Wherries

[JennyMorgan]

Another wherry snap here:

[Vaughan]

Talking of using the rig for craning, your last photo shows how they did it.

The mast has been cocked back slightly on the forestay, while the throat block of the halyard has been clipped above the "spen" block, to give the result of raising the gaff horizontal, to clear the cargo hatch.  The gaff can then be swung out over the quay and used as a derrick.

For heavy loads such as logs they would take the gaff off altogether and use the halyard winch for lifting, with the mast cocked back. This last method strikes me as rather dangerous, but I guess they knew what they were doing!

So the mast ring in your earlier photo is still a mystery.

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, Vaughan said:

So the mast ring in your earlier photo is still a mystery.

I have in mind a photo that I have seen of a wherry using the mast itself rather than the gaff. I suspect there were different rigs for different cargos. 

As for that ring, after some thought, I also wonder if it might not be to prevent chafe from the lower throat halliard block rubbing on the mast. 

[marshman]

Perhaps its just to avoid chafe from the main halliard which with a mast mounted winch may well be closer to the mast. Given the way they were all working boats though, seems a bit of bother just to avoid a bit of chafe.

 

[JennyMorgan]

4 hours ago, marshman said:

Given the way they were all working boats though, seems a bit of bother just to avoid a bit of chafe.

Any alternative ideas?

[DAVIDH]

10 hours ago, Vaughan said:

The mast has been cocked back slightly on the forestay, while the throat block of the halyard has been clipped above the "spen" block, to give the result of raising the gaff horizontal, to clear the cargo hatch.  The gaff can then be swung out over the quay and used as a derrick.

 

[JennyMorgan]

2 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:

 

Awwwww, you won't need that! Any real sailor will understand it all .

[marshman]

PW  - that ring!!! ( The rest is really only for wherry technophobes - others will find it utterly boring!!! )

Still have no real idea but been thinking that it might correspond with where the coburg might be and could be a rest for the mast when lowered? Canarytops mentioned the fact that the gaff jaws looked very short and just suppose perhaps it was set up for single handed working - anyone who has tried it will know removing the jaws of the gaff really requires two crew. However with shorter jaws it might be possible to do it on your own - at the same time with less weight on the counterbalance you might be able to drop the mast right down onto the coburg and almost to deck level? Normally the weight is balanced so you have to actually pull the mast down the last bit but with less weight it may go all the way down and the ring rest on top of the coburg? 

Single handed sailing would allow you to do all three actions from the mast on your own , as described but you would have to be a good ol' Norfolk bouy and  fit to do it!!! But we do know it was done!!

Dont forget Ludham bridge was also much lower then and getting the mast lower may have been a real help - although the mast mounted winch would not help unless it could be moved out of the way somehow and the photo does show a seemingly full height tabernacle which is the highest point given the mast sits on top.

With real apologies to most of you 'cos it is a bit technical so probably only for PW, Vaughan and Canarytops and certainly NOT for David H!!!

[Canarytops]

On 11/03/2021 at 10:14, Canarytops said:

Very nice image, any idea what the mast "ring" is just below the identification bands ? Gaff jaws also seem very short ? Together with winch fixed to mast - still can't identify her !

I guess many of you may have seen the CWB Facebook page suggestion that this is thought to be Cornucopia but just in case ...

[marshman]

Facebook - whats that?

[JennyMorgan]

On 13/03/2021 at 12:01, marshman said:

it was set up for single handed working - anyone who has tried it will know removing the jaws of the gaff really requires two crew. However with shorter jaws it might be possible to do it on your own

I used to sail on Albion in the days of Ewan Anderson & Dougie Blewitt, long time ago, good memories. One trick Ewan had, when shifting the gaff and coarse aft and away from the mast, was to tip the mast head by a foot or so, take the strain on the throat and that way the gaff fell away from the mast, e.g. let gravity do the work. Mind you, unshipping the gaff was rare. Works on a river cruiser too!

[marshman]

You can also unship the jaws by executing a "Chinese"  gybe, although not to be recommended generally!!!!!!

[Polly]

I think we will be out on White Moth on Sept 3rd 4th 5th can’t wait!

[JennyMorgan]

7 hours ago, marshman said:

You can also unship the jaws by executing a "Chinese"  gybe, although not to be recommended generally!!!!!!

I could, but I wouldn't . . . . . . . at least not intentionally. 

[MauriceMynah]

What's  a Chinese gybe, and how does it differ from the proper British gybe?

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, MauriceMynah said:

What's  a Chinese gybe, and how does it differ from the proper British gybe?

The foot of the mainsail lifts and the head of the sail uncontrollably gybes rather than the whole thing slamming over. A good British gybe should and often is a controlled affair.

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, MauriceMynah said:

What's  a Chinese gybe, and how does it differ from the proper British gybe?

Going about, is when you tack across the wind from side to side.

When running free, before the wind, the sail goes across with much more of a crash and it is best to be prepared for it by altering course a bit and "letting it happen".  Probably the most dangerous part of sailing and can be a bit dodgy on a winding river, with Richo's finest coming the other way down the Ant.

A Chinese gybe is when you get a sudden gust from a different direction at the moment of gybing, so the boom and the lower part of the sail swing over to the new side, but the gaff and the upper part stay where they are!

Usually causes damage, which can include losing the mast.

I should stick to your omni-directional, BMC 1.5.        

[Polly]

My own view is that these old gaffers put a Chinese gybe into the mix for badness. It would scare those who knew and mystify those who didn’t. ⛵️

[JennyMorgan]

Imagine meeting this on the River Ant on change over day!

[marshman]

A Chinese gybe is most spectacular on a wherry- but worrying for the skipper, as suggested by Vaughan. Dont forget a real wherry does not have a boom so when running there is a tendency to let out all the mainsheet - about 70m!!!!

As a result the blocks, two of them and pretty heavy, will tend to go right up towards the area of the mast - if you let them. If the wind then gets aback the top of the sail, that bit will gybe over but because of the weight at the bottom and position, the bottom might not follow - you therefore get a twist in the leach, the gaff goes almost vertical, and the gaff jaws because there is no thrust, tend to come away off and away from the mast - there are parrel beads across the jaws but these are not fixed so the gaff can come away from the mast. You used to have special lightweight "summer" mainsheet blocks but never seen any!!!!!

If you follow all that, you probably know a bit about sailing but believe me you don't want to be on the tiller when that happens - it makes a lot of noise given all the weight that is aloft and can cause real issues - as Vaughan suggests!!!!!!

[Canarytops]

On 14/03/2021 at 12:06, marshman said:

Facebook - whats that?

Come on young man if I can manage to dip my fingers in "here" I'm sure you ought to be just as capable in foreign fields ;-) !

[DAVIDH]

Just in the right place at the right time for this photo. It's from 2008. Forgot I took it!

[dom]

Can anyone shed any light on exactly what unique quality or specific feature makes a boat a wherry? I thought there'd be something obvious I simply wasn't aware of, but Googling doesn't seem to shed much light.

The reason for asking is, Wikipedia's page on Norfolk wherries says on the Aylsham navigation they had to be 12' 6" x 3' 6" maximum. If that's length and beam, it's more like a punt. I can't believe it's beam and draft though, as surely 12'6" beam never would have got up to Aylsham?

 

 

[Turnoar]

12’6” might have been ok to Aylsham, I think the narrowest lock was 12’8 on that stretch. Fully laden 3’6” might have been drawn including a slipping keel but I should think the keel would have been removed up toward the head of navigation.

[marshman]

The official measurements of the locks were  50' long, 12'4" wide with a 3'draught - no doubt the slipping keel arrangement was used as the Canal was always short of water.

The term wherry is pretty generic and on the Thames were often just passenger skiffs - the Norfolk Wherry was specifically built for the Broadland navigations to carry cargo