Maltese Falcon ... hit or miss?

Oh well, just can't get it done based on the info from Wiki . . . .

Please somebody provide a MF vs CS comparison based on the below info with adjustment for the Froude number . . .

Thanks

Angel

 

Btw, the MF vs CS comparison came from the MF folks . . . I think it's better to compare MF to the Champion of the Seas of more similar length . . . . .

The Boston Daily Atlas, Vol. XXII, No. 274, Saturday, May 20, 1854.

^ PS - if that fore rake is half above the water then that gives her a LWL of 245 ft, don't know if this is a fair assumption.

SchoonerMan, Schooner and Tall Saling Ships: Champion of the Seas.

Post #239, best ever 24h average...

Don't think the Falcon will ever break that . . - - - (some more MF specs)

Cheers,
Angel

 

"I'm happy to report that the Falcon has just broken the Cutty Sark's best 24-hour run. The Cutty did 362 nautical miles and we've done 380."

"Best ever 24h average: MF 15.83 knots*, CS 15.08 knots."

Not big deal with such disparity in their DL and SAD ratios, as well as the longer WL of MF, I'm afraid. MF should theoretically be pretty faster than CS.

One explanation could be the MF's rig being less efficient than the CS's one when reaching/running, which would be somehow dissapointing.

 

From Perini Navi, MF specs (wait for specs to load)

Why MF under max power (2,998 kW) can't outperform the shorter Champion of the Seas' best 24h average of 19.46 kts under sails alone while moving cargo . . ? ?

Cheers
Angel

 

The fate of the Champion . . .

Cheers,
Angel

 

An other explanation could be that those oldies (not old then ) were driven very hard by very hard men, don't think MF's push button guy's have the guts to push their luck that hard on such an easily heeled vessel.

But this allone can't be the only explaination for such a poor performence in these comparisons . . .

About the rig, see Lister's post #226.

Cheers,
Angel

 

I could be wrong but I don't think MF has yet been tested in the roaring 40's? Therefore the comparison doesn't really hold up....having a series of gales (for months on end) over the stern quarter are what creates record runs with square riggers......reaching across the Atlantic is not really it..........

 

Sailing HERZOGIN CECILIE, a four masted steel bark.
"The ship sailed 299 miles that first 24 hours. In eight of them she sailed 116 miles; 58 miles for each of two four-hour watches, an average of 14 1/2 miles an hour. Often she touched 15 knots; sometimes the patent log on the rail right aft recorded the fact that she was going a little over that speed. There are many cities where the speed limit for motor cars is not so fast as "Herzogin Cecilie" sailed upon that day, and many days succeeding. She was a flyer right enough; and we loved her for it while we desperately tried, three of us at that great wheel, to hold her to something like her course.....
.... and always we sailed on, 240, 260, 280, 290 miles a day.... four times it blew out the royals. But always we lay aloft and bent others and set them again, and drove her on."
(This was while carrying 3,432 tons of grain from Australia to England in 1928. I was taught to sew many years ago by Adolph Dobbertin, one of the sailmakers from those late square-rig days and he said all he did on a Cape Horn passage (30 of them) was sew new sails constantly.)
Alan Villiers, FALMOUTH FOR ORDERS, 1929

 

Most likely the expensive yacht like MF wasn't driven nearly as hard as the for-profit, get-paid-more-if-you-get-there-first, Cutty Sark was.

A lot of sailing ships of that time reached high speeds, even ones that weren't necessarily designed for speed. It was part of the madness of the times, due in part to the encroaching competition of steam assisted ships.

Any kind of a rig failure on the Maltese Falcon would be a major embarrassment. In the Cutty Sark's day, such was taken as a matter of course.

 

Whether the comparison is valid or not, the enthusiastic support by everyone of their particular champion is most entertaining as well as informative. It takes me back * to the great days of the Atlantic liners, known as the greyhounds of the sea, when every hard-won (or rather expensively purchased) knot was hailed by the proud owners as each was launched, longer than before, with bigger engines than before. The differences seemed awfully minute to my schoolboy mind - I must have been a prosaic SOB as a kid.

BTW, Angelique, there is a link to a mine of information on the various boating design ratios by Eric Sponberg in the boat forum wiki -

http://www.boatdesign.net/wiki/Design_Ratios

* OK, OK, not many left who can be taken back that far, I know I know . . .

 

Yes, knowing the prevailing conditions during the record breaking days is of course basic to understand the differences. As you said, to properly compare things it would be necessary to know the velocity diagrams for each vessel.
Cheers.

 

I think a careful reading of this paper may clarify MF's design aspects and performance. There is an interesting VPP comparison among the different rigs.

http://www.hiswasymposium.com/assets/files/pdf/2004/Gerard Dijkstra.pdf

 

Falcon 24h 405nm

Just digged for a new 24h Falcon PR . . . this one is fresh

MF 24h 405nm, somewhere between July 1 - 13, 2011.

Cheers,
Angel

 

Thanks Terry , and even more thanks to Eric

Just hope it doesn't sail all over my head

Cheers,
Angel

 

MANY THANKS Guillermo for that reference paper. I believe I have seen it before, but not that version with the color presentations, and all the other big sailing ship rigs, etc

BRAVO :!: