Talk:The Maltese Falcon (yacht)

Fair use rationale for Image:MalteseFalcon.jpg

Image:MalteseFalcon.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Maurice27 20:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sail design

It seems to me that the sails on the Maltese Falcon are not really square sails, as they do not curve parallel to the yards, but rather perpendicular. It seems to be just a giant, roller furling variation of the Bolger sail (see Boats with an Open Mind, chapter 24), also known as the AYRS sail, which dates back to the 1960's[1]. It might be worth having a bit more discussion of how the rig works, with a nod to Bolger's earlier design. scot 14:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me it looks as if the sails are square to the yards, but the yards rotate around the mast. They don't seem to be related to the Bolger sails, which look as if they have an edge fixed to the mast. 199.71.183.2 21:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, the Bolger/AYRS sail has free edges. The sail is bilaterally symmetric, with pre-cambered battens acting as yards, so the airflow can come from either edge, and it has a definate windward and leeward side (making it a good choice for the proa). The only attachment to the mast is at the peak of the sail, and the bottom corners each have sheets, either of which can be fixed, to form the leading edge, while the other serves as a sheet. The downside of the rig was that it required lots of tension on the sheet to keep the leading edge straight, which tended to warp the sail and distort airflow. Attaching the battens to the mast, making them yards as in the Falcon, spreads this load out. See here for some commentary, related to the use on a proa, but for the most part generally applicable. scot 21:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second comment above: "the yards rotate around the mast" - No. The yards are rigidly attached to the mast, and the whole mast rotates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulburnett (talk • contribs) 14:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One drawback I see in this design is that it appears that the yards can not be fanned to accommodate the change in wind direction with height. As I remember the rule, in the Northern hemisphere, "winds are veered aloft". The photos of the USCGC Eagle (WIX-327) clearly show the fanning of the yards. The Eagles operating manual, Eagle Seamanship: A Manual for Square-Rigger Sailing, Naval Institute Press; 4 edition (April 15, 2011), ISBN 1-59114-631-3, explains the process. --AJim (talk) 16:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wind powered top speed

What is the top speed powered by wind? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kslays (talk • contribs) 23:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, let me guess — if the wind speed is zero, the top speed powered by wind is — zero? —Quicksilver^{T @} 18:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hectomillionaire

This is an insane term. In gives me 300 google hits, most of which indirectly refer to wikipedia, or discuss the term as such. I believe to use it would qualify as WP:OR, or something similar, so Im changing it to millionair.. -- Eiland (talk) 15:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an insane term, it's a correct term for someone who has over a hundred million dollars. Just using the word millionaire could equally be used to refer to someone with $1 000 000 or someone with $800 000 000. Since there is an enormous difference in that wealth it's not "insane" to use the word hectomillionaire. Also, it's spelled with an 'e' at the end. -- Brendan OhUiginn (talk) 18:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Large ship in the photo?

Whats that large ship in the photo, sitting along side the Maltese Falcon? --Ragemanchoo (talk) 07:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Perkins" mentioned in article

The article contains several mentions of an unattributed / unexplained "Perkins". The article needs to be re-written to explain Perkins' role in the ship's history - it's kind of clumsy right now - it doesn't even link to Tom Perkins' WikiPedia article. Paulburnett (talk) 16:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Owner of the yacht

The yacht was built and is owned by the American venture capitalist Tom Perkins and not by "Australian billionaire William Kristensen." There is a chapter devoted to the creation of the Maltese Falcon in the recent autobiography: "Valley Boy: The Education of Tom Perkins." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.31.252 (talk) 05:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vessel name

The yacht's legal name is "The Maltese Falcon", not "Maltese Falcon" or "The Falcon". According to the Yachtworld.com listing offering it for sale, the boat is currently registered in the Cayman Islands, and according to Cayman Island Shipping Registry, the name "MALTESE FALCON" is available, but "THE MALTESE FALCON" is not. We can, therefore, infer that the correct current name is The Maltese Falcon — at least, unless the next owner decides to rename it. —Quicksilver^{T @} 18:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DynaRig, Dyna-Rigg, Diana Rigg, etc.

The article used various spellings and capitalizations until I changed it to "DynaRig" a short time ago. There is a German Wikipedia article on Dynaship that renders it "Dyna-Rigg", but I haven't been able to find any authoritative references. If anyone can come up with something definitive, it should be changed with a global search-and-replace operation. —Quicksilver^{T @} 18:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we need the section Sightings?

Is this section needed? The Maltese Falcon is not as mysterious as a Flying Saucer or a Yeti. She sails the world and is very visible everytime she puts into a port or anchorage. eg an edit made in March 2010 declared that she had been spotted in Tahiti in 2008. Is this sort of info really relevent to an encyclopedia. I recommend that the Sightings section is deleted. Are there any objections?? Boatman (talk) 16:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No objections received so deleted sightings Boatman (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, it should not be part of the article, and here is the section in question if anyone is interested. -kslays (talk • contribs) 17:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sightings

18 July 2008 - spotted anchored in Papeete - Tahiti, French Polynesia
24 February 2009 - spotted anchored in Sint Maarten.
17 June 2009 - spotted anchored in Venice, Italy.
15 September 2009 - spotted anchored in Douglas Bay, Isle of Man.
28 December 2009 - spotted anchored in Antibes, France.
4 February 2010 - spotted anchored in Birgu, Malta.
4th February 2011 - spotted docked in English Harbour, Antigua (Caribbean Sea) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.151.164.57 (talk) 19:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

actual sailing?

An image of her under sail would be nice. Does she ever actually sail? 206.208.105.129 (talk) 14:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, here is an image: The Maltese Falcon sailing. Too bad that image is not in Wikimedia Commons. —Nikolas Ojala (talk) 02:21, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]