Thread: Any thoughts onhow to make this boat better
View Single Post
  #51   Report Post  
posted to alt.sailing.asa
Dave Doe
 
Posts: n/a
Default Any thoughts onhow to make this boat better
In article ,
says...
.... You used the example of an empty jug vs one
1/2 full of water... is the water in the jug "in water" or
is it in the jug?



Well?
How about an answer on this one?

It's in the jug. Where's the jug? What's the overall effect of the jug?


Let me propose this example- a cooler full of ice & beer is
lighter than water (hence lighter than water ballast) yet
can be pretty heavy when you're carrying it down the dock.
If you put it in the lowest possible location in the boat,
right down against the hull, and tie it in securely (to the
handles, so you can still open the lid of course), will this
improve the boat's stability?


Dave Doe wrote:
Not a lot no.

Which means yes.

Correct, never denied (2nd or 3rd or 4th time I've had to say that?).
The righting factor is almost purely *density* related though. Hint:
think about what you're 'in' and what you 'are' and what you 'have' to
provide righting moment.

Clearly - any material not exceeding the density of what you are 'in' is
going to be poor. Given 'ideal' (no mass boat) - it's extremely poor.
Add the mass of the boat itself, it's even worse performance wise.

Ah good, so now we've gone from "Water cannot be ballast
because it doesn't weigh anything when below the waterline"
to admitting that something that is in fact lighter than
water *can* function as ballast below the water line,
although not as efficently as denser material.

Sorry if you're a pedantic ******* - my argument simply asks to
compare the effectiveness of water ballast righting ability vs lead
keel. PS: I think you've misquoted me - indeed I think you have taken
the ol' poetic licence thingie and just made up my "quote" - if so, yer
a *******. If not, sorry, but water (or any mass) is a ballast that has
inertia (perhaps I've confused folk with stability when I mean momentum
or inertia) - however that does *not* go hand in hand with righting
ability. Again, sorry for any confusion there, I take 1/2
responsibility.

I've posted the comparison question. Send your answers to D. Conners.


Think it over some more. I compliment you on your ability to
gradually recognize facts contrary to your prejudices. Most
people can't ever take this first small step.

Hmmm, I think you're comment quite pretentious. How about we keep to
fact not fiction. My initial reply to the OP was stability in terms of
momentum or inertia (due mass) - and not stabilty in terms of righting
ability (due density). I hope that is clear.

--
Duncan