The navigator© wrote:

Even Phil Bolger wrote this in his fiction story about his boat:

" If they had passed the strait they would almost certainly have lost
the boat. The Libeccio, a southwest dry gale, blew up out of a clear sky
as they neared Cap Corse

1- this is fiction

2- he is talking about 50 knot gale and confused seas, not a hopeful place for a 15' boat
with rocky cliffs under the lee.


What depresses me is that you should be able to look at the design and
_know_ it is NOT seaworthy.

One cannot judge a book by its cover. It's sad to see that *you* think *you* can.

DSK

DSK wrote:


The navigator© wrote:


Even Phil Bolger wrote this in his fiction story about his boat:

" If they had passed the strait they would almost certainly have lost
the boat. The Libeccio, a southwest dry gale, blew up out of a clear sky
as they neared Cap Corse


1- this is fiction


Yes very romantic but based on his knowlege of his design.

2- he is talking about 50 knot gale and confused seas, not a hopeful place for a 15' boat
with rocky cliffs under the lee.

A gale is not 50 knots. You should know that. The Libecco is just a gale.

What depresses me is that you should be able to look at the design and
_know_ it is NOT seaworthy.

One cannot judge a book by its cover. It's sad to see that *you* think *you* can.


What a petulant response. Do you deny that some people know about boat
design and can make decisions by inspection about their suitability for
sea? They are called "yacht inspectors" here Doug, and I can tell you
that not one of those that I know would rate that vessel as anything
other than manifestly unsafe for offshore passages -and that is why I
say it is not seaworthy. It's ballast ratio is only 25% and it's form
stability is lost at 45 degrees. If that's not bad enough, I suggest she
is not weatherly either when the wind picks over a stiff breeze up with
a 3'sea.

It's really simple. This was never intended to be a seaworthy boat. It's
for shallow water and calm days. That will indeed fit the needs of 95%
of prospective Micro customers. What is incorrect is to over sell the
qualities to the point that some poor misled person thinks they can go
offshore safely in it.

Cheers MC

The navigator© wrote:


...Do you deny that some people know about boat
design and can make decisions by inspection about their suitability for
sea?

No I don't deny any such thing. However I am quite certain that you cannot.



say it is not seaworthy. It's ballast ratio is only 25%

Where did you get this figure?

and it's form
stability is lost at 45 degrees.

Where did you get this figure?

If that's not bad enough, I suggest she
is not weatherly either when the wind picks over a stiff breeze up with
a 3'sea.


I suggest you are either 1- talking about something with no knowledge and/or 2- talking about a
different boat.

DSK

DSK wrote:

The navigator© wrote:


...Do you deny that some people know about boat
design and can make decisions by inspection about their suitability for
sea?


No I don't deny any such thing. However I am quite certain that you cannot.



say it is not seaworthy. It's ballast ratio is only 25%


Where did you get this figure?


420 lbs ballast 1650 lbs diplacement. Yes, that's 25% to me! Perhaas you
should invest in a calculator or some math lessons?

and it's form
stability is lost at 45 degrees.


Where did you get this figure?

Tell me what you think it should be? Have you even looked at it's
crossection? Have you even seen GZ curve for a vessel with slab vertical
sides? No I didn't think so, but they are in all good Naval Architecture
texts.

If that's not bad enough, I suggest she
is not weatherly either when the wind picks over a stiff breeze up with
a 3'sea.



I suggest you are either 1- talking about something with no knowledge and/or 2- talking about a
different boat.

Wrong on both counts.

Cheers MC