Schooners-worth the time and money?

In the main rule book, one of the types of merchantship is the Schooner. Has anyone got much experience of these and in particular using them to support trade? They are quite expensive (compared to the more basic liner designs) and take a long time to build...on the other hand have a smaller crew and are available to anyone (unlike East Indiamen)

I have asked 'advisors' this very question, this turn in G7, so possibly not that long to wait for a definitive answer.

I don't think it is a simple choice between schooners or EiM, but more basic than that. In game 1L is really 10 separate ships, a kind of generic merchant ship, which is expected to generate c.£4K in profits. So 1EiM must carry more cargo (possible), but also more valuable cargo to justify the additional cost. EiM may well be better sailing round the Cape of Good Hope (fewer lost in storms?) which is what they were designed for. Schooners (or later clippers, which sacrificed cargo space for length, allowing them to use extra sail) took a slightly different route which allowed them to keep the wind. Logically some high value cargos would be better carried by schooners so the cost could be justified (although I'm not convinced that the cost is justified in the triangle trade).

Also, it could be that in the game journey times (say England to India) are not reduced by using faster ships, so although players think it is a good idea, it might not be.

I know Stuart uses them in his triangle trade, but he has plenty of money/recruits so isn't really bothered about making a profit. Perhaps Stuart can enlighten us, but the triangle trade was mainly slaves (there is a ship designed for that purpose), bulk commodities (sugar/cotton) where time is much less important, and perhaps some finished goods like rum which again is not really that time-dependent. So I have never understood why he thinks schooners are needed unless he hopes they will outrun pirates - could be unlikely when carrying cargo?

I don't have a definitive answer which is why I'm asking 'advisors'. My instinct is that if you can match high value (or perishable) cargos to schooners then there could be an advantage, but you do have to be very clear you are doing this, otherwise there may not be a benefit.

Thanks Papa, useful thoughts.  The speed and distance aspect does make sense. Like you, not convinced but happy to be convinced

Fun fact-the clipper ship design, as it emerged in the 1830s, was at first more a tax dodge than anything else.  Alexander Hall & Co (of Aberdeen) were responding to changes in the way the British government taxed merchant ships when they built "Scottish Maid" with its "Aberdeen Bow".  The shipyard worked that the design was the most cost effective way of carrying cargo and avoiding paying tax through how tonnage measurements (which then were used to calculate tax) were made-basically through a clever design fudge, ships of this revised design basically could carry some cargo tax free.  Of course the speed advantage came in handy, esp as "Scottish Maid" was used against steamships on the trade route down to London, but it was the tax advantage that appealed to canny Scottish merchants at first

Another constant in the universe? Whenever tax authorities try to take more money, someone somewhere will design something to get round it?

I wasn't aware of the history, just think that clipper ships are among the most striking of all ships in the Age of Sail. It won't surprise you that in the sail vs steam debate, I'm with sail - you just can't imagine Jacobites wielding claymores jumping off floating kettles (although I can imagine Williamites doing so).

Perhaps I should introduce a tax on stupid uniforms to force the Royal Company of Archers to wear something less frightful?

One of the advantages of having been the curator of maritime history in Aberdeen Plus, the town next to the Aberdeenshire village I'm currently in was the birthplace of Hercules Linton of "Cutty Sark" fame...the 2nd greatest clipper ship of all time (1st obviously being "Thermopylae", Aberdeen-built and the ship the CS was built to compete against).

I do tend to agree with you on sail v steam. Having said that, do have a bit of a weakness for some of the early attempts at steam-powdered ships in the 18th C, esp the Scottish efforts. When I've finally got time for more non-essential research in G10, would like to have a go at seeing if I can bring forward, by a few decades, some of the steamship attempts of William Symington and Patrick Miller. Doubt Richard will let me have a 144 gun, 74m steam-powered catamaran though!

Just be careful with your tax on silly uniforms, in case the highlanders think you're outlawing the kilt Perhaps King James could sponsor a competition to design a new uniform, to celebrate his success in Scotland?

Jason2 wrote:Just be careful with your tax on silly uniforms, in case the highlanders think you're outlawing the kilt Perhaps King James could sponsor a competition to design a new uniform, to celebrate his success in Scotland?

No danger of outlawing kilts ... I did actually design a special Jacobite tartan which one regiment is dressed in, and have specified kilts for certain regiments. 25th (King's Own Scottish Borderers) wear this Jacobite tartan which I named Royal Stuart Tartan, being an English unit masquerading as Scottish. 2nd Dragoons (Royal Scots Greys) also wear this tartan (although not kilts obviously). But when it comes to Scottish regiments it is rather difficult as I didn't want to exclude Jacobites (or Jacobite converts) who want to fight by requiring that they wear a specific tartan. Regiments linked to a specific tartan are straight forwards so 42nd wears Black Watch tartan. In the end I decided that 51st Highlanders would wear the tartan appropriate to their individual clan so when they fought they would be demonstrating the bravery of their clan. The 52nd Lowlanders wear Border tartan since clan identity was not so important for Lowlanders.

One current dilemma is whether to raise more Scottish regiments now I have the recruits and if so how to number/name them. Some (like 26th Foot - Cameronians - are unlikely to form part of the Jacobite army for religious/historical reasons). But the other famous Scottish regiments (e.g. Seaforth Highlanders, Gordon Highlanders, Argyll&Sutherland, etc,) tend to be later. So I might just end up raising generic 'Highland' regiments and giving them a number as I did 51st. I do want to raise Scottish regiments, partly because they are just so good at fighting, but also because they will give my army a rather unique historic flavour.

Quite like the idea of a competition, though. I have actually ordered a kind of competition last month which you can read about in the forthcoming newspaper. Don't want to spoil it here, but could be amusing (unless you're Spanish).

On the Scottish regiments and names, the solution I've gone for is a mix of "reforming" the various infantry and mounted regiments that were raised after 1666 and disbanded by 1700 (14 foot and 7 mounted regiments) and also using some of the names of the various independent highland companies of the latter part of the 17th Century as inspiration for regimental names.

I did seriously consider the Independent Highland companies, but it didn't seem to fit well with the numbering system of other units. I've deliberately avoided naming units after colonels since when the colonel gets killed the unit then changes its name (and my forces do have a habit of losing their officers, a bit like the Russian navy loses ships). Also the independent companies were more closely tied to clans which I felt would undermine the 'highlander' or 'lowlander' split. Where I do still have names they are either in addition to numbers or occasional odd units that just happened to have the right title.

I also considered naming them after Scottish counties, but ran into similar problems - the names just don't sound right and clash with the clan system.

At the moment it is all work in progress so I'll keep thinking.

Hi Guys,

Hope everyone is keeping well and enjoying their great Scots Army uniform debate.......think when I rebuild the 1st & 2nd Regiments of Leon and the 1st & 2nd Regiments of Gallicia in G7 I may give them a Tartan Plaid as a keep sake from their days trying to save King William etc. What would go well with Hapsburg White?

Yes, I know G7 King William was betrayed and then executed alongside Lord Murray Prime Minister of Scotland and Prince Eugine of Savoy the Austrian Envoy to Scotland so looked at from one point of view it was a total failure. But we are talking a major Opera theme here as the heroic Tercio hacks its way from Glasgow to Edinburgh (in Winter) to open up an escape route by blasting their way through hordes of Russian Cavalry and taking the breach.

Only for good King William and the Hapsburg hero not to make it too the breach because they have been sold down the river and handed over to the Jacobite foes. This is serious grounds for a proper Lement!

Also have to own up to the fact that the Spanish Schooner in G7 is another case of style over substance:

- Basically when the last war with France & the English Jacobites ended a lot of Spanish merchant sailors got set free but their Ships and Cargo was kept has prizes (King James Navy is still drinking Spanish Wine rather than Rum) so Spanish underwriters paid out and Ship Owners replaced their lost tonnage.

There are actually tens if not hundreds of different types of merchant ships all of which are probably best for a certain type of cargo, distance, sea condition etc. But were I think the combination of the combined Northern Square sail's and Med lantern sails which developed into the Biscay rigs and then into the various Schooner rigs does have a major advantage is in............LOOKS! If you have ever seen a Biscay Schooner Rigged vessas or a Fore Top Sailed Schooner under full sail under a blue sky she is utterly gorgerous to look at.

Currently in G7 Spanish ship owners (played by me) are busy trying to convince their wives (played by Richard) that time is money and their new Pride and Joy is a wise buy because:

1) They are much quicker than the average merchant ship so you get paid earlier which is good for cash flow, avoiding interest on loans and saves losses on perishable cargo. A Slaver for instance wants to make as fast as trip as possible to the America's since losses at sea on a slow voyage can be terrible. While other markets pay premium prices for first supplies in the new year.

2) Faster ships stand chance of out running storms and pirates so pay lower insurance premiums

3) The best looking and fastest ships in port easily attract the the best crews and do not waste and money due to crew shortage.

All of the above do have an element of truth but I suspect Spanish wives and Agema are giving a look like some of Jason's girlfriends would give if he showed up with a sports car and claimed a faster drive from home to work will save loads of time and it makes perfect economic sence.

In conclusion replacing lost ships with Schooners probably had zero effect on my trade. But by sending out a positive message that Spain can and will rebuild bigger and better than before it may have helped economic confidence........basically spending £££££! on getting the same result as Lord Melville manages with a few drinks and a speach to the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce.

But I do think in a lot of Agema games its not so much what you do........its how you do it & Schooners have got style in spades!

Thanks Stuart, that's really useful on the Schooners...you almost convince me until the girlfriends bit...most of mine either have access to some unusual weapons and/or know unusual ways to dispose of a body...and I know what their reactions would be

But in all seriousness, your final comment could be the most telling. I am thinking about the renewed League and it needs to be a bit brash and by sounds of it Schooners are brash!

Stuart Bailey wrote:Hope everyone is keeping well and enjoying their great Scots Army uniform debate.......think when I rebuild the 1st & 2nd Regiments of Leon and the 1st & 2nd Regiments of Gallicia in G7 I may give them a Tartan Plaid as a keep sake from their days trying to save King William etc. What would go well with Hapsburg White?

Yellow (to remind them that they are much better off sunning themselves in Spain than getting drenched in Scotland?)

or

Green (to remind them that no matter how colourful their uniforms they cannot compete with the Royal Company of Archers?)

Should also point out that the Scots would be very upset (in G7 at least) if Spain started creating tartans that were not approved (as all tartans must be in G7) by the official Keeper of Tartans and entered in the book. Very important to keep things legal - you know what Scottish lawyers are like. I know there are also some Irish tartans, but they do not really compare to Scottish tartans in quality/design. You could always ask for a Spanish tartan to be created and I would consider it, but if you try and design a 'Kentigern' tartan or make an anti-Jacobite political point then it is likely to be a very dangerous tartan to be seen wearing.

Stuart Bailey wrote:
Yes, I know G7 King William was betrayed and then executed alongside Lord Murray Prime Minister of Scotland and Prince Eugine of Savoy the Austrian Envoy to Scotland so looked at from one point of view it was a total failure. But we are talking a major Opera theme here as the heroic Tercio hacks its way from Glasgow to Edinburgh (in Winter) to open up an escape route by blasting their way through hordes of Russian Cavalry and taking the breach.

Only for good King William and the Hapsburg hero not to make it too the breach because they have been sold down the river and handed over to the Jacobite foes. This is serious grounds for a proper Lement!

For the benefit of new players, William was released on parole on condition he went back to UDP; instead he turned up in Scotland (possibly an oversight by an overworked GM) and allowed himself to be used as a figurehead to rebel against King James. Prince Eugene was sent as the Hapsburg advisor on military matters and helped funnel funds/arms to help Scottish rebels and was executed along with the others for breaking the law. The only lamentable thing is that none of the 3 had sufficient common sense to decamp to UDP whilst they had the chance.

Stuart Bailey wrote:
Also have to own up to the fact that the Spanish Schooner in G7 is another case of style over substance:

- Basically when the last war with France & the English Jacobites ended a lot of Spanish merchant sailors got set free but their Ships and Cargo was kept has prizes (King James Navy is still drinking Spanish Wine rather than Rum) so Spanish underwriters paid out and Ship Owners replaced their lost tonnage.

There are actually tens if not hundreds of different types of merchant ships all of which are probably best for a certain type of cargo, distance, sea condition etc. But were I think the combination of the combined Northern Square sail's and Med lantern sails which developed into the Biscay rigs and then into the various Schooner rigs does have a major advantage is in............LOOKS! If you have ever seen a Biscay Schooner Rigged vessals or a Fore Top Sailed Schooner under full sail under a blue sky she is utterly gorgerous to look at.

Currently in G7 Spanish ship owners (played by me) are busy trying to convince their wives (played by Richard) that time is money and their new Pride and Joy is a wise buy because:

1) They are much quicker than the average merchant ship so you get paid earlier which is good for cash flow, avoiding interest on loans and saves losses on perishable cargo. A Slaver for instance wants to make as fast as trip as possible to the America's since losses at sea on a slow voyage can be terrible. While other markets pay premium prices for first supplies in the new year.

2) Faster ships stand chance of out running storms and pirates so pay lower insurance premiums

3) The best looking and fastest ships in port easily attract the the best crews and do not waste and money due to crew shortage.

All of the above do have an element of truth but I suspect Spanish wives and Agema are giving a look like some of Jason's girlfriends would give if he showed up with a sports car and claimed a faster drive from home to work will save loads of time and it makes perfect economic sence.

In conclusion replacing lost ships with Schooners probably had zero effect on my trade. But by sending out a positive message that Spain can and will rebuild bigger and better than before it may have helped economic confidence........basically spending £££££! on getting the same result as Lord Melville manages with a few drinks and a speach to the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce.

But I do think in a lot of Agema games its not so much what you do........its how you do it & Schooners have got style in spades!

Captured Spanish wine is indeed drunk in large quantities throughout England, predominantly by the lower classes in celebration of the victories of the Royal Navy. It is not currently drunk at other times due to the high taxes (250%) levied upon it. Attempts have been made to get Spain to be more reasonable and return tariffs to less punitive levels, but so far without success.

At least we can all agree that schooners look good. Although I'm not so sure that they would necessarily attract crews. All that extra sail is awfully tiring for the crew to keep working and to keep catching the wind to get the fastest passage, that crew will have to work very hard indeed. Also totally reject the idea that schooners are ideal slave transporters. With cargo space limited and poor ventilation below decks, slaves would find the conditions awfully cramped. Yes the length of voyage would probably be shorter, but I doubt that would compensate for the conditions. Slave transporters tended to be more solid, broader vessels designed to withstand storms - the exact opposite of a schooner's profile. Stuart uses EiM as troop transports for that very reason: increased stability means lower sick lists and fewer casualties. If it applies to troops then it will apply even more to slaves who are usually packed in more densely.

So however nice they may look, I'm not sure I'd want to sail a schooner in the Baltic where it lacks the structural strength to resist ice and the winds are rarely constant enough to get the benefit from the extra sail. You might also want to avoid coppering them since the Baltic has high salt concentrations that will corrode them fairly quickly. It would hardly do the reputation of the Hanseatic League much good to have its shiny new schooner towed by a galley having sprung a leak, the cargo ruined and captain being somewhat embarrassed that he was set up to fail?

Oh Darn; Russia in G 7 has 100 Schooners helping trade in the Baltic, just seemed like a good idea at the time.

Please don't tell me they are all going to sink next turn .

J Flower wrote:Oh Darn; Russia in G 7 has  100 Schooners helping trade in the Baltic, just seemed like a good idea at the time.

Please don't tell me they are all going to sink next turn .

Fitting a ship with a Schooner rig compared to say fitting it with a Junk rig, a Ketch rig, a Square rig or any other of the half a hundred other rigs does not make it more or less sea-worthy.

A possible problem with the Schooner rig and other rigs which put up a lot of sail compared to the size of the vessel is that if you get hit by a sudden storm with a lot of sail up you can get "taken aback" and lose a mast or even turn turtle. Probably not a problem in the Baltc were the more usual problem is too little wind (esp when you want to avoid getting stuck in the ice).

The other possible problem with fairly complex rigs like the Schooner rig is that its easier for a poor crew to mess things up and crash into a rock, jetty or some sand bank some idiot left handing around.............Ok I can see why Russian marine underwriters are worried.

My own experience sailing in a couple of Schooner rigged ships is very light winds which jump around or die away are down right hard work. What you want are good steady winds like a trade wind or the monsoon winds which blow from one direction and do not jump around much. This will allow you to trim your sails just right sail much closer to the wind and generally leave most other sailing ships floundering in your wake.

Plus as happened to me once........a big schooner gets the sun and her list just right as it goes past you and every other crew turns green with envey.

Seems like we are in agreement that schooners are likely to be most useful on routes which allow them to use their sail. They are built for speed over stability or capacity. I'm not rejecting schooners out of hand, just think they should be used with care to get the benefit expected.

In the Baltic it would probably be a waste to use EiM since they are not really designed for those conditions either. So perhaps ordinary Liners are optimal to support Baltic trade?

Stuart has raised an interesting point about the quality of crews - not something I had taken into account since any untrained crew is risky. I do wonder how many of us bother training the crews of merchant ships rather than raising them and sending them to help trade as soon as possible. Perhaps the more specialized the ship the greater the benefit to training crews?

Think any benefit from specialist merchant ships like East India Men designed for long voyages and to survive rough sea's would probably be limited to trade with the Far East, India and the America's.

That said the Barbary Corsairs used to avoid English and Dutch sailing to the Levant because they were large and well armed so using EIM may have benefits in waters with a problem with small pirate ships. And before anyone shouts G10 I said small pirate ships not large fast privateers on holiday from the French Navy!

Have only had a few well drilled drilled merchant crews by accident and historically most prople learnt on the job but it can not do any harm and I wonder if it might not be of particular value for positions with no real tradition of sea going.

okay, okay I get the hint, Russia in G 7 will be building a number of training facilities for sailors, just knowing my luck they'll get struck by freak floods & all students will drown.

Bugger, have I just given Richard an idea!

Watch out in G 8 see if anyone can spot the beginnings of the Bavarian Navy last seem still afloat in the Baltic.

J Flower wrote:okay, okay I get the hint, Russia in G 7 will be building a number of training facilities for sailors, just knowing my luck they'll get struck by freak floods & all students will drown.

Bugger, have I just given Richard an idea!

You're not helping any Russian players in parallel dimensions you know

Marshal Bombast wrote:

J Flower wrote:okay, okay I get the hint, Russia in G 7 will be building a number of training facilities for sailors, just knowing my luck they'll get struck by freak floods & all students will drown.

Bugger, have I just given Richard an idea!

You're not helping any Russian players in parallel dimensions you know

Note as well the Rome Game starts in 65 AD and the History of the period does not really include a single Naval battle worthy of the name.

But like a moth to a flame were is the attention of @ "J Flower" drawn? Over 300 years before the start of out Game & the 1st Punic War one of the few major wars in history were the winner manages to drown more of their own men than the combined battle losses of both sides!

Marshal Bombast wrote:

J Flower wrote:okay, okay I get the hint, Russia in G 7 will be building a number of training facilities for sailors, just knowing my luck they'll get struck by freak floods & all students will drown.

Bugger, have I just given Richard an idea!

You're not helping any Russian players in parallel dimensions you know

Really,

no one here listening

Well G7 turn has now arrived and the answer from the admiralty regarding schooners is as follows: "I'm a fighting man's admiral, not one of those merchant types. No idea about it really, sorry not to be of more help on this occasion. Perhaps the French Admiralty might be able to help enlighten you more about such a matter?"

There are several things we learn from this:
1. Lord Orford really isn't interested in ships without guns. Or possibly ships that are smaller than a frigate and outside of the ratings system. If I had asked a question relating to types of sail upgrades on lineships I'd have probably had a long, useful but costly reply.
2. Lord Orford finds social occasions (like the ball he was attending) pointless so he was probably in a bad mood anyway. To him the only social occasion worth attending is a battle, preferably a big one with big ships and big guns against someone he doesn't like.
3. Lord Orford may well have a contempt for ship designers - his job is to get the crews working and the ships blasting away - why should he care how they are built? Curiously this does reflect the historic tensions between ship designers and the Admiralty. An enlightened admiral would take the views of designers into account, but in practical terms Admirals had to compensate for what they viewed as the mistakes of designers to get a fleet of ships of varying ages/designs working as an efficient unit. Any suggestion that the design of ships might make their task easier was seen as compromising the skill of the admiral (in a similar way to pre-packaged powder charges being seen as compromising the judgement of professional artillerymen).
4. Lord Orford really doesn't like the French admiralty, who he thinks doesn't share his single-minded pursuit of the enemy. At least he didn't suggest asking the Russian admiralty as perhaps that would have been obviously unco-operative?
5. Lord Orford does reflect a certain historical antipathy between the Royal Navy and the Merchant Navy. Unfortunately for him they rely on each other. A large merchant navy does help crews get used to being at sea and although it may be annoying to have to use ships to protect merchants, without merchant ships the Royal Navy would struggle to find crews to replace losses in wartime. Of course not every merchant sailor adjusts to the higher standards expected by the Royal Navy, so perhaps Lord Orford was also expressing some dissatisfaction at the quality of the recruits he was expected to train.
6. If I ask him another question I can be fairly sure that the answer will be 'more guns', 'more powder', 'more shot', 'more ships' and 'a war to use them in'. Clearly peace is a very difficult environment for a fighting admiral.

The perils of 'asking advisors'.

However, I will not be so easily deterred and will be asking the same question of different advisors this coming turn. Not the French or the Russians, of course. I'm still thinking about asking a ship designer, but he might suggest building both, with different timber sources, then running sea trials with different cargos, so I might have the answer sometime over the next 20 years. So if I can identify the most suitable person to ask then hopefully the answer will be more useful.

Since most heavy fighting is done under top sails only and in battle you want as want as many people on the guns and as few sailing the ship as possible Schooners are probably of very little interest to the military.

Guess they could be used as messengers, or as very fast privateers provided they only picked on easy targets and ran away from everything else.  Or as Blockade runners due to their speed and ability to sail closer to the wind.

If the English are going to check with the French in G7 the question is probably going to get passed to that damn Parrot.

In the game rules schooners do not carry cannon, although they can be upgraded provided they are no larger than 9pdr.

As mentioned above I will not be asking the French admiralty, however it might be worth asking Esmerelda - she must speak fluent parrot, so could ask her relatives, some of whom probably sail with pirates.

If you want the Russian Expert Naval opinion opinion "They float ? We loose less sailors if ( *note IF not when!) they sink .Good we'll take them. Oh & If you paint a them red do they go faster?"

J Flower wrote:If you want the Russian Expert Naval opinion opinion "They float?"

Applicants for the post of Master Shipbuilder to His Rightful and Most Catholic Majesty, King James, are of the unanimous opinion that schooners float.  They also point out that so do rafts.

Lord Orford helpfully observed that schooners with guns fitted also float, but have a tendency to tip upside down.  This unfortunately means the guns tend to sink, which is another reason he's not that familiar with them, a ship without guns not being a proper ship.  Oddly rafts with guns do not sink if the guns slide into the water, so rafts could be considered safer.

He is also pleased to report that all pirates he has come across also float - although that was after they were hung or otherwise rendered incapable of objecting to their punishment.  

J Flower wrote:We loose less sailors if ( *note IF not when!) they sink. Good we'll take them.

Applicants for the post of Master Shipbuilder to His Rightful and Most Catholic Majesty, King James, are of the unanimous opinion that mathematically there are fewer sailors on board a schooner than an ordinary merchant ship so everything being equal fewer sailors should be lost.

This did not impress Lord Orford, who observed that schooner rigging is more complicated, masts higher and sails more numerous so there is a significantly increased risk that Russian sailors will slip overboard or fall from a great height, probably onto other Russian sailors, causing higher sickness and a greater risk of the ship floundering in a light breeze.  Rafts, of course, do not have these dangers and the crew could be tethered to the raft so that if they slipped, they could be hauled back on board.

J Flower wrote:Oh & If you paint a them red do they go faster?"

Applicants for the post of Master Shipbuilder to His Rightful and Most Catholic Majesty, King James, were divided upon the question of colour.  One observed that red ships would stand out and attract pirates which could encourage the crews to put on sail more quickly to escape.  Another suggested that blue ships would be camoflaged so less likely to attract pirates and therefore more likely to complete their journey without being stopped.  Some candidates observed that neither of these would make any difference because it is the sails rather than the hull that are seen from a distance.  Each colour has the chance to disguise the ship against certain skies, but not others.  Unless sails are changed to match the sky, colour is unlikely to help; and of course carrying extra sails would increase weight which in turn would slow down the ships.  After considerable discussion, the consensus was therefore that painting schooners does not make them go faster.

After launching into a tirade against ship designers, Lord Orford stated "Of course a Russian schooner painted red would be faster.  A third of the crew would have dropped their brushes into the water and been lost trying to find them; another third of the crew would be washed overboard trying to rescue their shipmates, so the Russian schooner would be left with only a third of the crew on board - a considerable reduction in weight."  

It is not known whether any of the applicants interviewed by Lord Orford was offered the post.