Draft Of A Galleon

[JCB]

Does anyone know the draft range for 1600's spanish galleons?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[rgecy]

JCB,

Welcome to the forum. The draft would certainly depend on the size and tonage. You typically hear 12-15', but again, it all depends on the size! Certainly a smaller galleon would draft less. Ships in the early 1600s would have been smaller than ships in the later half.

Robert in SC

 

[JCB]

The Anchor off the ship is 11 feet long and 7.5 feet wide. Thought this info might help determin the size of the ship and then maybe we could figure out the draft from there. Thanks for your help.

Jim

 

[JCB]

PS The anchor appears to be from the early 1700's, not 1600's. My bad.

 

[ScubaDude]

Your question is hard to answer. Most of the ships in those periods were carrying at least six anchors. Your boat could be anywhere from 100 to 150 feet, and draft from 12 to 18 ft. What are you basing the age of the anchor on? Have you found any artifacts that might help? I guess my big question is are you asking the draft question so you can locate the rest of the wreck? If so sea state could have caused the wreck to ground in considerably deeper water. Help us help you. I'm not trying to sound like a wise guy, there is a lot of talent and expertise on this site.

 

[JCB]

I have based the age of the anchor on research i have done. Based on the fact that it had a wooden stock, which has deteriorated and the shape of the flukes. I am asking about the draft because I would like to locate the rest of the wreck. I have not foud any artifacts in the vacinity and have spent several day searching the area with metal detectors. The anchor was in about 20 feet of water, however the reef gets very shallow before your get into deeper water. The only way into the area where the anchors layed is over the top of that reef. Would it be possible for a the ship to break up comming over that reef and drop the anchor on the shallow side? Also i have not been able to locate any cannons or other anchors. Would the ever cut an anchor loose and leave it on the bottom? I figured they would salvage it if at all possible. Any help is greatly appreciated.

 

[ScubaDude]

To answer your first question, yes the ship could have broken up coming over the reef you mentioned and deposited the anchor on the shallow side. Ships have basically sheared in half and the upper decks continued along leaving the hull bottom and ballast behind. Was your anchor set at all or was it just lying about? If it was set the shank could be pointing toward what you seek. Your last question could it be abandoned? My guess is doubtful - To have intentionally set an anchor in a place as you describe seems unlikely. What geographic area are we talking about if you don't mind saying?

 

[Cablava]

This is part of the narrative written about this shipwreck by the sixth officer (1818), he clearly states the ship seperated and the upper section drove further onto the reef. I have another more detailed report stating that the upperworks drove several hundred meters further onto the reef. In this case the reef stays relativly flat for about a mile before the beach.

The captain, however, was not to be seen, and most of the others had
returned to the wreck and were employed in getting the small cutter into
the water, which they accomplished, and safely reached the shore. About
noon, when we had all left the ship, she was a perfect wreck. The whole
of the upper works, from the after part of the forecastle to the break
of the poop deck, had separated from her bottom about the upper
futtock-heads, and was driving in towards the reef. Most of the lighter
cargo had floated out of her. Bales of company's cloth, cases of wine,
puncheons of spirits, barrels of gunpowder, hogsheads of beer, &c. lay
strewed on the shore, together with a chest of tools. Finding the men
beginning to commit the usual excesses, we stove in the heads of the
spirit casks, to prevent mischief, and endeavoured to direct their
attention to the general benefit. The tide was flowing fast, and we saw
that the reef must soon be covered; we therefore conveyed the boats to a
place of safety, and filling them with all the provisions that could be
collected, proceeded to the highest sand-bank as the only place which
held out the remotest chance of security. Our progress was attended with
the most excruciating pain I ever endured, with feet cut to the bones by
the rocks, and back blistered by the sun--exhausted with fatigue--up to
the waist--sometimes to the neck in the water, and frequently obliged
to swim. Seeing, however, that several had reached the highest
sand-bank, lighted a fire, and were employed in erecting a tent from the
cloth and small spars which had floated up, I felt my spirits revive,
and had strength sufficient to reach the desired spot, when I was
invited to partake of a shark which had just been caught by the people.
Having set a watch to announce the approach of the sea, lest it should
cover us unawares, I sunk exhausted on the sand, and fell into a sound
sleep. I awoke in the morning stiff with the exertions of the former
day, yet feeling grateful to Providence that I was still alive.

 

[stevemc]

Yes, they often move in closer to shore from the anchor. If you look closer to shore and also further to sea, in a further outward pattern, you might find something. I know they say a loaded galleon or naos had a draft of 16 to 18 feet, but if it was rough, the troughs would make that shallower, and the peaks would carry the boat further with each wave. So as told earlier, the ballast could spill out and the boat could go further to shore. There may be several anchors in this path. Good luck, Steve.

 

[theGOLD]

What physical characteristics define the date of an anchor. Say as in the example that JCB gave earlier in the thread for an early 1700's anchor, and lets still take the example of a spanish galleon. I asked this same sort of question concerning the size anchor that the "el capitan" would have been carrying in the discussion "Wisdom from the wise". I ask because if I ever want to have a look for the El capitan I would have no idea what to look for in terms of approximate size/shape anchors, or cannon for that matter.

THANKS!!

-theGOLD

 

[pegleglooker]

Greetings Everyone,
I hate to 'jump" this post, but I'm thinking you guys might be my best hope to find some answers... I am doing research on a few different types of early tall ships and am trying to find out how much draft is needed for each. Here is what I'm hoping to find:

16th century 40 ton English Galleon, this ship was most likely loaded to the max....

17th century Spanish Caravelle (caravel), with a very light load, so I'm looking for the draft when empty

17th century Spanish "light" frigate (fragata) with a very light load, so I'm looking for the draft when empty

Thank you in advance for any and all info you can provide!!

Thx
PLL

 

[ivan salis]

ok -- draft as a way of thinking of shipwreck depth.. .. one must take into account several factors .. the vessels draft is just one factor .. the wave size of the storm it was in .. is a huge factor .. most ships did not just "fall apart" at sea but had to strike something to be broken up .. either a reef , other ships or by "bottom bouncing" in shallow waters until their hull burst apart ...... think of say 30 foot waves a 15 foot draft vessel riding on top of a 30 foot wave would still have 15 feet of water under it ..until after the wave came out from under it and it slammed into the empty bottom as the wave went past and under it ..once in shallow water --it would be lifted up and pounded down until she broke to bits ...the direction the anchors are pointing in is a critical tip as to the direction of the wreck (if there was one ) sometimes a anchor was lost but the ship survived the storm--but in the off chance it ran up on a reef or sank --the anchor ropes / chains would have pulled the shaft of the anchor in the direction in which the wind was blowing at the time --so the shaft of the anchor would "point" in the direction the "adrift" vessel would have been blown ..at the time .. you would want to follow this line to he nearest reef or shallow water spot ..looking for ballast rocks along the way ..

 

[Old Bookaroo]

PLL:

I think you will find useful information in Potter's classic "Homewrecker" - The Treasure Diver's Guide by John S. Potter, Jr. (1960; revised 1972). See Section One, Chapter One, "The Golden Galleons." I believe you will locate the information you are seeking.

Unless I miss my guess, storms and wave heights and beaches and coral reefs won't be much of an issue for the wreck you are hunting...

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Boatlode]

For what its worth, the 1622 Nuestra Senora de Atocha was 112 feet long, 550 tons, and a draft of 14 feet. But as Mr. Salis points out above, wave height has as much to do with point of impact as draft does. The Atocha struck the reef in the trough of a wave and went down in deep water, while the Margarita was carried across that same reef on the crest of a wave and broke up in shallow water.

 

[pegleglooker]

Maybe, I'm a bit confused... What I am looking for is the minimum water depth needed for these ships to sail. They would not have been sailing in the ocean, rather they would have been in Sea of Cortez between Mexico and Baja.. Maybe draft isn't the right word to use... Also I missed up on the galleons capacity, it was 60 tons not 40, sorry... And to Old Bookaro, sorry amigo, but that's a book I do not own.. However, maybe I should... lol Thx again evreryone!!!

16th century 60 ton English Galleon, this ship was most likely loaded to the max....

17th century Spanish Caravelle (caravel), with a very light load, so I'm looking for the draft when empty

17th century Spanish "light" frigate (fragata) with a very light load, so I'm looking for the draft when empty

 

[seekerGH]

Unless I miss my guess, storms and wave heights and beaches and coral reefs won't be much of an issue for the wreck you are hunting...

neither will salt water!

add fresh water draft to the mix.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Ahoy!

So it's a landlubber ye be - not to have a copy of The Homewrecker!

Argh!

The following is not to dispute any of the previous posts. I'm not enough of an expert to attempt that. It was clear what vessel you were inquiring about - I based my previous comment(s) on that premise.

A 40- or even a 60-ton ship is not very large. That's about the size of Columbus's Nina (Marx - Shipwrecks in the Americas). Not a "galleon." You'd have to add another "0" for a vessel of that size.

Potter (page 11) says "From 1550 to 1600 the typical galleon or nao [generic term for "ship"] ranged in size from 300 tons to 600 tons (a ship's tonnage was its cargo capacity)...The 400-tonner of 1590 ... [had] a 20-foot draft."

He goes on to point out that draft is not only determined by weight but also by design - length and beam (width).

"The Caravel was a favorite of the explorers." These were small - 35 to 90 tons - often lantine-rigged, "...shallow draft which permitted it to enter rivers and bays..." Marx states a vessel of 50 tons would be 35 to 40 feet long and from 12 to 15 feet in the beam. Potter's note: "By 1575 it had nearly disappeared."

Frigates were much larger - 900 to 1700 tons. They probably had a draft (and this is me, not Potter or Marx) of 18 to 20
feet.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Jolly Mon]

I imagine, given a suitable propulsion source (riverside mules, sweeps, etc.), all of the vessels you mentioned could have navigated a substantial distance up the Colorado River. As Old Bookaroo mentioned, a 60 ton "galleon" is almost certainly a misnomer. A typical period galleon of the period would have been MUCH larger...perhaps 10x or more.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

I hazard a guess the problem is with the source "document(s)." Treasure writers love to include a Spanish galleon. It just reads so well. "Caravel" doesn't have the same cachet - sounds more like a two-door sedan.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[seekerGH]

The reports do state it was a Caravel....fresh water would mean deeper draft.
Tidal influence upstream would be a guess, as would the river channel of the day, as the river doesnt flow to that point any longer.