mast is required to be much thicker and stronger, because it does not have standing rigging that transfers force from the sails to the hull. Since it stands on its own, it requires not only its own strength, but also a powerful attachment to the keel. However, people have calculated that the weight of a regular mast + standing rigging is greater than the weight of a durable 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 effort to control. We pull the halyard and the sail rises. We release the halyard and the sail furls. ALL!!! In the event of a sudden squall (and this happens), the sail is retracted 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 control the entire vessel without leaving the helm.
  3. A sail can be made from any shit; the Chinese wove sails from some kind of grass. A large panel of Bermuda sail is beyond the realm of fantasy if you do not have a serious weaving business.
  4. The rigging is two orders of magnitude simpler; you don’t need a large amount of precious hemp. There is no need to resin it all, knit it, etc.

  If you start from scratch (well, something like Ancient Rome), then a Chinese sail will fit perfectly. Since the 13-14th century, this idea has been known to everyone and is not used due to the above disadvantages. Sailors are an incredibly conservative people, and changes have always come very slowly, and then there is also the issue of image...

>although the existence of the latter is like a legend.

Then before ten (decer): there is such and such a legend.

Rey is finally masculine.

If the wind does not blow exactly astern, then under no circumstances 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 beam (the direction perpendicular to the course). But not perpendicular. Put it perpendicularly - go ashore forever and never climb aboard sailboats again.

Because on a sailboat such a miracle is simply dangerous.

What about dezera? There are generally 10. But. Are you even sure that you were counting the rows of oars? Who has ever seen a multi-row galley? There may be different options. For example, the oars may be positioned more frequently than the rowers are seated. The rowers sit in two rows not on top of each other, but further and closer from the side. And the oars simply have different lengths from the oarlocks to the inside of the hull. And they alternate. If the rower in the second row pushes the oar while the rower in the first row pulls the oar, the rower in the first row will get hit on the back with the oar. 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 without tangling the wet part of the oars, located in two vertical rows. Because there is less difference in the moment of inertia and resistance of water. But this is also problematic. Or maybe they counted how many rowers were holding the same oar? Galleys also existed in the Russian Empire. How many rows of oars?

• That is, it's easier than not getting the wet part tangled. Ochepyatka.

//the oars simply 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, if the end of the oar is longer than usual inside the hull, the rower will be forced to run around the deck.

// Who has ever seen a multi-row galley?

http://mtdata.ru/u29/photo0E22/20430584338-0/huge.jpeg
For everyone who begins to create scandals, intrigues, investigations about the impossibility of three-row triremes, google “treme Olympia”
https://im0-tub-ru.yandex.net/i?id=cc319aec41ca57173ca209521b6a3633-l&n=13
Enthusiasts built it back in 1987 and sailed normally. 7 knots for a 45-ton ship is not so bad.
Everything is filmed, described in articles, there is a film, but idiots still come out and say that it is impossible to put the oars in three rows, they say they will be heavy, etc.

• Is it possible to have a set of oars of different lengths on the outside of the hull? This is actually more complicated. But if the bottom row is raised and the top row is lowered, the oars will collide. And asynchrony eliminates out-of-phase.

  “In addition, with a longer than usual end of the oar inside the hull, the rower will be forced to run around the deck.” No. He won't run. It's just that his oar will turn at a smaller angle. Accordingly, his strokes are shorter. But if you get creative, it can be implemented. Another thing is that it will turn out to be a sea circus instead of a mass ship.

  I'm actually a candidate of science. And nowhere did he claim that this was absolutely not feasible. Unlike some. But enthusiasts did not build a fleet. Let me give you a link to a hydrofoil pedal submarine and say that this is the Raketa boat? What was considered when determining the class of a ship?? That was the question. And not what is the maximum number of rows of oars.

  And the problem is not the weight of the oars. The problem is the moment of inertia, or more precisely, that this moment is different for different rows of oars.

• not really.
  They sailed a couple of miles at 9 knot speed. And 7 knots took quite a long time to do.
  And I advise you to look at the photos I provided :)
  They are especially good together with the phrase “with modern men on the oars”, there are very different guys on the oars.

However, there is evidence of the use of sails in land transport - for example, the sail was widely used to create auxiliary motive power on carts in China, it also drives wheeled and ice buera.

The simplest sail is a piece of material (see. canvas). Larger sails are sewn from several pieces. Before stitching, the panels are shaped in such a way that the finished sail, installed in its place and filled with wind, has a well-streamlined convex-concave shape, resembling a bird’s wing in cross-section, and develops the greatest useful force.

Synthetic fabrics are used to make modern sails. In some cases (for example, for making sails for windsurfers) not fabric is used, but a durable film. There are also more complex and expensive sail manufacturing technologies, in which the entire sail is made not from pieces of fabric or film, but from high-strength synthetic threads placed between two layers of film along the lines of action on the sail of the largest loads.

There are also structures that are completely different from an ordinary sail, representing a vertically placed wing and using the power of the wind for the same purposes as a sail. Such designs are sometimes installed, for example, on sports boats(also, by the way, quite different from ordinary boats familiar to most) in order to achieve records speed on water. Having very little in common with a stretched piece of material, these wings are nevertheless called, due to their inertia, either a “rigid sail” or a “wing sail”.

History of the sail

People learned to use a sail about 5.5 thousand years ago. Judging by the surviving drawings and the results of excavations, the Egyptians were the first to use the sail. [ ]

Types of sails

Straight sails

Straight sails- sails that are placed across vessel and attached to rays, rising to masts And topmasts. They look like an isosceles trapezoid. The straight sail is controlled by turning Rhea braces And sheets in the horizontal plane. On sharp tacks, the windward luff of a straight sail is moved to the wind using a special tackle called spruit.

Large sailing ships are armed with straight sails: ships , barges , barquentines , brigs And brigantines. Straight sails became widespread due to the ability to obtain huge sailing areas using a combination of small sails. No person will be able to cope with a sail whose area exceeds a certain limit (approximately 5-8 square meters per person).

Slant sails

At the moment it is the most common type of sail on yachts. In terms of ease of control, installation and traction characteristics, it is the undisputed leader.

A yacht with properly adjusted Bermuda sails can be sailed for a long time by just one person. A maneuver like tack, can be executed without calling at all shifts, due to shifting the steering wheel.

Vessel "Reaper" with lugger sails

Luger (raik) sail- variety slanting sail.

The sail is most often in the shape of an irregular trapezoid, the top luff attached to lath, bottom - to geek.

Sprint sail- a quadrangular oblique sail, stretched diagonally with a thin pole (spring or sprint), resting on its upper corner at one end and against the lower part of the mast at the other.

Gaff sail

Jib

Staysail

Other types of sails

• Blooper

• Genaker

• Spinnaker

• Tallboy

Sail parts

Names of parts of the sail

In sailing, all parts of the sail have their own names. Triangular sails are the most commonly used, and so most have six terms - one for each corner and side of the sail. The side of the sail is generally called luff . There are front, back and lower luffs. The luff is considered to be the luff adjacent to the mast. The corners of a triangular sail are called tack , halyard And clew . The lower one adjacent to the mast is the tack angle, the upper one adjacent to the mast is the halyard angle, and the rear one adjacent to the boom is clew corner.

The luffs and corners of the sail, as the most loaded areas of the sail, are decorated with various reinforcements made of fabric using the so-called “ useful things" Corner reinforcements are called boats And bows . Luff reinforcements, as a rule, do not have special names.