Talk:Baltimore Clipper

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Ships This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Could someone provide a source for the Californian to be a Baltimore clipper? Otherwise I'm sorry to say that I'll delete the picture in this article. Thanks, Ibn Battuta 03:36, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"They were so far in advance of their times that there was no comparison with other vessels of the same time"

You have obviously never heard of objectivity.

Ibn Battuta, according to the foundation that built the Californian, the ship is a recreation of the "C. W. Lawrence," (http://www.californian.org/htm/shipinfo.htm), which according to the U.S. Coast Guard was a "Brig-rigged Baltimore-style clipper" built by William Easby in Foggy Bottom, Washington D.C. and launched August 18, 1848. (http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-cp/history/WEBCUTTERS/Lawrence_1848.html)

Although I agree that this article is in need of a severe rewrite, as it is utterly lacking in objectivity and makes questionable claims, I see no reason to remove the photograph. Dukiebiddle 14:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although there are four schooners of note in the United States today that loosely date from that period, (Pride of Baltimore II, Lynx, Amistad, and Californian) only the Pride of Baltimore II belongs to the class of 'Baltimore Clipper.' Lynx has several design issues, most prominently a break in the deck abaft the main shrouds that is not true to the flush-decked style of Baltimore Clipper. Californian and Amistad are modeled after Revenue Cutters, the Californian after the C.W. Lawrence (http://www.sdmaritime.com/contentpage.asp?ContentID=52). Amistad was of the same era, and built towards the design of the original vessel of historical fame. Ergo, if there is to be any photo on this page, it seems that the POB II is the most qualified. Perhaps more apt would be to put a photo of the Pride of Baltimore, which was far more true to her roots than any vessel today, even using cobblestone from the streets of Baltimore as ballast. ("Pride of the Sea", by Tom Waldron (http://books.google.com/books?id=v8U6FVXAoG8C&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=Pride+of+Baltimore,+cobblestone&source=bl&ots=3BUGb3DswD&sig=p41NdylMUcqqbYkp7ts0jwsGBwA&hl=en&ei=z3fXSc-IC4LNlQeWg4i9DA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7)). I will obtain several photos of each vessel for upoload.

Starbuck2009 (talk) 15:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Lynx absolutely is a Baltimore clipper. The original Lynx had her lines taken off by the British, and that was the source material for the current Lynx. Certain modifications were made for modern safety, and she has a flat keel instead of a raked keel, but there's no doubt that she's a reasonable marriage of modern safety requirements with historical attributes. (See: http://www.privateerlynx.com/lynx.html) An exactly period correct Baltimore clipper would not meet Coast Guard safety requirements. Here's a historical image of a Baltimore clipper with her crew hiked out on the windward rail -- you'll never see this in a modern tall ship! (http://www.seakayak.ws/kayak/kayak.nsf/0/07a965ee63639cc5852570dc006abb98/Body/0.64A8!OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif) This article has huge problems -- The theory of Bermuda origin was first posed by Howard Chapelle in the 1930s, then refuted by him by the 1960s. Footner's Tidewater Triumph isn't a good source, either. ~K~ (talk) 10:42, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are we sure that describing slaves as 'low-density, perishable cargo' is appropriate? they were human beings after all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikigreenwood (talk • contribs) November 30, 2007

I agree 100%. What's a better way to word that sentence? Would something like the following be less insensitive but still accurate?

They were especially suited to moving low-density, high value perishable cargoes. They were frequently used to transport slaves, and in that trade operated as far afield as the west coast of Africa.

-- Avocado 01:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing about the design of the Baltimore clipper type that is inherently unstable. A ship that would ordinarily capsize in port would not be able to sail in any condition whatsoever. If such a capsize did occur it would certainly be due to being under ballasted. Ballast stones are routinely removed and replaced to compensate for the addion or subtraction of cargoes. If, for example, a ships cargo was removed and it was not reballasted before a storm the ship might be easily knocked down. Though this would be the case for virtually any equivalent vessel of that era. Danielrjansen (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia requires