|
It finally hit me.
Why ..... to get to where they're going .....backwards.
Sheesh, what a simpleton .... the straight answer is there could be many reasons, but you don't have enough experience to think of any. otn Simple Simon wrote: And, praytell otnmbrd, why would any self-respecting motor sailer captain like Fulmoron or First Mate like Lady Sailor want to back in open water? S.Simon "otnmbrd" wrote in message ink.net... Can be applied in a modified version. Tied up port side too, hold "fwd after spring", quick kick ahead to swing stern out, then go astern, but we were, or at least I was talking about an open water situation while trying to back. ..... can also be used when going down a narrow slip, where you need to stop and still end up heading in the same direction. |
It finally hit me.
DSK wrote: otnmbrd wrote: There are a whole bunch of different factors involved with each type boat, operator, and conditions (such as the folding prop issue) that will have to be factored in, which makes trying to recommend a positive solution to any one boat, difficult, in this medium. Exactly. That's part of the fun! One reason I don't like using too much power/speed astern is the strain on steering gear ( be it tiller or pedestal) when trying to use the rudder. I hope that is'nt a problem for us, our rudder is a 1/4" SS plate on a 1 1/2" dia shaft with monsterous bearings & hydraulic steering. Some boats, especially as the tonnage get larger, can be a problem you're right. A busted rudder can ruin the whole day! Much depends on the system: Tiller - can become a total "bear" when astern Wire, via Sheaves to the wheel - parted wire, runaway wheel which shears stops. Hydraulic - in and of itself can put some heavy strain on gear, causing cracked mounts, post. ETC. Each boat will have to show it's own weaknesses .... they all have some. Something else to think about, which I frequently use (in the past on sail and nowadays on power). If I have a right hand prop and want to back in a particular direction, I will frequently start with a kick ahead and hard left rudder to get the boat swinging to port, then midships the rudder and start astern (timing is everything) and let the prop walk stop the port hand swing of the bow while getting up sternway so that the rudder can take over when I stop the engine so that I'm going in the direction I want (this can be repeated). I've read about this in the texts, but haven't gotten the hang of it in practice. We were doing practice maneuvers for a while but have fallen out of the habit... need to get back into it. It's a "basic" maneuver, but it's usefulness depends a good deal on the boat, operator and conditions .... i.e., it can't always be used and needs to be played with. Also, play close attention to the wind ..... a high percentage of boats want to back into the wind (and current) and will sometimes do this over prop walk, ....something else you can use to your advantage. Another thing tha varies highly from boat to boat. Our tug has a big keel & is quite heavy for the amount of windage, she doesn't seem to swing at all and drifts very little. Although I have noticed that it is more difficult to bring the bow into the wind from a standing start, probably another area to practice. Check this in various wind speeds and currents ..... the results will vary, by boat as you say (figure 15K of wind equals 1/2k of current @). My experience is that I always will bring the stern through the wind, rather than the bow ..... generally easier. One big difference between driving a sailboat and driving a powerboat is the pivot point, and the helmsmans point of view. A sailboat pivots around her CLR, approx the midpoint of the keel foil, usually about 1/2 way the length of the waterline. Powerboats pivot much further forward. And on our boat (like many) the helm is much further forward than on a sailboat. So you have to beware of swinging the stern into things.... we haven't done that, but it would be an easy mistake. G if you have a forward steering station, watch your compass ( knowing the heading you are on) ....it tells you where your stern is, to some degree ( not swing clearance) In all, it's a different kind of fun than sailing, but still very enjoyable. Fresh Breezes- Doug King I haven't found an aspect of boating yet that I don't enjoy to some degree...... welllll....I never liked sanitary tank cleaning detail...... otn |
It finally hit me.
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
Dear Ms. Carroll
You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
What an absurd and laughable point of view, that a Hinkley Sou'wester is not
a sailboat. You need to look into their history and build specifications. Try punching through a tall sea at an inlet with only 15 or 20 hp available. To sail through all is not always a good prudent decision these days, even Larry Pardee used a motor on occasion. Cabo Rico and Hinkley are two of the best sailboats made, expensive they are, but we are not talking cost. You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
SV "The Carrolls" wrote You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. |
It finally hit me.
I challenged Booby to a race many times but he's ALWAYS
chickened out. I'll make you the same challenge. I'll race you starting at Key Largo to Marsh Harbor in the Abacos from there to Habana and from Habana to Key West. Said race to commence sometime in December of this year. Loser buys the winner's beer for five years. I bet you, like your sniveling, pretend-to-sail, little, butt buddy Booby, will also chicken out. S.Simon - my 27-footer will beat yours in a long distance race. wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 01:41:43 GMT, "The Carrolls" wrote: What an absurd and laughable point of view, that a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat. You need to look into their history and build specifications. Try punching through a tall sea at an inlet with only 15 or 20 hp available. To sail through all is not always a good prudent decision these days, even Larry Pardee used a motor on occasion. Cabo Rico and Hinkley are two of the best sailboats made, expensive they are, but we are not talking cost. You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. Simon is not an actual sailor. He's a pimply faced kid who read some books. BB |
It finally hit me.
How about from the Toledo Light to the North Tower of Big Mac via the
Milwaukee harbor light. I will even give you a 4 hour head start. Say July 4 2004 at 6am. I drink Mack and Jacks African amber, it aint cheap nor is it easy to get. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I challenged Booby to a race many times but he's ALWAYS chickened out. I'll make you the same challenge. I'll race you starting at Key Largo to Marsh Harbor in the Abacos from there to Habana and from Habana to Key West. Said race to commence sometime in December of this year. Loser buys the winner's beer for five years. I bet you, like your sniveling, pretend-to-sail, little, butt buddy Booby, will also chicken out. S.Simon - my 27-footer will beat yours in a long distance race. wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 01:41:43 GMT, "The Carrolls" wrote: What an absurd and laughable point of view, that a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat. You need to look into their history and build specifications. Try punching through a tall sea at an inlet with only 15 or 20 hp available. To sail through all is not always a good prudent decision these days, even Larry Pardee used a motor on occasion. Cabo Rico and Hinkley are two of the best sailboats made, expensive they are, but we are not talking cost. You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. Simon is not an actual sailor. He's a pimply faced kid who read some books. BB |
It finally hit me.
$13 for 5l. Sound like the sort of beer girls use to wash hair.
Expensive? Bwhahahhahahahahahahaha Cheers MC Wes Carroll wrote: How about from the Toledo Light to the North Tower of Big Mac via the Milwaukee harbor light. I will even give you a 4 hour head start. Say July 4 2004 at 6am. I drink Mack and Jacks African amber, it aint cheap nor is it easy to get. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I challenged Booby to a race many times but he's ALWAYS chickened out. I'll make you the same challenge. I'll race you starting at Key Largo to Marsh Harbor in the Abacos from there to Habana and from Habana to Key West. Said race to commence sometime in December of this year. Loser buys the winner's beer for five years. I bet you, like your sniveling, pretend-to-sail, little, butt buddy Booby, will also chicken out. S.Simon - my 27-footer will beat yours in a long distance race. wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 01:41:43 GMT, "The Carrolls" wrote: What an absurd and laughable point of view, that a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat. You need to look into their history and build specifications. Try punching through a tall sea at an inlet with only 15 or 20 hp available. To sail through all is not always a good prudent decision these days, even Larry Pardee used a motor on occasion. Cabo Rico and Hinkley are two of the best sailboats made, expensive they are, but we are not talking cost. You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. Simon is not an actual sailor. He's a pimply faced kid who read some books. BB |
It finally hit me.
Actually it is not a bad thing, I greatly admire those with the
patience to own and care for a wooden boat. But there is a lot to be said about new materials and equipment. "Scott Vernon" wrote in message news:bko9ft$43mp8$1@ID- 154502.news.uni-berlin.de... You say that like it's a bad thing. SV "The Carrolls" wrote You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. |
It finally hit me.
Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...
Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boat Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. Does this take into account adverse elements, such as wind and current or it just for flat calm water? Seems to me that many boats are way underpowered based on the above. RB |
It finally hit me.
Yes, many boats are underpowered. However, if the target speed is reduced to about 75% of
hull speed ( a ratio of 1.05 instead of 1.34) the HP required goes down to 1HP per 1000 pounds. This is why any sailboats are slower under power than under sail. (OK, there are a few other factors ...) A "True Motorsailer" will have more like 1 HP per 250 pounds - enough to keep the speed up in adverse conditions. Two examples are the NorthEast 400 (100 HP for 22000 pounds) and its big brother Bruckman 480 (140 HP for 42000 pounds) -jeff "Bobsprit" wrote in message ... The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. Does this take into account adverse elements, such as wind and current or it just for flat calm water? Seems to me that many boats are way underpowered based on the above. RB |
It finally hit me.
Yes, many boats are underpowered. However, if the target speed is reduced to about 75% of hull speed ( a ratio of 1.05 instead of 1.34) the HP required goes down to 1HP per 1000 Interesting info, Jeff. Thanks. RB |
It finally hit me.
And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently
fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat". Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass. When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind. Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued. S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ... Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boat Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives
him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go. -jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat". Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass. When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind. Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued. S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ... Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa t Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
Nautical science? Where did that combination of words
come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant, self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something other than it is? Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like 'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'. But the bottom line is you once more failed to address the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come in a poor second. You also failed to understand that EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise you're no sailor. In your particular case you have two diesels in a boat which can in no way be considered an honest sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go. -jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat". Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass. When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind. Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued. S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ... Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa t Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
Address the issue? Your ramblings about "First she's a sailboat" is just your way of
saying you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to powering a sailboat. The truth is, you have just as much power, proportionately, as most other boats. However, you have it hanging off the stern so it causes more drag by squatting the stern than my folding props do. Its useless in a surf because the prop will come out of the water. It has a 6 Amp alternator. Yours is probably a 2-stroke that spews a trail of fuel wherever you go. And to top it off, your log shows that on your last trip to the Bahamas you powered there, you powered back, and you powered much of the time you were there! But you're right about one thing - I had the option of powering with twin 10HP outboards but chose the small diesels because I knew I would be powering at least 3000 miles in the first 2 years I owned the boat. But still, 36HP for a 36 foot boat isn't really overkill. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Nautical science? Where did that combination of words come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant, self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something other than it is? Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like 'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'. But the bottom line is you once more failed to address the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come in a poor second. You also failed to understand that EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise you're no sailor. In your particular case you have two diesels in a boat which can in no way be considered an honest sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go. -jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat". Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass. When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind. Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued. S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ... Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa t Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
So you finally grew large enough gonads to admit the truth.
You value your motors above your sails. Your main concern when buying a so-called sailboat was what engine(s) to fit. That strikes me as pathetic. It proves my contention that you are just another motor boater pretending to be a sailor - or, to be a little more kind, an old sailor who's gotten too lazy to sail much any more. To correct a couple of your misconceptions, my little outboard is a 2001, 9.9 HP, Honda 4-stroke which meets 2006 emission standards. It is a far cleaner and environmentally friendly than your twin diesel pollution machines. It burns less than two quarts per hour at five knots and does not use pre-mix so it doesn't put oil into the water and air like 2-stroke outboard engines. It has a 12 amp alternator (optional charging coil). It cost me only $1800. It weighs in at 100 pounds. As an option your environmentally unfriendly diesels probably cost you well over ten grand for the pair. They weigh at least five to seven times more than my 100 pound motor/transmission/prop combination. They harm the performance of your boat more than you'll ever know until you toss the lot overboard and do some pure sailing sometime again instead of allowing your being ever so out of shape and obese to force you into motoring the majority of the time. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Address the issue? Your ramblings about "First she's a sailboat" is just your way of saying you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to powering a sailboat. The truth is, you have just as much power, proportionately, as most other boats. However, you have it hanging off the stern so it causes more drag by squatting the stern than my folding props do. Its useless in a surf because the prop will come out of the water. It has a 6 Amp alternator. Yours is probably a 2-stroke that spews a trail of fuel wherever you go. And to top it off, your log shows that on your last trip to the Bahamas you powered there, you powered back, and you powered much of the time you were there! But you're right about one thing - I had the option of powering with twin 10HP outboards but chose the small diesels because I knew I would be powering at least 3000 miles in the first 2 years I owned the boat. But still, 36HP for a 36 foot boat isn't really overkill. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Nautical science? Where did that combination of words come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant, self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something other than it is? Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like 'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'. But the bottom line is you once more failed to address the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come in a poor second. You also failed to understand that EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise you're no sailor. In your particular case you have two diesels in a boat which can in no way be considered an honest sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go. -jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat". Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass. When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind. Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued. S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ... Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa t Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
I've always admitted to the boat I have and why I decided on it. I'll even admit that
I've had second thoughts - then I've heard horror stories of the outboards going belly up without any spare parts in the hemisphere. But the bottom line is that I've already done a lot more sailing than you, so I don't mind admitting that now that I'm older and have family responsibilities, I enjoy getting to a beautiful destination, and don't mind using the engine to get there. Tell you what Neal: why don't you throw away your engine, your GPS, and your VHF and cruise the Maine coast for a season. Then we'll let you join the club of real sailors! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... So you finally grew large enough gonads to admit the truth. You value your motors above your sails. Your main concern when buying a so-called sailboat was what engine(s) to fit. That strikes me as pathetic. It proves my contention that you are just another motor boater pretending to be a sailor - or, to be a little more kind, an old sailor who's gotten too lazy to sail much any more. To correct a couple of your misconceptions, my little outboard is a 2001, 9.9 HP, Honda 4-stroke which meets 2006 emission standards. It is a far cleaner and environmentally friendly than your twin diesel pollution machines. It burns less than two quarts per hour at five knots and does not use pre-mix so it doesn't put oil into the water and air like 2-stroke outboard engines. It has a 12 amp alternator (optional charging coil). It cost me only $1800. It weighs in at 100 pounds. As an option your environmentally unfriendly diesels probably cost you well over ten grand for the pair. They weigh at least five to seven times more than my 100 pound motor/transmission/prop combination. They harm the performance of your boat more than you'll ever know until you toss the lot overboard and do some pure sailing sometime again instead of allowing your being ever so out of shape and obese to force you into motoring the majority of the time. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Address the issue? Your ramblings about "First she's a sailboat" is just your way of saying you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to powering a sailboat. The truth is, you have just as much power, proportionately, as most other boats. However, you have it hanging off the stern so it causes more drag by squatting the stern than my folding props do. Its useless in a surf because the prop will come out of the water. It has a 6 Amp alternator. Yours is probably a 2-stroke that spews a trail of fuel wherever you go. And to top it off, your log shows that on your last trip to the Bahamas you powered there, you powered back, and you powered much of the time you were there! But you're right about one thing - I had the option of powering with twin 10HP outboards but chose the small diesels because I knew I would be powering at least 3000 miles in the first 2 years I owned the boat. But still, 36HP for a 36 foot boat isn't really overkill. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Nautical science? Where did that combination of words come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant, self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something other than it is? Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like 'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'. But the bottom line is you once more failed to address the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come in a poor second. You also failed to understand that EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise you're no sailor. In your particular case you have two diesels in a boat which can in no way be considered an honest sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go. -jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat". Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass. When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind. Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued. S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ... Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa t Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
Too much fog up in Maine and too many sailors like you,
Shen44 and otnmbrd who refuse to give way to sailboats in a fog. It's just too dangerous for me. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... I've always admitted to the boat I have and why I decided on it. I'll even admit that I've had second thoughts - then I've heard horror stories of the outboards going belly up without any spare parts in the hemisphere. But the bottom line is that I've already done a lot more sailing than you, so I don't mind admitting that now that I'm older and have family responsibilities, I enjoy getting to a beautiful destination, and don't mind using the engine to get there. Tell you what Neal: why don't you throw away your engine, your GPS, and your VHF and cruise the Maine coast for a season. Then we'll let you join the club of real sailors! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... So you finally grew large enough gonads to admit the truth. You value your motors above your sails. Your main concern when buying a so-called sailboat was what engine(s) to fit. That strikes me as pathetic. It proves my contention that you are just another motor boater pretending to be a sailor - or, to be a little more kind, an old sailor who's gotten too lazy to sail much any more. To correct a couple of your misconceptions, my little outboard is a 2001, 9.9 HP, Honda 4-stroke which meets 2006 emission standards. It is a far cleaner and environmentally friendly than your twin diesel pollution machines. It burns less than two quarts per hour at five knots and does not use pre-mix so it doesn't put oil into the water and air like 2-stroke outboard engines. It has a 12 amp alternator (optional charging coil). It cost me only $1800. It weighs in at 100 pounds. As an option your environmentally unfriendly diesels probably cost you well over ten grand for the pair. They weigh at least five to seven times more than my 100 pound motor/transmission/prop combination. They harm the performance of your boat more than you'll ever know until you toss the lot overboard and do some pure sailing sometime again instead of allowing your being ever so out of shape and obese to force you into motoring the majority of the time. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Address the issue? Your ramblings about "First she's a sailboat" is just your way of saying you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to powering a sailboat. The truth is, you have just as much power, proportionately, as most other boats. However, you have it hanging off the stern so it causes more drag by squatting the stern than my folding props do. Its useless in a surf because the prop will come out of the water. It has a 6 Amp alternator. Yours is probably a 2-stroke that spews a trail of fuel wherever you go. And to top it off, your log shows that on your last trip to the Bahamas you powered there, you powered back, and you powered much of the time you were there! But you're right about one thing - I had the option of powering with twin 10HP outboards but chose the small diesels because I knew I would be powering at least 3000 miles in the first 2 years I owned the boat. But still, 36HP for a 36 foot boat isn't really overkill. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Nautical science? Where did that combination of words come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant, self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something other than it is? Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like 'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'. But the bottom line is you once more failed to address the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come in a poor second. You also failed to understand that EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise you're no sailor. In your particular case you have two diesels in a boat which can in no way be considered an honest sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails. S.Simon "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go. -jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls! "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat". Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass. When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind. Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued. S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight. "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ... Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ... Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable lack of understanding of nautical science. Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed. For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa t Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces 23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate. Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than the rated power. So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The "Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed. Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his education as an English major. -jeff "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
Too much fog up in Maine and too many sailors like you,
Shen44 and otnmbrd who refuse to give way to sailboats in a fog. It's just too dangerous for me. Some sailor. Oh, it's only cowardly neal! RB |
It finally hit me.
Simple Simon wrote: Too much fog up in Maine and too many sailors like you, Shen44 and otnmbrd who refuse to give way to sailboats in a fog. It's just too dangerous for me. S.Simon Unlike you, Neal, the three of us, when on any type of vessel (be it sail or power), when hearing the fog signal of a vessel forward of our beam, which may involve a close quarters situation or risk of collision, will reduce our speed to the minimum at which we can be kept on course and if necessary take all way off and in any event, navigate with extreme caution until danger of collision has passed. For us, it won't matter if we are on a sailboat or powerboat, nor will it matter what type of vessel we are approaching, for.....it could well be some clown such as yourself, who thinks he has some special privileges in fog because he is sail and is proceeding as if in normal visibility. otn |
It finally hit me.
How about the Toledo light to the North Tower of Big Mac Via the Milwalkee
light? This is one of my favorite little cruises.I will even give you 4 hours of head start. July 4th 2004 6am. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... Dear Ms. Carroll You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars. The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer." Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any 42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap Timex but because they think it gives them status. Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks to ooh and aah! Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat in the first place. S.Simon - has more common sense than most people "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... "Kelton Joyner" wrote in message ... So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS. A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a motorsailer at best. What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
"The Carrolls" wrote in message ... How about the Toledo light to the North Tower of Big Mac Via the Milwalkee light? This is one of my favorite little cruises.I will even give you 4 hours of head start. July 4th 2004 6am. Your MacDonald's have towers? Ours have arches. Anyway, in case you've not noticed, I'm talking racing in sailboats and not in PT Cruisers and if a race ain't comprised mostly of ocean sailing then it's hardly sailing at all. I think everybody here but me is actually afraid to go off-soundings. A fine bunch of pansies you all are . . . S.Simon - if your depth sounder can get a reading they you ain't really sailing. S.Simon |
It finally hit me.
|
It finally hit me.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 19:11:12 GMT, "The Carrolls"
wrote this crap: How about the Toledo light to the North Tower of Big Mac Via the Milwalkee light? This is one of my favorite little cruises.I will even give you 4 hours of head start. July 4th 2004 6am. "Little cruise"? You never been anywhere near there. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:27:03 -0400, "Simple Simon"
wrote this crap: "The Carrolls" wrote in message ... How about the Toledo light to the North Tower of Big Mac Via the Milwalkee light? This is one of my favorite little cruises.I will even give you 4 hours of head start. July 4th 2004 6am. Your MacDonald's have towers? Ours have arches. Biggest arches are at the Machinaw bridge, dumbass. You'd know that if you ever sailed. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:49:14 -0400, "Simple Simon"
wrote this crap: I never chicken out but I DO INSIST on setting the race course. Some people have the cheek to say I don't sail and never leave the mooring, etc. but they're wrong. I sail so much that some little sheltered water day trip is not my idea of sailing anymore. I like oceans and long distances single-handing. I like boat and master to work as a team over long periods of time and strong winds with big seas derived from hundreds or thousands of miles of fetch. I don't like to see readings on my depth sounder for extended periods of time and I like to see 20-30 knots on my anemometer. If I'm gonna hafta spend my time racing some wannabe klutz then I insist on making a voyage out of it - not some silly around the buoys flim-flamery. I've no interest in racing some crummy little inland course. That's for lubbers like Bobsprit, LOCO, Pony Express, Horvath, Ganz, Katysails, Mooron, Oz1, Donal, Navigator, Haggie, Jeff Morris, Shen44, onnmbrd, Joe Butcher, Billy Jane, etc. etc. So, please don't insult me with anything less than a race of at least five hundred miles with mostly open water. S.Simon - a man, a legend, a standard by which others are judged. This is good. I gotta mark this. Pimple Pieman is leaving the mooring ball. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
Horass,
Don't try and insult your betters. Neal is 100 times the sailor you are, and that is NOT saying much at all. "Horvath" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:49:14 -0400, "Simple Simon" wrote this crap: I never chicken out but I DO INSIST on setting the race course. Some people have the cheek to say I don't sail and never leave the mooring, etc. but they're wrong. I sail so much that some little sheltered water day trip is not my idea of sailing anymore. I like oceans and long distances single-handing. I like boat and master to work as a team over long periods of time and strong winds with big seas derived from hundreds or thousands of miles of fetch. I don't like to see readings on my depth sounder for extended periods of time and I like to see 20-30 knots on my anemometer. If I'm gonna hafta spend my time racing some wannabe klutz then I insist on making a voyage out of it - not some silly around the buoys flim-flamery. I've no interest in racing some crummy little inland course. That's for lubbers like Bobsprit, LOCO, Pony Express, Horvath, Ganz, Katysails, Mooron, Oz1, Donal, Navigator, Haggie, Jeff Morris, Shen44, onnmbrd, Joe Butcher, Billy Jane, etc. etc. So, please don't insult me with anything less than a race of at least five hundred miles with mostly open water. S.Simon - a man, a legend, a standard by which others are judged. This is good. I gotta mark this. Pimple Pieman is leaving the mooring ball. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
The biggest arches are from your underwire support bra.
"Horvath" wrote in message ... Biggest arches are at the Machinaw bridge, dumbass. You'd know that if you ever sailed. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
This route is approximately 800 miles. You want more, we can go to Duluth
and back to Houghton where my son goes to school, or even the Toledo light. You want 20 -30 knots on youe anemometer, I can assure you it will happen. You want 10 foot seas or larger, that too. Quit waffeling, you challanged, I accept. Your current "Cut the Mustard" vs My current "Maybee Crazy" from the Toledo light 7-4-04 6am. The challenger does not get to set the course or conditions, they only get to back out. Why do you think the Americas cup was held in New Zeland last. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I never chicken out but I DO INSIST on setting the race course. Some people have the cheek to say I don't sail and never leave the mooring, etc. but they're wrong. I sail so much that some little sheltered water day trip is not my idea of sailing anymore. I like oceans and long distances single-handing. I like boat and master to work as a team over long periods of time and strong winds with big seas derived from hundreds or thousands of miles of fetch. I don't like to see readings on my depth sounder for extended periods of time and I like to see 20-30 knots on my anemometer. If I'm gonna hafta spend my time racing some wannabe klutz then I insist on making a voyage out of it - not some silly around the buoys flim-flamery. I've no interest in racing some crummy little inland course. That's for lubbers like Bobsprit, LOCO, Pony Express, Horvath, Ganz, Katysails, Mooron, Oz1, Donal, Navigator, Haggie, Jeff Morris, Shen44, onnmbrd, Joe Butcher, Billy Jane, etc. etc. So, please don't insult me with anything less than a race of at least five hundred miles with mostly open water. S.Simon - a man, a legend, a standard by which others are judged. "Wes Carroll" wrote in message om... Hey Neil, no answer? You chicken out? You issued the challange, I just set a few conditions. (Wes Carroll) wrote in message . com... How about from the Toledo Light to the North Tower of Big Mac via the Milwaukee harbor light. I will even give you a 4 hour head start. Say July 4 2004 at 6am. I drink Mack and Jacks African amber, it aint cheap nor is it easy to get. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I challenged Booby to a race many times but he's ALWAYS chickened out. I'll make you the same challenge. I'll race you starting at Key Largo to Marsh Harbor in the Abacos from there to Habana and from Habana to Key West. Said race to commence sometime in December of this year. Loser buys the winner's beer for five years. I bet you, like your sniveling, pretend-to-sail, little, butt buddy Booby, will also chicken out. S.Simon - my 27-footer will beat yours in a long distance race. wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 01:41:43 GMT, "The Carrolls" wrote: What an absurd and laughable point of view, that a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat. You need to look into their history and build specifications. Try punching through a tall sea at an inlet with only 15 or 20 hp available. To sail through all is not always a good prudent decision these days, even Larry Pardee used a motor on occasion. Cabo Rico and Hinkley are two of the best sailboats made, expensive they are, but we are not talking cost. You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. Simon is not an actual sailor. He's a pimply faced kid who read some books. BB |
It finally hit me.
Bud, you are so very wrong. I got pictures, no scanner though, will try to
post. "Horvath" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 19:11:12 GMT, "The Carrolls" wrote this crap: How about the Toledo light to the North Tower of Big Mac Via the Milwalkee light? This is one of my favorite little cruises.I will even give you 4 hours of head start. July 4th 2004 6am. "Little cruise"? You never been anywhere near there. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
I gotta start previewing this stuff before I post. I know, spelled: New
Zealand "The Carrolls" wrote in message .. . This route is approximately 800 miles. You want more, we can go to Duluth and back to Houghton where my son goes to school, or even the Toledo light. You want 20 -30 knots on youe anemometer, I can assure you it will happen. You want 10 foot seas or larger, that too. Quit waffeling, you challanged, I accept. Your current "Cut the Mustard" vs My current "Maybee Crazy" from the Toledo light 7-4-04 6am. The challenger does not get to set the course or conditions, they only get to back out. Why do you think the Americas cup was held in New Zeland last. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I never chicken out but I DO INSIST on setting the race course. Some people have the cheek to say I don't sail and never leave the mooring, etc. but they're wrong. I sail so much that some little sheltered water day trip is not my idea of sailing anymore. I like oceans and long distances single-handing. I like boat and master to work as a team over long periods of time and strong winds with big seas derived from hundreds or thousands of miles of fetch. I don't like to see readings on my depth sounder for extended periods of time and I like to see 20-30 knots on my anemometer. If I'm gonna hafta spend my time racing some wannabe klutz then I insist on making a voyage out of it - not some silly around the buoys flim-flamery. I've no interest in racing some crummy little inland course. That's for lubbers like Bobsprit, LOCO, Pony Express, Horvath, Ganz, Katysails, Mooron, Oz1, Donal, Navigator, Haggie, Jeff Morris, Shen44, onnmbrd, Joe Butcher, Billy Jane, etc. etc. So, please don't insult me with anything less than a race of at least five hundred miles with mostly open water. S.Simon - a man, a legend, a standard by which others are judged. "Wes Carroll" wrote in message om... Hey Neil, no answer? You chicken out? You issued the challange, I just set a few conditions. (Wes Carroll) wrote in message . com... How about from the Toledo Light to the North Tower of Big Mac via the Milwaukee harbor light. I will even give you a 4 hour head start. Say July 4 2004 at 6am. I drink Mack and Jacks African amber, it aint cheap nor is it easy to get. "Simple Simon" wrote in message ... I challenged Booby to a race many times but he's ALWAYS chickened out. I'll make you the same challenge. I'll race you starting at Key Largo to Marsh Harbor in the Abacos from there to Habana and from Habana to Key West. Said race to commence sometime in December of this year. Loser buys the winner's beer for five years. I bet you, like your sniveling, pretend-to-sail, little, butt buddy Booby, will also chicken out. S.Simon - my 27-footer will beat yours in a long distance race. wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 01:41:43 GMT, "The Carrolls" wrote: What an absurd and laughable point of view, that a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat. You need to look into their history and build specifications. Try punching through a tall sea at an inlet with only 15 or 20 hp available. To sail through all is not always a good prudent decision these days, even Larry Pardee used a motor on occasion. Cabo Rico and Hinkley are two of the best sailboats made, expensive they are, but we are not talking cost. You show an attitude that should be sailing a wooden boat and using canvas sails. Simon is not an actual sailor. He's a pimply faced kid who read some books. BB |
It finally hit me.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:15:07 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap: The biggest arches are from your underwire support bra. Do you HAVE to turn every thread into your homosexual fantasies? "Horvath" wrote in message ... Biggest arches are at the Machinaw bridge, dumbass. You'd know that if you ever sailed. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:14:00 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap: Horass, Don't try and insult your betters. Neal is 100 times the sailor you are, and that is NOT saying much at all. You shouldn't even be in this conversation, loser. Non-boater loser. Non-boat owner loser. Loser. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me. - photo2.jpg (0/1)
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 03:31:35 GMT, "The Carrolls"
wrote this crap: Bud, you are so very wrong. I got pictures, no scanner though, will try to post. Here's MY pic of me sailing off Mac Island. That's the Grand Hotel just over my shoulder. You can also see Ft. Mac over my other shoulder. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
It finally hit me.
You want 20 -30 knots on youe anemometer, I can assure you it will = happen. Heck, that's an average September day on Lake MI...yesterday was 25=3D30 = with 7 footers...earlier this week the waves were 8-10. I think you = should make the race during the autumn season...They've already got the = orance "save the beach" fences up at the shore parks and the windsurfers = are having a ball out there in the heavy surf along with the MI surfers = (they're a weird breed...) --=20 katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
It finally hit me.
Where were you in the spring/summer of 2002 while I was
cruising the Bahamas and off the newsgroup? And, where will you be this coming winter, spring and summer when I'm off to the Bahamas again for at least six months and off the group? Probably crying in your beer at the local gay bistro you little faggot! S.Simon - a real cruising sailor who uses the internet when in port. wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:49:14 -0400, "Simple Simon" wrote: I never chicken out but I DO INSIST on setting the race course. Some people have the cheek to say I don't sail and never leave the mooring, etc. but they're wrong. I sail so much that some little sheltered water day trip is not my idea of sailing anymore. I like oceans and long distances single-handing. I like boat and master to work as a team over long periods of time and strong winds with big seas derived from hundreds or thousands of miles of fetch. I don't like to see readings on my depth sounder for extended periods of time and I like to see 20-30 knots on my anemometer. Those many, many, long distance ocean cruises must explain why you are never away from this newsgroup for more than a day or two. BB |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com