Talk:Inverted bow

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inverted bow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160416233751/http://ulstein.com/references/windea-tbn1 to http://ulstein.com/references/windea-tbn1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:26, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Buoyancy

The article states that inverted bows lack reserve buoyancy and tend to plunge under waves rather than pierce or ride them. This may well be the case for late20th and early 21st century inverted bows. But this article also includes the curved 'ram' bows of dreadnought-type and earlier ships of the early 20th century and beforehand in the same overall category and presumably applies the same performance critique to those bows. Yet, anyone who has read Reed's writings about the form, as developed in the 1860s and remaining very little modified until the First World War, will be aware that the form was selected specifically for its combination of shapes which aided buoyancy forward. Late 19th-C to early 20th-C 'ram' bows (as opposed to the more modern 'inverted' bow) aided seakeeping and were far more buoyant than contemporary clipper bows. They also operated in a different speed regime to the later bows of ships coming from the mid-20th Century up to the present day, by and large. Perhaps the article might reflect this in a way which would make this distinction clear to the average reader, since this piece suggests that they were merely detrimental with no clear benefits. Cursory research in other sources outside of this encyclopedia (Reed has even been cited in other articles in Wikipedia before) reveals another story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.127.120 (talk) 19:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC)