If you head out from London, a souwest wind would be fair until the Broadstairs, when it would be a beat. So I reckon tacking on and off means tacking on starboard and then port because the wind is dead foul - the course is directly to windward. In the wonderful Patrick O Brian books on Aubrey and Maturin (set from 1805ish to 1813 or so) visitors could often set out from London after the ship had left and post down to Plymouth (in a horse drawn carriage) and save time. There are quite a few tales of whole fleets being weather bound in the Channel, waiting for southwest gales to moderate and shift. The books tell of the awful worry of the dreaded lee shore and the pleasure of weathering Ushant (an island off the French coast near Brest).

phil are you a jack of all yachting trades?

I think he was saying that when there was a breeze they were going to windward, but when it died, they stopped, maybe dropping an anchor.

Kankama said..
If you head out from London, a souwest wind would be fair until the Broadstairs, when it would be a beat. So I reckon tacking on and off means tacking on starboard and then port because the wind is dead foul - the course is directly to windward. In the wonderful Patrick O Brian books on Aubrey and Maturin (set from 1805ish to 1813 or so) visitors could often set out from London after the ship had left and post down to Plymouth (in a horse drawn carriage) and save time. There are quite a few tales of whole fleets being weather bound in the Channel, waiting for southwest gales to moderate and shift. The books tell of the awful worry of the dreaded lee shore and the pleasure of weathering Ushant (an island off the French coast near Brest).

I've read the whole collection of Patrick O'Brien, and recommend it to anyone here.

The Ida Zeigler put in to Plymouth before heading SW on the long circumnavigation to Auckland, NZ. On the second voyage in the diary, the doctor found a man with the measles and put him ashore there. Even so, that was not enough to stop a deadly outbreak of the measles in the tropics, which claimed the lives of 8 children on board. An enquiry was held in Auckland. Captain Reynolds was reprimanded, and the doctor summarily dismissed. The doctor's dismissal explains why my Eliza, grand-mother's grand-mother gave birth to her third child in Auckland Harbour without the assistance of a doctor or nurse and only a "female passenger to clean it up" (her words). I can only wonder at her fortitude. Mum and baby seemed to have come out of it OK, as Eliza went on to produce another five children, one of whom was my ancestor.

Ahh BB, but isn't that described as wearing. I often go for the rolling gybe on the spray as she's a pig to bring through the wind especially without the mizzen set ( or with it sometimes) I think the gaff mizzen on a brig is referred to as a spanker, and well it makes sense if you need to make the back end move ! Anyway for what it's worth I think tacking on and off refers to having the right of way on a particular tack and not the other. ( perhaps all those start line shenanigans have a legitimate evolution)

It is not a sailing term. It just means now and then, off and on...

Bananabender said..

woko said..
Ahh BB, but isn't that described as wearing.

Absolutely . Not sure if Alfred is a sailor or passenger so his terminology may be pedestrian . He talks about strong SW winds so I would guess he is talking about wearing when tacking off.

Yes, that would be "wearing" (Patrick O'Brien often uses it). Also, failing to complete a tack is "missing stays".

Alfred was the purser, and he starts his diary aged 29 years. If he had been apprenticed at 14 (I don't have the record, but it was customary), he would have been at sea for 15 years. His wife, Eliza, was the daughter of a Captain who was lost at sea. It seems likely that their language was thoroughly colloquial. Even so, they might have said and wrote phrases out of habit, rather than out of consideration, and the "off an on" part of it might have only been a casual way to round off the phrase without intending to mean anything specific.

Curiously, Alfred sometimes enters the latitude and longitude, but with more enthusiasm than accuracy, as I found when cross-checking his references with the newspaper accounts. It was not the purser's job to navigate, and his positions appear to be a long way off course. Perhaps he wanted to give the impression of speaking "nautical-ese" to a future audience who might not have known better. The "off and on" phrase could be the same kind of bluff.

Finally, on the subject of navigation, Alfred writes that the ship lost its way in the English Channel, near the coast of France, when approaching London, and had to ask a nearby fishing boat for directions. Alfred puts this down to "unknown reasons", which seems unlikely for a ship that has just circumnavigated the globe. I suspect that grog might have played a key part in this, but Alfred, being a Wesleyan and a temperance campaigner, probably did not want to disparage his fellow crew by accusing them of drunkenness.

If you have read this far, you have probably guessed that I have immensely enjoyed reading and researching this diary. It has been a lot of fun.

As above.
When tacking down a channel ( on the scale of the English one)against a foul wind one tack leads you back towards the coast. This is the "on" tack. The one leading to more open water is the "off".
Usually considered in the evening when the "off" tack is the safer option for the hours of darkness.

seafever17 said..
As above.
When tacking down a channel ( on the scale of the English one)against a foul wind one tack leads you back towards the coast. This is the "on" tack. The one leading to more open water is the "off".
Usually considered in the evening when the "off" tack is the safer option for the hours of darkness.

Seafever, thanks for your thoughts. This seem the most likely explanation, especially as it was a south-wester, which could have churned up the channel grandly.