gaff-rigged pinky sloop

[sasemr]

I am thinking in having a gaff-rigged pinky sloop built. This is a classic sardine fishing boat from Maine. The desing is from Ted Brewer (here is the link to the sloop in Ted's page: http://www.tedbrewer.com/sail_glass/sunshine.htm)
Can you guys let me know your thoughts with respect to two areas:
1) What will be her windward ability? I know it will likely be poor, but I don't know how poor, so I will appreciate some examples.
2) Due to the long keel and the configuation of the rudder, it looks like the boat will be a hell to maneuver and dock. Do you guys think this will be like an Island Packet or much harder? Any thoughts here will be appreciated.

Thanks a lot

Sas

[PAR]

Anyone interested in windward ability shouldn't be considering a low aspect gaffer. This said, she'll easily tack through 50 degrees, being able to pinch down a few more degrees if necessary.

She'll have the close quarters maneuverability of any full keel, with fair amount of drag and inclined/attached rudder. Compared to a modern, divided appendage arrangement, she'll be sluggish, but her drag should help somewhat. On the other hand, she'll hove too well and track like a freight train.

This is a pretty well burdened hull form, so stowage is plentiful for cruising gear and spares. With her high D/L she'll be a comfortable sea boat, but she has a very modest SA/D, which means you'll need a fair bit of puff to move her. In the trades this will be an advantage, because you wouldn't have to carry a reef constantly, but for coastal sailing, this may prove bothersome. She's a handsome character yacht, but smart performance isn't very close to the top of her design brief details.

[Tcubed]

Like Par says, the manoeuvrability will be as expected for full keel designs. Shame the prop aperture and prop kills the rudder's effectiveness..
It is a bit undercanvassed too. Whenever i see stuff like << However, in moderate-strong breezes SUNSHINE has the power to stand up to it, carry full sail, and really pick up her heels when most boats her size are well reefed down and making heavy weather of it.>> I think "undercanvased". Then again, it has the engine so maybe it's not meant to be sailed in the really light stuff.
As for low aspect gaff rigs being no good to windward, that's a pretty misleading blanket statement.

[alan white]

On looks alone... the pinky is the kind of boat you walk away from backwards.
That stern pulpit is useful too. What a great vantage point for just about any viewing, whether for sightseeing or taking a bearing.
Performance will be as stated. Not bad for comfortable cruising.

[Tcubed]

On the Pinkies the stern deck was made slightly overhanging, which tapered into a behind the rudder platform, and the bulwarks came together at a sort of false transom. In that little platform a hole was cutout so a guy could do his personal needs. Basically, the 'head' was a 'tail'... Very, very practical. Lookitup H. Chapelle. And a good view in one's most meditative moments....

I still am a bit confused by the "pinky sloop" thing though. Is T. Brewer being liberal with his terminology or am i missing a crucial piece of the history of American workboats history?

To me, the pinky is a bald headed, single jib, well proportioned schooner. Often has an overlapping foresail and self tending club footed jib (very efficient setup, BTW) , centreboard, moderate beam, strong rake on the keel. Traditional colors were light pink topsides and bottle green bulwarks.

A picture i found, but not the most archetypal:

[PAR]

The term pinky is correct, though schooners have had much more exposure.

I didn't say that she wasn't any good to windward, but aspect ratio in the appendages and the rig account for this ability, plus several other design elements. My point, which I don't think was misunderstood, was that a person looking at a gaffer isn't looking into short tacking up a narrow channel, across 80 degrees, but the charm of the vessel, particularly one like this.

[sasemr]

TCubed
I think you are right. All of the pinkys that I have seen or read about are schooners. I belive that this sloop is Ted Brewer's adaptation. Of course, the schoneers were larger (45-55f). To my eye schoones look even more beautiful, but they are much more complex. The sloop is simple and 35f is my size.
Thanks to all for your comments.

Sas

[PAR]

Chebacco boats of the pre and post colonial era often carried pinky sterns. They were noted to wear rigs of ketch, brigantine, "ship" and both single and double masted sloop. These early shallops seemed to carry what ever was the fancy of the builder, owner or employment. It wasn't until after the 1812 war, that the off shore fisheries required the need of larger Chebacco boats, most schooner rigged, in part following the trend of the Baltimore pilot successes, particularly the couple of decades after the war years. Most of these pinkies were about 50' LOD, though a few in the 65' to 70' range. "Spy" built in 1823 was 91 tons, 70' LOD, 17' beam, 8' 6" draft and three masted.

The heavily sparred working rigs retained their colonial era hull form until about 1850 when the Baltimore clipper hull form really began to show it's influence on the "old schooler's" of the fishing fleets. These new, square stern models were much faster, finer entry craft with light air additions to their rigs. All hell broke loose after this for a few decades, as these fisherman got more shoal, steeper deadrise and the sharpness of the model became excreted to dangerous levels. This lasted until the appearance of a Lawlor design "Roulette" and the Burgess design "Carrie E. Phillips". Both of these took on the stiffer bilge (in direct comparison of the very slack bilge in current favor), increased capacity, stability and straight stems of the pilot model. These new models whipped up on the Essex and Gloucester fleets (baddly) and were the predecessors to the great fisherman fleets, such as Elsie and the other "Indian-headers" (my personal favorite bow type) at the turn of the 19th to 20th centuries.

So yes, the pinky is typically a schooner, but much depends on the era and the employment of the craft.

[Tcubed]

Thanks for that great information. Could you please post more detailed info (quotes out of books, etc) so we can learn more? Your post is great but less concise would be better yet.

[PAR]

I'm not sure how I can be less concise, but more informative.

Information in general about these antique craft is scattered considerably, requiring a fair amount of research. Howard Chapelle's efforts helped tremendously, but there are blanks and assumptions that need to be addressed.

Several collections, many reference volumes and maritime archives of which to employ for this type of research are available. Some of these would include: the manuscript collections of the Essex Institute, ditto Salem, the Massachusetts Historical Society, Library of Congress, various state archives, Admiralty Library, the Smithsonian Institute's maritime collections, "Catalog of the Watercraft Collection in the US National Museum, plus the several books available on colonial era ships and 19th century commercial vessels.

As you might have guessed, I've been a bit of a sailing history buff, all my life.

[sasemr]

Here are two books on the subject:
The American Fishing Schooners 1825-1935 - Howard I. Chapelle;
Down to the sea: The fishing schooners of Gloucester - Joseph E Garland

Both of them can be found at Amazon

Sas

[Tcubed]

Thanks.

When i grew up i read my father's extensive collection of tomes several times over, from Chapelle, Skene, H. Butler through Uffa Fox, Hereshoff, Dixon Kemp and others. When the boat sank the collection was lost and i am slowly building up a new collection of my own for reference. The process has been painfully slow though as most of these books are far from cheap.

[Tom Hunter]

This is an Eastport Pinky Sloop from astern, or at least it is if I get the image posting to work:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3066/2467138655_6e89bc3621_b.jpg


I've owned it since 2001, sailed her down from Maine to Salem, and split time between repairing and sailing depending on the year.

A number of these were built by Penbo (Penobscott Boatworks) in the late 60s and early 70s. Some were sloop rigged, at least one was ketch rigged.

The type was developed in Eastport Maine to bring herring from the fish weirs to the sardine canneries. They are designed to move the maximum amount of fish, at the maximum speed, with a minimum crew. The type was popular from the 1870s to about 1910.

My experience is something like what PAR describes. She does go like a freight train, especially when the breeze is up. Ted Brewer's design may be a little different in performance, but I don't reef until the breeze is pushing 20 knts. On my boat I am pretty sure they started with the 1880s rudder design and cut out a space for the prop without changing it. This is a bad thing, I would assume that Ted compensated for the propeller apature, but you might ask him about that.

The reduction in rudder size probably hurts, but another thing to think about with a boat like this is using the sails to turn as well as the rudder. I've started to learn about that, and she manuevers much better when you keep that in mind.

The big issue when getting in and out of docks is planning your moves ahead. The boat will manuever, but she will respond some time after you make the move. For example I will throw the engine into reverse, kick it a bit, and slow it down. Then the boat will move, then speed up, then slow down. Also there are tricks to using the rudder, prop spin, and lines to the shore that make docking much easier. When I first got her I was nervous about smashing up docks, but I find if I go slow and think in advance it is not an issue. (so far, knock on wood)


I'm not sure about the undercanvassed comment. 548 square foot main and 171 jib seems to move the boat fairly well. This is not to say that she will break modern speed records, but for a 100+ year old design she moves pretty well. I pass other classics from time to time, and catch badly sailed boats that I have no right to overtake on occasion. If you have sailed a Freindship sloop I am pretty sure that Pinky sloops are faster.

To windward she outsails most split rigs without trouble, though I could not point with a well handled Rozinante. Which makes an important point. If you learn the boat well you will outpoint marconi boats that are poorly skippered, poorly designed, have dirty bottoms or are poorly rigged, and the well designed marconi boats in good shape with competent skippers will out point you. If you really try I bet you can get a pinky within 5 degrees of a well founded modern cruiser, though I have not done a close comparison. Being honest, when the wind is on the nose and I have to get home I turn on the engine.


Finally, I'm not sure these two questions are really the most important. How critical is windward performance if you don't plan to sail in triangles? I race modern boats, I sail a Pinky sloop for a different sort of fun. Even the docking question is really a function of practice and learning, it is not as if you cannot dock the boat, you just dock it differently.

I'll try to stop by this thread again if you have any more questions, glad to help.

[Tom Hunter]

.....

[Butch .H]

Tom that is some boat thank you for sharing this with us.Please post more pic's. Do you have any photos of her on the hard?
Regards
Butch

[PAR]

This is a classic example of a name and a design element that has been "bastardized" over the years. Clearly the stern in the above image doesn't have the "Pinked" stern typical of the schooners that bare the name, but yet this sloop is called a pinky. Perhaps the Eastport renditions lost the tailboards, but kept the name, who knows. This isn't unusual, just look at what once was a cutter or a yawl.

Yep, straight, full keels react slowly and drive along, unoffended by most contrary waves, current and initial helm inputs. They have a will of their own and "get around to it, when their damn ready", so experience with the type is important, before you go tackling a tight anchorage.

If you want a pinky, then go for it. Well handled, they're just fine for cruising.

For what it's worth, 5 degrees less pointing ability will mean two boats (one that is 5 degrees better to windward), starting at the same point will quickly separate, with the lesser ability boat losing ground pretty quickly. Across a 150', she'll be a boat length behind, likely slightly more. After a few hundred yards, the better windward boat will have a distinct advantage of a handlefull of boat lengths, plus be closer to the mark. After a quarter mile the leeward boat will be well astern and need to tack a couple of times to get back on the same "plane" as the windward boat.

This doesn't mean a hill of beans unless you're racing a fixed up and down course. So, you have a few extra tacks to make, you'll get there in good shape and likely and easier ride then someone smashing hard on, the full way.

[Tom Hunter]

In answer to Butch's request here are a couple of photos on the hard, though they only show the hull under water.http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3271/2896631802_c9e4c9697a_b.jpg


She has 11' of beam on deck, I think the photo of the bow does not show how quickly she fills out, but I am posting it anyway. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3269/2896631052_a3bdfc5dde.jpg

She makes the same kind of low, foaming wake that a well designed fishing schooner makes. My understanding this that is a sign of good performance for this type of boat though I am not a naval architect and don't have that from expert sources.

PAR's description of what 5 degrees means fits my personal experience pretty well. He also makes a subtle but important point. You are going to be a lot more comfortable in an Pinky. For thier water line length they are huge. There is 6' of standing room in the head, you can walk past the cook to go forward, and I have taken 16 people out sailing without overcrowding the boat.

I've researched the type some, and as PAR suggests, they did lose the tailboards but keep the name. The US fisheries dept did a very extensive survey of the fisheries in the 1880s and I have a few pictures of the type from that survey. The rig is very much the same, the hull shape as well. To convert the type to a yacht designers bring the cabin further aft over what used to be the fish hold and put in a huge cockpit.

[Tom Hunter]

Here is the photo I discussed up above, 1882 not 88:

http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/700s/fish6817.jpg

The 1969 Penbo version coming into Gloucester harbor under power:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2193/2505907473_268ee91a19_b.jpg


And the 1882 version at anchor:


http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/700s/fish6821.jpg

[Butch .H]

Thanks Tom. She is a beaut:)

[Tom Hunter]

Just adding that if you look at a Pinky schooner they have the tailboards, but they are also double ended. The pinky sloop does not have the boards, but does have a somewhat similar double ended shape.

I've never seen a transitional boat with smaller boards, though there could have been some once apon a time. I think they kept the Pinky name because of the double end.

[diwebb]

Hi,
Tom nice boat.
Windward ability of the gaff rig is often under rated. Most gaffers are fairly heavy displacement traditional full keel boats and perform relatively better as the wind strength increases. Often a lightweight boat that will point high is stopped by the waves wheras a heavy gaffer will punch through them, also not pointing as high they may well go comfortably over the wave and therefore go much faster than the high pointing boat. I remember back in the early 1980s seeing a 26 foot Bristol Channel Cutter beat two half tonners from Ilfracomb in Devon to Barry in south Wales by over half an hour, against a force six easterly and with the tide, this created a nasty short wave pattern. The fully crewed half tonneres arrived soaking wet even though clad in full oilies, whereas the single handed skipper of the gaff cutter arrived dry and only wearing oily bottoms. Probably the half tonners would have done a lot better if they had not been pointed so high but sailed faster and freer, and they would definitely have been more comfortable. So if you can go two knots faster while pointing five degrees lower then you may well win out in the long run. Also if short tacking up a channel the heavy gaffer can often pinch up through a slower tack and gain several boatlenths to windward, which can offset the lighter, higher pointing boats windward ability to some extent.

David

[sasemr]

Tom
Thanks for the pictures. Could I have your thoughts on single handling this boat? The size of the main is pretty impressive and I am not sure how easy is to handle it, i.e. hoist it in a breeze, reef it too late, etc.

[Tom Hunter]

I've single handed her on nice days, and run her solo under power on blustery days, but never sailed her alone in heavy weather.

Sailing her down from Maine a freind and I had beaufort 5, which for this boat was really nice sailing weather. The wind was supposed to get stronger over night, so we reefed about 5 pm. Due to inexperience with the boat and a failed engine we had a little trouble holding her into the wind, which made putting the reef in and raising the sail more of a job than it should have been, but it was not impossible, it just took longer.

As it was the wind went down over night, we shook the reef out off Gloucester. 70 miles in 12 or 13 hours in that wind.

That was my third time sailing the boat, now I would drop the main farther, scandalize the peak (up high were the gaff can't take us out) and might experiment with backing the jib to heave her too. Then I think we could get the cringles done easily, and the ties done without much trouble.

Which brings up two points

1) The boat was designed for strong men. If you are not a strong man you may want to choose a different rig, there are Ketch rig versions of this boat.

2) Understand the boat and how she works. I didn't know to back the jib, if I had things would have been much easier. Practice on calm days, figure out how things work, you will have a much easier time. You don't want to wrestle with any boat, but the way to get this boat to cooperate is different from what you do on a modern marconi rigged boat.

For example we once tried sailing off the mooring. We raised the main, had no problems boat pointed right into the wind. Raised the jib and she was off. I'm pretty sure we moved the 5,000 lb concrete mooring block around a bit before we got the mooring penants off the Sampson post.

Now if we want to sail off we hoist the main, let go, then raise the jib.

Last story, I got the boat because a surveyor reccomended her to me when I was having a different boat surveyed. He looked at her for a 60 something year old guy, I was 34. He told the older guy that the boat would be too much, he would be exausted by her.

That was 8 years ago, I still enjoy sailing her and when I finish the refit I'm looking forward getting in more sailing. I do exercise before sailing season to get stronger, but I am not a big guy.

I hope that helps.

Tom

[Tom Hunter]

I've single handed her on nice days, and run her solo under power on blustery days, but never sailed her alone in heavy weather.

Sailing her down from Maine a freind and I had beaufort 5, which for this boat was really nice sailing weather. The wind was supposed to get stronger over night, so we reefed about 5 pm. Due to inexperience with the boat and a failed engine we had a little trouble holding her into the wind, which made putting the reef in and raising the sail more of a job than it should have been, but it was not impossible, it just took longer.

As it was the wind went down over night, we shook the reef out off Gloucester. 70 miles in 12 or 13 hours in that wind.

That was my third time sailing the boat, now I would drop the main farther, scandalize the peak (up high were the gaff can't take us out) and might experiment with backing the jib to heave her too. Then I think we could get the cringles done easily, and the ties done without much trouble.

Which brings up two points

1) The boat was designed for strong men. If you are not a strong man you may want to choose a different rig, there are Ketch rig versions of this boat.

2) Understand the boat and how she works. I didn't know to back the jib, if I had things would have been much easier. Practice on calm days, figure out how things work, you will have a much easier time. You don't want to wrestle with any boat, but the way to get this boat to cooperate is different from what you do on a modern marconi rigged boat.

For example we once tried sailing off the mooring. We raised the main, had no problems boat pointed right into the wind. Raised the jib and she was off. I'm pretty sure we moved the 5,000 lb concrete mooring block around a bit before we got the mooring penants off the Sampson post.

Now if we want to sail off we hoist the main, let go, then raise the jib.

Last story, I got the boat because a surveyor reccomended her to me when I was having a different boat surveyed. He looked at her for a 60 something year old guy, I was 34. He told the older guy that the boat would be too much, he would be exausted by her.

That was 8 years ago, I still enjoy sailing her and when I finish the refit I'm looking forward getting in more sailing. I do exercise before sailing season to get stronger, but I am not a big guy.

I hope that helps.

Tom

[haybayian]

If you are asking for opinions about gaff headed schooners here is mine. I built a 40' Roberts Spray which I rigged first as a gaff headed schooner. She looked great. That's all the good I have to report. Because perhaps I was carrying only 900 sq feet the thing was not moving much. My feeling was that she was not cuting nicely into the wind even with three jibs and was not great downwind either. The following Spring, I got rid of my mizen mast made a large main and sailled her as gaff headed cutter or sloop. Then she became a tremendous down winder. I have taken her out in 25-30 kts winds, she was flying. Broad reach was not bad either. Upwind, I had to sail her at 45 to 50 degrees and often had to tack ship in light winds .

Now I am moving away from gaff headed rigs altogether. The same boat is again being converted to a modern bermudan sloop for performance and practicality. Looking back at these years (16) I would say build what you love but don't expect the old rigs to perform under any wind. They don't.

Haybayian

[John Riddle]

Sasemr:

It looks like you're getting quite a bit of good input and I can't add to it from personal experience but I would like to bid to build her. You can email me directly from my profile if you like.

[Tom Hunter]

no offense intended haybayin, but how do you reconcile these two statements:

"Then she became a tremendous down winder"

"don't expect the old rigs to perform under any wind. They don't."

[haybayian]

no offense intended haybayin, but how do you reconcile these two statements:

"Then she became a tremendous down winder"

"don't expect the old rigs to perform under any wind. They don't."

Sorry, English is not my mother tongue, this should read "under all winds".
What I meant was that with her large main my boat was very fast down wind. My second point was old rigs (in particular gaff headed ones) are not too good at beating.....
However as one of my fellows sailors (who owned a gaff headed schooner) put it once: Gentlemen only go downwind.

Haybayian

[M&M Ovenden]

Hi Haybayian,
I understand you didn't have the best sailing experience with your gaff rigs but in your case I don't think it should be fully related to the rig. Actually, for any sailboats sailability, the hull and mostly underwater surface is very important to consider. The BR 40ft spray is extremely beamy and shallow drafted . In my opinion it is an unfair hull to judge a rig. Adding sail surface without matching underwater lateral surface hardly helps a boat head in the wind.
I've had extremely good experiences from gaff rigs but that on boats that had an appropriate under water for there sail surface.

cheers
Murielle

[haybayian]

Hi Murielle,
My post sounded more negative than I intended. The point I was trying to express was what most people I think agree with : bermudian sail plans can sail closer to the wind and gaff headed rigs better at running. Of course this may be a gross generalization.
In my case, yes Spray is a big mama. My draft however was increased from 4' to 5 ' so she is not as shallow as Slocum's. I agree with your point that this design is not the best place to judge gaff headed rigs. But can one really name one that would be. Within the gaff headed family IMHO there are so many differences; the main sail aspect ratio and the gaff to mast angle for instance. And the type of vessel: fishing, vs 19 th century racing yacht ...etc.
Which "adequate" boat did you test a gaff headed rig?
Haybayian

[PAR]

There are many factors, all contributing to windward ability. Rig type, hull form, appendage configuration, etc. all play a role. If a slippery, canoe bodied hull was balanced for a Bermudian sloop, then converted to a conventionally proportioned gaffer of similar area, the gaffer would get killed to windward, by the Bermudian. This would be apples to apples (well almost), though not truly a fair test.

If two hulls were developed and both had highly refined versions of Bermudian or gaff rigs placed on them, each having a hull and appendages optimized for the specific rig it carried, then the gaffer would still get beat, but not nearly as badly and in some conditions could win to weather. This would mean a gaffer with internal halyards and every effort of reduced windage made, just like the Bermudian, a higher aspect ratio then typical proportions permit, very light spars, etc. Now this would be apples to apples and an interesting race, especially if long distance in deep water. This of course assumes that both boats are sailed perfectly, 100% of the time, with perfect sail cuts and sets, etc.