Talk:Iron-hulled sailing ship

message: The Article mentions both the Preussian and the France II as the largest Windjammer.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.233.69.220 (talk) 22:24, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest Windjammer 

message: Windjammers are most famous for being very fast. Time is money, especially on the scale of Australia to Europe, and a fast ship would make more roundtrips a year, and more profit.
And all that stuff about modern reasons to return to sailing ships: this has nothing to do with windjammers in particular (other than that the windjammer was the most advanced form of a sailing ship prior to their demise as commercial vessels). I mean "kites"? what windjammers flew kites?
:You’re confusing windjammers with clippers. Seano1 21:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  article is not very good 

message: Some contemporary buisnesses use the term windjammer in their names and to describe their sailing vessles, which are most often actually schooners, and never square rigged sailing ships of the type described in this article.  I submit that it is enough to link to windjammer cruises at the top of the page and that we ought to refrain from any other such links, as they are essentially promotion of commercial ventures. --John.james (talk) 02:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern use of the term "windjammer"

message: I see there is a list of some windjammers in this article but I think I know of one not mentioned, the Christian Radich althou I might be wrong about it being a windjammer...
Anyways it would be nice if anyone could verify that it is a windjammer and add it to the list (or prove it ain't one/give a other reason for not adding it)
Luredreier 16:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Christian Radich was built for sail training, not cargo carrying.  She is also much smaller than the last commercial sailing windjammers.  Her loaded displacement of 1050 tons is one fith of the  deadweight tonnage (cargo carrying capacity) of Moshulu.  --John.james (talk) 23:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: List of windjammers under sail today

message: #The article uses the past tense.  Why?  There are still some Windjammers around.
#The article claims that Windjammers must have a metallic hull.  The German article states that there are also Windjammers with wooden hulls.
#The article doesn't give the term's etymology.
Thanks, Maikel (talk) 11:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited it some. Maikel (talk) 08:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I scold this article! 

message: The claim that the term derives from Dutch 'jammeren' (similar to German 'jammern', or whinging), is explicitly contradicted by the German version of this page. Only one can be right. Please substantiate. heiser (talk) 10:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: Is that mistaken "folk etymology" actually "common"? I've read about windjammers many times before with explanations of the name and never encountered that mistaken etymology before Wikipedia.--23.119.205.88 (talk) 20:02, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Folk etymology common? 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Windjammers (video game) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 00:00, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: *Iron-hulled sailing ship:  Iron-hulled sailing ships represented the final evolution of sailing ships at the end of the age of sail. They were built to carry bulk cargo for long distances in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They were the largest of merchant sailing ships, with three to five masts and square sails, as well as other sail plans. They carried lumber, guano, grain or ore between continents. Later examples had steel hulls. They are sometimes referred to as "windjammers" or "tall ships".
:HopsonRoad (talk) 22:52, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: - Ahunt (talk) 22:50, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Sample lead

message: Seeing the above discussion about the article name, I feel I should highlight a problem. The History section starts:
* "Iron-hulled sailing ships were mainly built from the 1870s to 1900...."
For all iron-hulled sailing vessels, this is completely incorrect. Many iron hulled ships were built before 1870 - see for instance David MacGregor (marine historian):
* "Whereas most of the iron sailing vessels built prior to 1850 were schooners, brigs or barques of small tonnage, an abrupt reversal to this trend materialised in 1852 with the construction of iron full-rigged ships of large size, and this new development became the established pattern."
If you look at the statistics on Scottish shipbuilding, there was a significant tonnage of iron or steel sailing ships built from 1865 through to the last five years of the 19th century.
It seems that the article text is a hangover from when the article was about windjammers - but of course the article title as it is makes the content of the article wrong.
There is a lot of content that could be put in an article about iron hulled sailing ships that may be inappropriate if the intention here is simply to cover windjammers. For instance, the problems of fouling of the hull, compass adjusting, the advantages over wood, the falling costs over time, the shortage of suitable ship-building timber in Britain and the economics of competition with steam. This last point should make clear the economic equilibrium that existed between the relatively inefficient compound-engined steamers of the 1870s and sail. This, of course, was disrupted at the beginning of the 1880s by the use of steel boilers that could run at much higher pressures, thereby making the triple expansion engine possible. This gave a much greater fuel economy (fuel consumption decreased by more than 60%) and made the steamship the primary means of maritime transportation in most places. One of the few advantages left to sail was that it was "the cheapest warehouse in the world". This applied as much to the massive bulk carriers on long distance voyages as to the Thames barges that took grain from the transatlantic steamships in London docks to the flour mills of East Anglia.
Is it appropriate to rewrite this article to cover all iron and steel hulled sailing vessels, or does the problem of the article title need to be revisited? ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your thoughtful discussion here, ThoughtIdRetired. From what I can see, the date range needs to be corrected per the sources that you cite. I encourage you to do so. You also suggest that the scope should include all such vessels. I agree. If there is a different issue with the title, could you please state it more clearly? Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 13:38, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the article title or the text at fault 

message: I am not sure that the film describes an iron hull ship but it fits the time period and nitrate route from Chile to Hamburg bypassing the Panama canal.
Four Masted Barque rounding Cape Horn 1928 - Captain Irving
Idyllic press (talk) 15:10, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as it looks that video was uploaded to YouTube by someone who is not the copyright holder so it would be WP:COPYLINK. See also WP:YOUTUBE in particular  - Ahunt (talk) 15:45, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a place to add external links to a good period film