HMS Wagtail (1806)

HMS Wagtail was a Royal Navy Cuckoo-class schooner launched in 1806 by James Lovewell at Great Yarmouth.[1] Like many of her class and the related Ballahoo-class schooners, she succumbed to the perils of the sea relatively early in her career.

History
UK
Name: HMS Wagtail
Ordered: 11 December 1805
Builder: James Lovewell, Great Yarmouth
Laid down: February 1806
Launched: 12 April 1806
Fate: Wrecked 13 February 1807
General characteristics [1]
Class and type: Cuckoo-class schooner
Tonnage: 75​1⁄94 (bm)
Length:
  • 56 ft 4 in (17.2 m) (overall)
  • 42 ft 4 1⁄8 in (12.9 m) (keel)
Beam: 18 ft 3 in (5.6 m)
Draught:
  • Unladen: 5 ft 1 1⁄2 in (1.6 m)
  • Laden: 7 ft 6 1⁄2 in (2.3 m)
Depth of hold: 8 ft 5 in (2.6 m)
Sail plan: Schooner
Complement: 20
Armament: 4 x 12-pounder carronades

She was commissioned in 1806 under Lieutenant William Cullis.[1] She was wrecked on 13 February 1807 at Vila Franca do Campo, São Miguel in the Azores, three hours after her sister ship Woodcock was wrecked, and near Woodcock's water-logged remains.[2] Both vessels had been anchored in the shelter of an islet off the town when a gale came up. Because of the storm they were unable to clear the land.[2]

Wagtail's cables held until 8pm. Then her cables parted, and with waves breaking over her, Cullis ran her ashore. One man of the 18 men in her crew drowned.[3]

Citations and references

Citations

  1. Winfield (2008), p. 361.
  2. Gosset (1986), pp. 56-7.
  3. Hepper (1994), p. 117.

References

  • Gosset, William Patrick (1986). The lost ships of the Royal Navy, 1793-1900. Mansell. ISBN 0-7201-1816-6.
  • Hepper, David J. (1994). British Warship Losses in the Age of Sail, 1650–1859. Rotherfield: Jean Boudriot. ISBN 0-948864-30-3.
  • Winfield, Rif (2008). British Warships in the Age of Sail 1793–1817: Design, Construction, Careers and Fates. Seaforth. ISBN 1-86176-246-1.


gollark: Skynet is basically that.
gollark: <@160279332454006795> skynet.
gollark: I did that one time, remember? We were talking about it ingame and I thought of doing that.
gollark: It would stop any further sandbox escape attacks from doing too much.
gollark: <@!113673208296636420> Did you consider running the Lua-executing process of `\lua` as a different user to the one who owns the files and stuff for more security?
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.