Talk:Gaff rig

Removed text:

A gaff is the sail is supported at the top by a spar. The gaff is suspended from the mast and rises and falls with the sail. See the picture on the schooner page for an example. The gaff is hoisted so that its end furthest from the mast is much higher than the end attached to the mast. This leads to an advantage of this rig that the mast itself need not be so high. Possibly this led to the popularity of this type of rig in the days of wooden spars.

A reasonable start but lots of guesswork. Andrewa 21:21, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Merge Gaff->Gaff rig

Presently the Gaff article is a subset of a version of this article. It either needs work or should become a disambiguation page for the spar used in Gaff rig and the fishing tool. With work (along the lines of Boom), it could probably shrink Gaff rig and let that concentrate on where the rig is used. But as it stands now Gaff is duplication.--J Clear 02:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

After popping over to Gaffer is seems like working to make Gaff unique might be better.--J Clear 02:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Gaff is also a fishing term and a special card or gimmick used in magic - I suggest gaff is a disambiguation page which links to different treatments of each term. Davidbod 12:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

gaffs longer than booms

Does this happen? If so, the area would more than double. Debivort 20:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

It is theoretically possible, but I have never seen any ships like this. I suspect that this is because any ship with space for such a pole has room for it at deck level, and tradition says that the boom should be longer. On second thoughts, however, it would be quite a good idea to have the gaff longer. This would put much of the sail higher, where the wind is a tiny bit stronger. The resulting sail would be harder to handle, but it shouldn't be impossible. 81.187.148.35 (talk) 17:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The Dutch designed small yacht type Valk (link to Dutch wikipedia page) has a gaff that is about 10% longer then the boom. Ian Splinter (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Sailing characteristics (Small Craft)

There is a warning that this section is written like the opinion of wikipedia. I have read it. It's not opinion, it is factual information. I think the problem is most of the evidence is anecdotal. You can't measure whether one is better than another, you can only compare, and that's what this section does very accurately (Scot McPherson) 11 September, 2014 — Preceding undated comment added 19:53, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree with this criticism. I see no basis for tagging this section as opinion. Gaff rigs do have a CE lower and aft of a Bermuda rig of the same sail area. Using a cutter rig (two jibs) can compensate for that, as can keel design, and that is a popular option. The article may need better citations, but section is far from a personal impression. Jklowden (talk) 20:23, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Circular Definitions

I've had to wend my way through a couple of dozen of these nautical articles and most of them are quite wonderful. The problem I have, the MAJOR problem I have, is the inability to define one discrete feature of a sailing vessel without reference to a series of other features, all of which lead back to the feature one is trying to figure out. Read my lips: SHOW ME A PICTURE!! Nothing Else Will Do! You nautical types end up coming across to the rest of us as rather self-satisfied enthusiasts. GET IT TOGETHER and clue the rest of us in on what you are talking about.

Thanks most humbly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.196.74.174 (talk) 14:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with this statement. I DO know what a gaff rig is, and I was just here to see if there was a decent picture to clarify a few rigging details I was unsure of... Alas, there is a photo with some arrows that point at things I cannot even really see. I may just take it upon myself to generate a diagram myself at this point. Can't believe this hasn't been done before now, but better late than never! A decent image-- is that so much to expect? So hard to produce? I do not think so. Let me see what I can do here...! KDS4444^Talk 16:50, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Photo

The "halyard" photo is supposed to demonstrate exactly what a gaff-rigged boat is. How very nice. Exactly WHERE in the photo does it indicate what a ""***GAFF***"" is? I don't want to spend 5 hours on each and every of the hundreds of nautical terms, I come to Wikipedia to make my life easier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.196.74.174 (talk) 14:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

In the german wikipedia ("Deutsch") there is a picture where 1 identifies the "Gaffel" (gaff). I'd say the gaff is a round pole which is mounted to the mast near its top to maintain a sail in a way that it can be four-cornered. But English is not my first language and I know nothing about sailing. (That's why I'm also looking for precise and simple and non-circular definitions.) Maybe some expert could check this. -- 84.155.143.60 (talk) 10:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

It dosn't say were the gaff is. To give a deffinition, the gaff is the pole at the top of the sail, as opposed to the boom at the bottom of the sail. The gaff dosn't need to be round, but it normally is. I don't claim to be an expert either, but I do spend quite a lot of time sailing. 81.187.148.35 (talk) 17:12, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Ringtail

Have been redirected from Ringtail (sail) - so what is a Ringtail sail? is it the same as a Gaff or is the redirect wrong? Ray3055 (talk) 18:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

No, this should be redirected to Studding_sail. I fixed the redirect. Scot.mcpherson 11 September 2014 — Preceding undated comment added 19:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Citations

Much of this article is there "because it is obvious", but this is not acceptable. Citations must be found for all facts asserted in the article. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 21:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I'm not happy with the material that was added today with no citations and I almost reverted it all. I'm going to try to work on this article a bit sometime. —Diiscool (talk) 23:23, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

French Interlanguage link

There is a French Interlanguage link, directly written in article wikicode, to fr:Voile aurique. But looking at WikiData d:Q2723168, the French Interlanguage link would be fr:Voile à corne. --62.19.46.1 (talk) 12:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Looking at French Wikipedia: fr:Voile aurique is linked to d:Q1780790, which is linked to Fore-and-aft rig. fr:Voile à corne is linked to d:Q2723168 so, off course, to this article Gaff rig.--62.19.46.1 (talk) 12:25, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

• "Gaff rig" translates in French to "gréement à corne", but there is no French-language article with that title.
• "Fore-and-aft rig" would translate in French to "gréement franc", which is almost never used; The adjective "franc" is used to characterise a "côtre franc" (fore-and-aft cutter) as opposed to a "côtre à hunier" (naval cutter OR topsail cutter - read "square topsail cutter" of course, like the Renard), OR a "goélette franche" (fore-and-aft schooner) as opposed to a "goélette à hunier" (topsail schooner - read "square topsail schooner").
• "Voile aurique" has no direct translation in the English language, but it designates a quandrangular fore-and-aft sail that is *not* a headsail; no quadrangular jibs; "Voile aurique" is typically associated with gaff-rig sails, but also lugsails and gunter sails.
• "Voile à corne" designates a gaff mainsail on a gaff rig (or a modern squaretopmainsail with a peak batten, as developed on racing yachts)

In my opinion there is no simple way to provide a direct 1-to-1 translation for this term steeped in maritime tradition, it is the encyclopaedic depth of the article as organised in a particular language that counts most. signed:Donan Raven (talk, contribs) 15:32, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gaff rig. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081203151438/http://www.frankhagan.com/weekender/gaffhaly.htm to http://www.frankhagan.com/weekender/gaffhaly.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:16, 23 June 2016 (UTC)