Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?












9
















  • 1807, Robert Fulton's Clermont the first ship to demonstrate the feasibility of steam propulsion for commercial use, but it also carried sail.


  • 1819, The first steamship to cross the Atlantic was the American City of Savannah, but it also carried sail.


  • 1837, Britain's steam-powered Great Western established regular transatlantic passenger service, but it also carried sail.


  • 1838, SS Archimedes was the first steamship to be driven by a screw propeller, but it also carried sail.


  • 1871, The first British Navy ship not to carry masts or expensive sails the H.M.S. Devastation..


  • Commercial steam ships regularly carried masts and auxiliary sails into the 20th century (1900s).




Question:

IF steam power was superior to sail, Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?.











share|improve this question




















  • 4





    Infrastructure? Steam is not useful without coaling stations. Replacement capital cost? Ships were expensive, and it probably didn't make sense to just discard a major capital expense before you were ready to replace it.

    – Mark C. Wallace
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    Most of the reasons are discussed in Historic England's Ships and Boats: 1840-1950

    – sempaiscuba
    8 hours ago











  • The answers can be boiled down to logistics.

    – RonJohn
    28 mins ago











  • @RonJohn, It took nearly 100 years to completely abandon sail once a viable steam alternative was demonstrated. Oil would have a worse logistic problem for Britain but navy's would transform to oil away from coal within fifteen years.. HMS Spiteful (1899) was the first oil warship.. within 12 years the British Navy was converting to oil, even though they didn't have any oil wells in Britain nor access to oil when they made the decision.

    – JMS
    7 mins ago
















9
















  • 1807, Robert Fulton's Clermont the first ship to demonstrate the feasibility of steam propulsion for commercial use, but it also carried sail.


  • 1819, The first steamship to cross the Atlantic was the American City of Savannah, but it also carried sail.


  • 1837, Britain's steam-powered Great Western established regular transatlantic passenger service, but it also carried sail.


  • 1838, SS Archimedes was the first steamship to be driven by a screw propeller, but it also carried sail.


  • 1871, The first British Navy ship not to carry masts or expensive sails the H.M.S. Devastation..


  • Commercial steam ships regularly carried masts and auxiliary sails into the 20th century (1900s).




Question:

IF steam power was superior to sail, Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?.











share|improve this question




















  • 4





    Infrastructure? Steam is not useful without coaling stations. Replacement capital cost? Ships were expensive, and it probably didn't make sense to just discard a major capital expense before you were ready to replace it.

    – Mark C. Wallace
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    Most of the reasons are discussed in Historic England's Ships and Boats: 1840-1950

    – sempaiscuba
    8 hours ago











  • The answers can be boiled down to logistics.

    – RonJohn
    28 mins ago











  • @RonJohn, It took nearly 100 years to completely abandon sail once a viable steam alternative was demonstrated. Oil would have a worse logistic problem for Britain but navy's would transform to oil away from coal within fifteen years.. HMS Spiteful (1899) was the first oil warship.. within 12 years the British Navy was converting to oil, even though they didn't have any oil wells in Britain nor access to oil when they made the decision.

    – JMS
    7 mins ago














9












9








9









  • 1807, Robert Fulton's Clermont the first ship to demonstrate the feasibility of steam propulsion for commercial use, but it also carried sail.


  • 1819, The first steamship to cross the Atlantic was the American City of Savannah, but it also carried sail.


  • 1837, Britain's steam-powered Great Western established regular transatlantic passenger service, but it also carried sail.


  • 1838, SS Archimedes was the first steamship to be driven by a screw propeller, but it also carried sail.


  • 1871, The first British Navy ship not to carry masts or expensive sails the H.M.S. Devastation..


  • Commercial steam ships regularly carried masts and auxiliary sails into the 20th century (1900s).




Question:

IF steam power was superior to sail, Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?.











share|improve this question

















  • 1807, Robert Fulton's Clermont the first ship to demonstrate the feasibility of steam propulsion for commercial use, but it also carried sail.


  • 1819, The first steamship to cross the Atlantic was the American City of Savannah, but it also carried sail.


  • 1837, Britain's steam-powered Great Western established regular transatlantic passenger service, but it also carried sail.


  • 1838, SS Archimedes was the first steamship to be driven by a screw propeller, but it also carried sail.


  • 1871, The first British Navy ship not to carry masts or expensive sails the H.M.S. Devastation..


  • Commercial steam ships regularly carried masts and auxiliary sails into the 20th century (1900s).




Question:

IF steam power was superior to sail, Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?.








military age-of-sail steamboat commercial






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 8 hours ago







JMS

















asked 8 hours ago









JMSJMS

14.4k340112




14.4k340112








  • 4





    Infrastructure? Steam is not useful without coaling stations. Replacement capital cost? Ships were expensive, and it probably didn't make sense to just discard a major capital expense before you were ready to replace it.

    – Mark C. Wallace
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    Most of the reasons are discussed in Historic England's Ships and Boats: 1840-1950

    – sempaiscuba
    8 hours ago











  • The answers can be boiled down to logistics.

    – RonJohn
    28 mins ago











  • @RonJohn, It took nearly 100 years to completely abandon sail once a viable steam alternative was demonstrated. Oil would have a worse logistic problem for Britain but navy's would transform to oil away from coal within fifteen years.. HMS Spiteful (1899) was the first oil warship.. within 12 years the British Navy was converting to oil, even though they didn't have any oil wells in Britain nor access to oil when they made the decision.

    – JMS
    7 mins ago














  • 4





    Infrastructure? Steam is not useful without coaling stations. Replacement capital cost? Ships were expensive, and it probably didn't make sense to just discard a major capital expense before you were ready to replace it.

    – Mark C. Wallace
    8 hours ago






  • 2





    Most of the reasons are discussed in Historic England's Ships and Boats: 1840-1950

    – sempaiscuba
    8 hours ago











  • The answers can be boiled down to logistics.

    – RonJohn
    28 mins ago











  • @RonJohn, It took nearly 100 years to completely abandon sail once a viable steam alternative was demonstrated. Oil would have a worse logistic problem for Britain but navy's would transform to oil away from coal within fifteen years.. HMS Spiteful (1899) was the first oil warship.. within 12 years the British Navy was converting to oil, even though they didn't have any oil wells in Britain nor access to oil when they made the decision.

    – JMS
    7 mins ago








4




4





Infrastructure? Steam is not useful without coaling stations. Replacement capital cost? Ships were expensive, and it probably didn't make sense to just discard a major capital expense before you were ready to replace it.

– Mark C. Wallace
8 hours ago





Infrastructure? Steam is not useful without coaling stations. Replacement capital cost? Ships were expensive, and it probably didn't make sense to just discard a major capital expense before you were ready to replace it.

– Mark C. Wallace
8 hours ago




2




2





Most of the reasons are discussed in Historic England's Ships and Boats: 1840-1950

– sempaiscuba
8 hours ago





Most of the reasons are discussed in Historic England's Ships and Boats: 1840-1950

– sempaiscuba
8 hours ago













The answers can be boiled down to logistics.

– RonJohn
28 mins ago





The answers can be boiled down to logistics.

– RonJohn
28 mins ago













@RonJohn, It took nearly 100 years to completely abandon sail once a viable steam alternative was demonstrated. Oil would have a worse logistic problem for Britain but navy's would transform to oil away from coal within fifteen years.. HMS Spiteful (1899) was the first oil warship.. within 12 years the British Navy was converting to oil, even though they didn't have any oil wells in Britain nor access to oil when they made the decision.

– JMS
7 mins ago





@RonJohn, It took nearly 100 years to completely abandon sail once a viable steam alternative was demonstrated. Oil would have a worse logistic problem for Britain but navy's would transform to oil away from coal within fifteen years.. HMS Spiteful (1899) was the first oil warship.. within 12 years the British Navy was converting to oil, even though they didn't have any oil wells in Britain nor access to oil when they made the decision.

– JMS
7 mins ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















14














I think it comes down to a few basic factors:




  1. Early steam engines weren't very efficient or reliable. So it made sense to retain sails as a backup should the steam engine(s) breakdown or should the ship run out of fuel (especially on longer oceanic voyages were replenishment was uncertain).


  2. Wind-power is essentially free (once you've invested in the masts & sails in the first place), whereas you had to keep buying coal. As the steam engines were inefficient it made sense to have sails to supplement steam. This could be in the form of using them both together to add a few knots to the ship's speed or using one or the other as circumstances demanded (i.e. steam into the wind, sail down wind).


  3. Sailors are a superstitious and conservative folk, they knew sails and sailing, and it took some time to wean them off.


  4. The transition was dependent on a number of later technological changes, such as improvements in boiler design (to improve power, reliability and efficiency), the introduction of iron hulls and the introduction of the screw propeller, to make steam power capable of replacing sail.




Steam was introduced into naval service when it could improve an existing system, or provide a new method of carrying out essential business. It did not revolutionise the conduct of operations at sea overnight. Early steam engines were expensive, heavy, uneconomic and ill balanced. They were far from ideal power plants for wooden ships.



...



The 1840s witnessed a number of vital technological developments, of which the screw and the iron ship were the most obvious. Equally important breakthroughs in iron production, boiler design, bearings, lubricants, manufacturing and control systems were essential to the development of modern warships. Many of these technologies were drawn from other engineering sectors. By 1850 steam ships were effective and reliable enough to be used globally, while fuel supplies. engineering back-up and vital docking accommodation were spreading to meet the need. Although a few key commercial routes already carried steam shipping, this was a luxury market, catering for passengers and mail, not bulk produce.





[For a warship] it made sense to fit a square rig so the ship could cruise under sail, saving the coal for tactical demands, and emergencies.



The Sail and Steam Navy List, R. Winfield (2004), pg.17







share|improve this answer


























  • Re #2, that's why Skysails en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails is selling kite/sails to assist motor-powered ships. Fuel costs.

    – jamesqf
    7 hours ago











  • I would add that hulls also had to be redesigned to leverage steam power properly, thereby increasing the efficiency of the steam power, and this also took a few design generations.

    – Pieter Geerkens
    6 hours ago











  • And, you had to carry the fuel (coal), which reduced cargo space (without a hull redesign).

    – GalacticCowboy
    4 hours ago



















6














You can't completely replace sail with coal until you are 100% sure that you are going to have access to coal everywhere you need to go.



This is basically an extension of Steve Bird's #2. It's beyond the economics and into the availability.



Do you have reliably supplied coaling stations all the way to, say, Australia? If not you need to keep sails on hand.



As an example the famous Clipper Ship Cutty Sark was one of the fastest trading ships in the world when she launched (1869) and was used for the China tea trade. But coal quickly covered that route so then she was diverted to trade with Australia.






share|improve this answer


























  • It's kinda hard to stop and plant some coal like they used to do with trees to replace broken masts. In 1869, plutonium is not available at ever corner drugstore.

    – Mazura
    2 hours ago



















-1














1- Reliability. The first steam engines were prone to breakdown. That's not good in a mine or in a factory but outright dangerous on a ship. It took time before engines were reliable enough for ocean journeys.



2- Sufficient range. You can't bunker coal in the middle of the Atlantic. Ships need sufficient bunker capacity and still be able to operate economically. In other words, ships had to be large enough to carry both coal, cargo and still make a profit.



3- Infrastructure. One harbor on each end of the Atlantic with enough bunker capacity is not enough. You need coaling stations everywhere.



Developing all of the above took time.






share|improve this answer

























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "324"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51571%2fwhy-did-it-take-so-long-to-abandon-sail-after-steamships-were-demonstrated%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    14














    I think it comes down to a few basic factors:




    1. Early steam engines weren't very efficient or reliable. So it made sense to retain sails as a backup should the steam engine(s) breakdown or should the ship run out of fuel (especially on longer oceanic voyages were replenishment was uncertain).


    2. Wind-power is essentially free (once you've invested in the masts & sails in the first place), whereas you had to keep buying coal. As the steam engines were inefficient it made sense to have sails to supplement steam. This could be in the form of using them both together to add a few knots to the ship's speed or using one or the other as circumstances demanded (i.e. steam into the wind, sail down wind).


    3. Sailors are a superstitious and conservative folk, they knew sails and sailing, and it took some time to wean them off.


    4. The transition was dependent on a number of later technological changes, such as improvements in boiler design (to improve power, reliability and efficiency), the introduction of iron hulls and the introduction of the screw propeller, to make steam power capable of replacing sail.




    Steam was introduced into naval service when it could improve an existing system, or provide a new method of carrying out essential business. It did not revolutionise the conduct of operations at sea overnight. Early steam engines were expensive, heavy, uneconomic and ill balanced. They were far from ideal power plants for wooden ships.



    ...



    The 1840s witnessed a number of vital technological developments, of which the screw and the iron ship were the most obvious. Equally important breakthroughs in iron production, boiler design, bearings, lubricants, manufacturing and control systems were essential to the development of modern warships. Many of these technologies were drawn from other engineering sectors. By 1850 steam ships were effective and reliable enough to be used globally, while fuel supplies. engineering back-up and vital docking accommodation were spreading to meet the need. Although a few key commercial routes already carried steam shipping, this was a luxury market, catering for passengers and mail, not bulk produce.





    [For a warship] it made sense to fit a square rig so the ship could cruise under sail, saving the coal for tactical demands, and emergencies.



    The Sail and Steam Navy List, R. Winfield (2004), pg.17







    share|improve this answer


























    • Re #2, that's why Skysails en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails is selling kite/sails to assist motor-powered ships. Fuel costs.

      – jamesqf
      7 hours ago











    • I would add that hulls also had to be redesigned to leverage steam power properly, thereby increasing the efficiency of the steam power, and this also took a few design generations.

      – Pieter Geerkens
      6 hours ago











    • And, you had to carry the fuel (coal), which reduced cargo space (without a hull redesign).

      – GalacticCowboy
      4 hours ago
















    14














    I think it comes down to a few basic factors:




    1. Early steam engines weren't very efficient or reliable. So it made sense to retain sails as a backup should the steam engine(s) breakdown or should the ship run out of fuel (especially on longer oceanic voyages were replenishment was uncertain).


    2. Wind-power is essentially free (once you've invested in the masts & sails in the first place), whereas you had to keep buying coal. As the steam engines were inefficient it made sense to have sails to supplement steam. This could be in the form of using them both together to add a few knots to the ship's speed or using one or the other as circumstances demanded (i.e. steam into the wind, sail down wind).


    3. Sailors are a superstitious and conservative folk, they knew sails and sailing, and it took some time to wean them off.


    4. The transition was dependent on a number of later technological changes, such as improvements in boiler design (to improve power, reliability and efficiency), the introduction of iron hulls and the introduction of the screw propeller, to make steam power capable of replacing sail.




    Steam was introduced into naval service when it could improve an existing system, or provide a new method of carrying out essential business. It did not revolutionise the conduct of operations at sea overnight. Early steam engines were expensive, heavy, uneconomic and ill balanced. They were far from ideal power plants for wooden ships.



    ...



    The 1840s witnessed a number of vital technological developments, of which the screw and the iron ship were the most obvious. Equally important breakthroughs in iron production, boiler design, bearings, lubricants, manufacturing and control systems were essential to the development of modern warships. Many of these technologies were drawn from other engineering sectors. By 1850 steam ships were effective and reliable enough to be used globally, while fuel supplies. engineering back-up and vital docking accommodation were spreading to meet the need. Although a few key commercial routes already carried steam shipping, this was a luxury market, catering for passengers and mail, not bulk produce.





    [For a warship] it made sense to fit a square rig so the ship could cruise under sail, saving the coal for tactical demands, and emergencies.



    The Sail and Steam Navy List, R. Winfield (2004), pg.17







    share|improve this answer


























    • Re #2, that's why Skysails en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails is selling kite/sails to assist motor-powered ships. Fuel costs.

      – jamesqf
      7 hours ago











    • I would add that hulls also had to be redesigned to leverage steam power properly, thereby increasing the efficiency of the steam power, and this also took a few design generations.

      – Pieter Geerkens
      6 hours ago











    • And, you had to carry the fuel (coal), which reduced cargo space (without a hull redesign).

      – GalacticCowboy
      4 hours ago














    14












    14








    14







    I think it comes down to a few basic factors:




    1. Early steam engines weren't very efficient or reliable. So it made sense to retain sails as a backup should the steam engine(s) breakdown or should the ship run out of fuel (especially on longer oceanic voyages were replenishment was uncertain).


    2. Wind-power is essentially free (once you've invested in the masts & sails in the first place), whereas you had to keep buying coal. As the steam engines were inefficient it made sense to have sails to supplement steam. This could be in the form of using them both together to add a few knots to the ship's speed or using one or the other as circumstances demanded (i.e. steam into the wind, sail down wind).


    3. Sailors are a superstitious and conservative folk, they knew sails and sailing, and it took some time to wean them off.


    4. The transition was dependent on a number of later technological changes, such as improvements in boiler design (to improve power, reliability and efficiency), the introduction of iron hulls and the introduction of the screw propeller, to make steam power capable of replacing sail.




    Steam was introduced into naval service when it could improve an existing system, or provide a new method of carrying out essential business. It did not revolutionise the conduct of operations at sea overnight. Early steam engines were expensive, heavy, uneconomic and ill balanced. They were far from ideal power plants for wooden ships.



    ...



    The 1840s witnessed a number of vital technological developments, of which the screw and the iron ship were the most obvious. Equally important breakthroughs in iron production, boiler design, bearings, lubricants, manufacturing and control systems were essential to the development of modern warships. Many of these technologies were drawn from other engineering sectors. By 1850 steam ships were effective and reliable enough to be used globally, while fuel supplies. engineering back-up and vital docking accommodation were spreading to meet the need. Although a few key commercial routes already carried steam shipping, this was a luxury market, catering for passengers and mail, not bulk produce.





    [For a warship] it made sense to fit a square rig so the ship could cruise under sail, saving the coal for tactical demands, and emergencies.



    The Sail and Steam Navy List, R. Winfield (2004), pg.17







    share|improve this answer















    I think it comes down to a few basic factors:




    1. Early steam engines weren't very efficient or reliable. So it made sense to retain sails as a backup should the steam engine(s) breakdown or should the ship run out of fuel (especially on longer oceanic voyages were replenishment was uncertain).


    2. Wind-power is essentially free (once you've invested in the masts & sails in the first place), whereas you had to keep buying coal. As the steam engines were inefficient it made sense to have sails to supplement steam. This could be in the form of using them both together to add a few knots to the ship's speed or using one or the other as circumstances demanded (i.e. steam into the wind, sail down wind).


    3. Sailors are a superstitious and conservative folk, they knew sails and sailing, and it took some time to wean them off.


    4. The transition was dependent on a number of later technological changes, such as improvements in boiler design (to improve power, reliability and efficiency), the introduction of iron hulls and the introduction of the screw propeller, to make steam power capable of replacing sail.




    Steam was introduced into naval service when it could improve an existing system, or provide a new method of carrying out essential business. It did not revolutionise the conduct of operations at sea overnight. Early steam engines were expensive, heavy, uneconomic and ill balanced. They were far from ideal power plants for wooden ships.



    ...



    The 1840s witnessed a number of vital technological developments, of which the screw and the iron ship were the most obvious. Equally important breakthroughs in iron production, boiler design, bearings, lubricants, manufacturing and control systems were essential to the development of modern warships. Many of these technologies were drawn from other engineering sectors. By 1850 steam ships were effective and reliable enough to be used globally, while fuel supplies. engineering back-up and vital docking accommodation were spreading to meet the need. Although a few key commercial routes already carried steam shipping, this was a luxury market, catering for passengers and mail, not bulk produce.





    [For a warship] it made sense to fit a square rig so the ship could cruise under sail, saving the coal for tactical demands, and emergencies.



    The Sail and Steam Navy List, R. Winfield (2004), pg.17








    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 7 hours ago

























    answered 8 hours ago









    Steve BirdSteve Bird

    12.9k35566




    12.9k35566













    • Re #2, that's why Skysails en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails is selling kite/sails to assist motor-powered ships. Fuel costs.

      – jamesqf
      7 hours ago











    • I would add that hulls also had to be redesigned to leverage steam power properly, thereby increasing the efficiency of the steam power, and this also took a few design generations.

      – Pieter Geerkens
      6 hours ago











    • And, you had to carry the fuel (coal), which reduced cargo space (without a hull redesign).

      – GalacticCowboy
      4 hours ago



















    • Re #2, that's why Skysails en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails is selling kite/sails to assist motor-powered ships. Fuel costs.

      – jamesqf
      7 hours ago











    • I would add that hulls also had to be redesigned to leverage steam power properly, thereby increasing the efficiency of the steam power, and this also took a few design generations.

      – Pieter Geerkens
      6 hours ago











    • And, you had to carry the fuel (coal), which reduced cargo space (without a hull redesign).

      – GalacticCowboy
      4 hours ago

















    Re #2, that's why Skysails en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails is selling kite/sails to assist motor-powered ships. Fuel costs.

    – jamesqf
    7 hours ago





    Re #2, that's why Skysails en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySails is selling kite/sails to assist motor-powered ships. Fuel costs.

    – jamesqf
    7 hours ago













    I would add that hulls also had to be redesigned to leverage steam power properly, thereby increasing the efficiency of the steam power, and this also took a few design generations.

    – Pieter Geerkens
    6 hours ago





    I would add that hulls also had to be redesigned to leverage steam power properly, thereby increasing the efficiency of the steam power, and this also took a few design generations.

    – Pieter Geerkens
    6 hours ago













    And, you had to carry the fuel (coal), which reduced cargo space (without a hull redesign).

    – GalacticCowboy
    4 hours ago





    And, you had to carry the fuel (coal), which reduced cargo space (without a hull redesign).

    – GalacticCowboy
    4 hours ago











    6














    You can't completely replace sail with coal until you are 100% sure that you are going to have access to coal everywhere you need to go.



    This is basically an extension of Steve Bird's #2. It's beyond the economics and into the availability.



    Do you have reliably supplied coaling stations all the way to, say, Australia? If not you need to keep sails on hand.



    As an example the famous Clipper Ship Cutty Sark was one of the fastest trading ships in the world when she launched (1869) and was used for the China tea trade. But coal quickly covered that route so then she was diverted to trade with Australia.






    share|improve this answer


























    • It's kinda hard to stop and plant some coal like they used to do with trees to replace broken masts. In 1869, plutonium is not available at ever corner drugstore.

      – Mazura
      2 hours ago
















    6














    You can't completely replace sail with coal until you are 100% sure that you are going to have access to coal everywhere you need to go.



    This is basically an extension of Steve Bird's #2. It's beyond the economics and into the availability.



    Do you have reliably supplied coaling stations all the way to, say, Australia? If not you need to keep sails on hand.



    As an example the famous Clipper Ship Cutty Sark was one of the fastest trading ships in the world when she launched (1869) and was used for the China tea trade. But coal quickly covered that route so then she was diverted to trade with Australia.






    share|improve this answer


























    • It's kinda hard to stop and plant some coal like they used to do with trees to replace broken masts. In 1869, plutonium is not available at ever corner drugstore.

      – Mazura
      2 hours ago














    6












    6








    6







    You can't completely replace sail with coal until you are 100% sure that you are going to have access to coal everywhere you need to go.



    This is basically an extension of Steve Bird's #2. It's beyond the economics and into the availability.



    Do you have reliably supplied coaling stations all the way to, say, Australia? If not you need to keep sails on hand.



    As an example the famous Clipper Ship Cutty Sark was one of the fastest trading ships in the world when she launched (1869) and was used for the China tea trade. But coal quickly covered that route so then she was diverted to trade with Australia.






    share|improve this answer















    You can't completely replace sail with coal until you are 100% sure that you are going to have access to coal everywhere you need to go.



    This is basically an extension of Steve Bird's #2. It's beyond the economics and into the availability.



    Do you have reliably supplied coaling stations all the way to, say, Australia? If not you need to keep sails on hand.



    As an example the famous Clipper Ship Cutty Sark was one of the fastest trading ships in the world when she launched (1869) and was used for the China tea trade. But coal quickly covered that route so then she was diverted to trade with Australia.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 5 hours ago

























    answered 6 hours ago









    AllInOneAllInOne

    1,7672720




    1,7672720













    • It's kinda hard to stop and plant some coal like they used to do with trees to replace broken masts. In 1869, plutonium is not available at ever corner drugstore.

      – Mazura
      2 hours ago



















    • It's kinda hard to stop and plant some coal like they used to do with trees to replace broken masts. In 1869, plutonium is not available at ever corner drugstore.

      – Mazura
      2 hours ago

















    It's kinda hard to stop and plant some coal like they used to do with trees to replace broken masts. In 1869, plutonium is not available at ever corner drugstore.

    – Mazura
    2 hours ago





    It's kinda hard to stop and plant some coal like they used to do with trees to replace broken masts. In 1869, plutonium is not available at ever corner drugstore.

    – Mazura
    2 hours ago











    -1














    1- Reliability. The first steam engines were prone to breakdown. That's not good in a mine or in a factory but outright dangerous on a ship. It took time before engines were reliable enough for ocean journeys.



    2- Sufficient range. You can't bunker coal in the middle of the Atlantic. Ships need sufficient bunker capacity and still be able to operate economically. In other words, ships had to be large enough to carry both coal, cargo and still make a profit.



    3- Infrastructure. One harbor on each end of the Atlantic with enough bunker capacity is not enough. You need coaling stations everywhere.



    Developing all of the above took time.






    share|improve this answer






























      -1














      1- Reliability. The first steam engines were prone to breakdown. That's not good in a mine or in a factory but outright dangerous on a ship. It took time before engines were reliable enough for ocean journeys.



      2- Sufficient range. You can't bunker coal in the middle of the Atlantic. Ships need sufficient bunker capacity and still be able to operate economically. In other words, ships had to be large enough to carry both coal, cargo and still make a profit.



      3- Infrastructure. One harbor on each end of the Atlantic with enough bunker capacity is not enough. You need coaling stations everywhere.



      Developing all of the above took time.






      share|improve this answer




























        -1












        -1








        -1







        1- Reliability. The first steam engines were prone to breakdown. That's not good in a mine or in a factory but outright dangerous on a ship. It took time before engines were reliable enough for ocean journeys.



        2- Sufficient range. You can't bunker coal in the middle of the Atlantic. Ships need sufficient bunker capacity and still be able to operate economically. In other words, ships had to be large enough to carry both coal, cargo and still make a profit.



        3- Infrastructure. One harbor on each end of the Atlantic with enough bunker capacity is not enough. You need coaling stations everywhere.



        Developing all of the above took time.






        share|improve this answer















        1- Reliability. The first steam engines were prone to breakdown. That's not good in a mine or in a factory but outright dangerous on a ship. It took time before engines were reliable enough for ocean journeys.



        2- Sufficient range. You can't bunker coal in the middle of the Atlantic. Ships need sufficient bunker capacity and still be able to operate economically. In other words, ships had to be large enough to carry both coal, cargo and still make a profit.



        3- Infrastructure. One harbor on each end of the Atlantic with enough bunker capacity is not enough. You need coaling stations everywhere.



        Developing all of the above took time.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 15 mins ago

























        answered 40 mins ago









        JosJos

        9,21412246




        9,21412246






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51571%2fwhy-did-it-take-so-long-to-abandon-sail-after-steamships-were-demonstrated%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            How to label and detect the document text images

            Vallis Paradisi

            Tabula Rosettana