Maneuverablity of fore-and-aft rigged ships

[dochejed]

I just started reading the Osprey book 'Ships of the American Revolution' by Mark Lardas, and while discussing fore-and-aft rigged ships he says 'while these ships could sail closer to the wind than square-riggers, they were less maneuverable'. Is that true? In most of the rule sets I've played they are depicted as more maneuverable, but maybe that has to do more with size than with rig?

[Bligh]

Dobbs, Texas, Nightmoss, Aaron, or Dave Manley are the men to answer that one for you Jed.
Rob.

[Aaron]

I just started reading the Osprey book 'Ships of the American Revolution' by Mark Lardas, and while discussing fore-and-aft rigged ships he says 'while these ships could sail closer to the wind than square-riggers, they were less maneuverable'. Is that true? In most of the rule sets I've played they are depicted as more maneuverable, but maybe that has to do more with size than with rig?

With a 3 Masted ship situated around the center of gravity the captain could configure the sails to spin the ship around the center of gravity, or set one set against the wind (backing sails) and sit stopped on the water. Fore-aft didn’t have all of this easy flexibility.

[Dobbs]

Boats with fore and aft rigs were limited to Burdens 1. When we play, we allow all Burden 1 ships, regardless of type of rig, to plot one turn in advance instead of two, to reflect their agility.

A fore and aft rig allowed you to trim the sails closer to the centerline of the ship, thereby allowing you to sail closer to the wind. Because of their rigging, squareriggers could not sail closer than 60 degrees to the wind. They couldn't trim their yards any closer toward the centerline without hitting the shrouds. A fore and aft-er could manage 45 degrees, because the sails were inside the shrouds.

SoG is rather generous on the sailing angles in the game. I have posted more accurate, though still optimistic, cards around here somewhere. If you're interested, and can't find them, let me know, and I'll see if I can scare them up.

[David Manley]

Another consideration as the size of the sails and therefore the manpower needed to work them. Individual sails on a square rigger were smaller than on a fore and aft rigged vessel of comparable size, so less effort was required to work them, particularly in high winds. And as noted above the flexibility in the square ri sail plan allowed for more flexibility in operation that allowed nuances of manoeuvre and ship handling that weren't available to F&A

[Bligh]

Thank you for your expertise gentlemen.
I knew you would be able to answer much more coherently than I.
Rob.

[dochejed]

Thanks for those responses. That's a real eye-opener for me, now I have to rethink my understanding of small ship tactics.

Jed

[TexaS]

A ship completely rigged with lateen sails (Xebec) have a bit more trouble tacking as the boom have to change side of the mast.