Talk:Cog (ship)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hanseatic League, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Hanseatic LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject Hanseatic LeagueTemplate:WikiProject Hanseatic LeagueHanseatic League articles

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ships C‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Military history: Maritime / Medieval

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Early discussion

In expanding this article I kept the external link. It has other valuable links and good pictures. But, I disagree with some of the refernced site's dates, especially for development of the cog. Lou I 20:11, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I reduced the Seal of Lübeck b/c it can be easily seen at a smaller size and added a pic of "Lisa von Lübeck" to illustrate what a complete cog looks like. Naufana : ^talk 02:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI links 7 and 9 are broken.

Jargon

This article makes no sense to the layman. Full of technical terms that have no explanation. Entirely useless.

I added a {{cleanup-jargon}} because the text, while certainly interesting, is quite difficult to understand without a great deal of prior knowledge of fairly archaic ship-building terms. Some examples from the first paragraph:

flush-laid
strakes
posts
full lapstrake planking
garboards
rabbet
plank hoods

Peter ^Isotalo 18:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, almost unreadable —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.136.207 (talk • contribs)

Those are not archaic terms. I have linked some of them to existing articles. Tag removed. Meggar 01:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jargon, Cogs, and Stupid Corrections

This is ridicules! First of all, these terms are not “archaic ship-building terms�? but common nautical terminology – if you do not want to use them, do not correct this article! Second of all, if you want to describe ship’s structure you need to use precise technical terminology because otherwise you only confuse people. Finally, what an idiot added Peter von Danzig, which was a carvel-built vessel (completely different shipbuilding philosophy!!!), to an article about a cog? If you do not understand the difference between bottom-based cog, nordic lapstrake, and carvel-built shipbuilding techniques and methods switch to something you have at least a slight idea of. --Bojan7 20:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Peter von Danzing was erroneously labelled as a cog at List of world's largest wooden ships, until someone corrected it about two weeks ago. It could certainly stand to be removed from this article. --Grimhelm 08:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa von Lübeck picture

On the Lisa von Lübeck page, it lists her as being a caravel, not a cog. Does anyone know which one is correct? --Tabun1015 02:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the picture. It is listed as a caravel in both the English and German articles, plus the design and method of construction, as seen in the photograph, are inconsistent with that of a cog.--Tabun1015 05:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification

Can someone please revise this article so that it does not say "from 12th century and earlier". This puts no bounds on when it first appeared, or why the 12th century is mentioned. If things are not clear, it could say, "from 12th century (and perhaps earlier)". Or maybe "clearly apparent in the 12th century, and probably earlier". Please free to delete this section after clarifying. Thanks! Another cog in the wheel - RedKnight7 07:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. It says in the history section that they appeared in the mid-10th century. --Grimhelm 11:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fewer than what?

From the lead paragraph: "Even though this type of rigging prohibited sailing into the wind, it could be handled by a smaller crew, which reduced operational costs." A smaller crew than what? and how many, in either case? J S Ayer (talk) 01:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, real life sailing tests with reconstructions of other square rigged ship types (mainly the older viking style ships) have shown that they're quite capable of sailing into the wind even though not as close as modern rigged ships, so the paragraph may be highly misleading. Does anyone have info specifically for the cog on sailing into the wind? It's still quite possibly true, but then it's caused by the combination of square rigging and hull shape rather than the square rigging per se HenrikOlsen (talk) 22:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seal of Lübeck

I removed the image of the Seal of Lübeck . It doesn't show a cog but a Knarr.

No bow or stern post
No castel
Side-mounted rudder instead of stern mounted rudder.
Plus note the figurative heads at bow and stern.

--82.113.119.20 (talk) 14:15, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this is indeed a cog except that it's of an older design that shares some characteristics with Scandinavian vessels. See Ellmers in Gardiner (1994), page 37. Peter ^Isotalo 16:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

biggest cog?

Its mentioned that the biggest cogs were over 1000 tons, is there a source for that assertion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7019:0:F47F:C541:AD04:1296 (talk) 03:48, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I ask this because all of the sources on this page asserting that 1000 ton cogs exist dont claim that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7019:0:F47F:C541:AD04:1296 (talk) 04:05, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguation with mechanical cog

I don’t have the skills myself but I say we get a disambiguation link with the mechanical cogs attached to this page so the people who use Siri and google will get to actually hear what they’re asking for. Anyone feel like taking up the charge and doing this? Destrypants (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]