|
Seaworthiness ?
Since when is stating facts bragging? You call it opressive? tell me
about your airport security.... Cheers MC Vito Steockli wrote: "The_navigatorİ" wrote..... Here in NZ we ..... talk funny and never shear our sheep with nobody! .. The question is, to you have a toy or a seaworthy vessel? How many people here even have a storm jib? Since my boat is a pleasure craft it is by definition a toy, seaworthy or no. Question is why would anyone brag about an oppressive government? Have you considered professional help for your condition - a good deprogrammer perhaps? |
Seaworthiness ?
|
Seaworthiness ?
In a space that can be closed off, yeah. Been there, done that, got the
T-shirt..... PDW In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: Halon is best? Cheers MC Peter Wiley wrote: In article , Donals Dilemma wrote: On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:05:43 -0000, "Donal" wrote: "Peter Wiley" wrote in message om... Here in Australia we can build/buy anything we like and sail it anywhere there's enough water to float it. Top marks! If Oz has his way, you won't be able to get out if bed without a bloody certificate! Quite the contrary my dear Donal. I have no sailing qualifications and carry letters of recommendation whenever I travel and plan on doing any sailing or chartering. There was a few years ago a push by Govt to require licensing of anyone who wished to take a boat outside of enclosed water. I was a vigorous campaigner against this move but was behind regulations that require certification regarding First Aid and use of survival equipment for offshore races where boats are pushed into conditions where the normal rec sailor wouldn't venture. Heh. All of my people (including myself) have current first aid, survival at sea & marine firefighting certs. Most of us are qualified SCUBA divers and have boat licences of various types, limited coxwain or full coxwain being most common. Try putting out a fuel oil fire in a (simulated) bilge with grates, deck plates etc if you want something really scary. PDW |
Seaworthiness ?
Touche!!!!!! The last time I transitted through LAX it was worse than Sukarno Hatta and that's not easy. PDW In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: Since when is stating facts bragging? You call it opressive? tell me about your airport security.... Cheers MC Vito Steockli wrote: "The_navigatorİ" wrote..... Here in NZ we ..... talk funny and never shear our sheep with nobody! .. The question is, to you have a toy or a seaworthy vessel? How many people here even have a storm jib? Since my boat is a pleasure craft it is by definition a toy, seaworthy or no. Question is why would anyone brag about an oppressive government? Have you considered professional help for your condition - a good deprogrammer perhaps? |
Seaworthiness... fire
In article , DSK
wrote: Peter Wiley wrote: Not more than once.... I've had the pleasure of putting out a fire from a 45kg cylinder when the pressure release valve had triggered, and one from a 4" main with a pipe flange rupture. Both under controlled conditions as part of my training. It takes 2 people to snuff one of these, you can't do it alone and you definitely can't do it with a fire extinguisher. Takes a full sized fire hose. It's also crucial to shut off the source of fuel for the fire. That's why it takes 2 people. One to keep the fire hose aimed at the LPG leak to suppress the fire, the 2nd to go forward and shut off the valve near the supply. The training has the leak at the valve flange to simulate a 'worst case' approach. you need to know that you can trust your partner which is why fire fighting people train in teams. Few people realize how well most fiberglass burns. Once a fire gets started on a small boat, the only hope is to put it out FAST. Fires on ships are one of the worst things that can happen. Yes indeed. I once had the dubious pleasure of putting out a class C fire in a ships laundry, which was located just above the helo fuel storage & pumping room. I was careful to not show anybody else in the fire party the DC diagrams, didn't want to start a panic! Much more fun than training. Gets the adrenaline going that's for sure. The toy fire extinguishers most people have are a waste of space, they might snuff a cigarette lighter on a good day but a spilt pan of fat that's flashed - probably not. OTOH the fire blankets are surprisingly (to me when I first used one) effective on contained fires. PDW |
Seaworthiness ?
Unfortunaely. another example of ligilation missing the boat. the risk
to the ozone layer was not the minute amount of Halon released to control fires in critical locations but user CFC's. On board a boat you need the best possible fire control equipment and that's halon. Dry powder is rubbish in comaprison... Cheers MC Donals Dilemma wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:57:49 +1300, The_navigatorİ wrote: You don't have the Siebe (sp) Gorman? Cheers MC Bwaaahahahahahahahaaa! Nope, but I have been in a mainframe room where they had those little emergency air supplies in case the Halon was set off. IIRC it's now banned? Donals Dilemma wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 09:47:45 +1300, The_navigatorİ wrote: Halon is best? Cheers MC In an enclosed space? Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. |
Seaworthiness ?
That's what I thought. So halon for boat fires is best. Right now we are
syupoosed to be decomissioning all our halons. I've handed on in but there's still another on board (in addition to the dry powder). I wonder if I should keep it -just in case. what do you think? Cheers MC Peter Wiley wrote: In a space that can be closed off, yeah. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt..... PDW In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: Halon is best? Cheers MC Peter Wiley wrote: In article , Donals Dilemma wrote: On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:05:43 -0000, "Donal" wrote: "Peter Wiley" wrote in message news:031220031120583773%peter_d_wiley@hotmail .com... Here in Australia we can build/buy anything we like and sail it anywhere there's enough water to float it. Top marks! If Oz has his way, you won't be able to get out if bed without a bloody certificate! Quite the contrary my dear Donal. I have no sailing qualifications and carry letters of recommendation whenever I travel and plan on doing any sailing or chartering. There was a few years ago a push by Govt to require licensing of anyone who wished to take a boat outside of enclosed water. I was a vigorous campaigner against this move but was behind regulations that require certification regarding First Aid and use of survival equipment for offshore races where boats are pushed into conditions where the normal rec sailor wouldn't venture. Heh. All of my people (including myself) have current first aid, survival at sea & marine firefighting certs. Most of us are qualified SCUBA divers and have boat licences of various types, limited coxwain or full coxwain being most common. Try putting out a fuel oil fire in a (simulated) bilge with grates, deck plates etc if you want something really scary. PDW |
Seaworthiness ?
Good lord are you serious? It took me near 2 hours to get through LAX to
another outbounf flight earlier this year! If fingerprinting and photos were included the delayes gound go up hugely! How will fingerprinting anyone stop a terrorist attack anyway? Cheers MC Donals Dilemma wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 09:48:15 +1100, Peter Wiley wrote: Touche!!!!!! The last time I transitted through LAX it was worse than Sukarno Hatta and that's not easy. PDW Heh heh, saw an article the other day about US airport security. They've bee challenged on discrimination basis for photographing and fingerprinting all foreign nationals from the Middle east. To allay the protests, they've decide to photograph and fingerprint EVERY foreign arrival. Should make LAX a real fun place when 6 or 7 747's arrive within a half hour. Might be worth looking at arrival schedules before booking a flight! Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. |
Seaworthiness ?
Hell, my boat IS critical to my survival if I'm cruising!
Cheers MC Donals Dilemma wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:21:48 +1300, The_navigatorİ wrote: Unfortunaely. another example of ligilation missing the boat. the risk to the ozone layer was not the minute amount of Halon released to control fires in critical locations but user CFC's. On board a boat you need the best possible fire control equipment and that's halon. Dry powder is rubbish in comaprison... Cheers MC I think its still OK in critical applications though alternatives are being sought. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. |
Seaworthiness ?
"The_navigatorİ" wrote in message ... Ever seen an LPG explosion or its aftermath? Yes - or at least I think so. I saw a large puff of smoke appear from a 35-40ft yacht a couple of years ago. I assumed that it was a gas explosion. Regards Donal -- |
Seaworthiness ?
I saw a large puff of smoke appear from a 35-40ft yacht a couple of years
ago. I assumed that it was a gas explosion. You sure it wasn't Neal's boat? It may have been dust and cat hair. RB |
Seaworthiness ?
Donals Dilemma wrote in message ... A ****ing BIG one! I've read your, and some other, responses. I'm willing to accept that the costs of rescue are far greater for Australia than for the UK. Perhaps my opinions don't apply to the Southern Ocean. Regards Donal -- |
Seaworthiness ?
"Peter Wiley" wrote in message . .. You're a complete idiot. You have no idea how big Australia's SAR zone is. Some of it is so far away that the Navy has to take a fleet oiler with them, or charter a deep ocean fishing boat. The fuel costs alone exceed any collection of individuals' contributions. As I said, if EPIRB's were restricted to people with insurance against rescue costs and the rest of us took our chances, problem solved. That is a possible solution that I could agree with. I wonder how much the insurance premium would be? Regards Donal -- |
Seaworthiness ?
"The_navigatorİ" wrote in message ... Donal wrote: "The_navigatorİ" wrote in message ... Here in NZ we have to get vessels inspected every 2 years for their seaworthiness and without a CAT1 clearance the vessel is not allowed to leave (if owned by a NZ resident). The inspection takes up to ~2 hours and the inspector also questions the skipper on his seamanship (it helps if you already have qualifications like Ocean yachtmaster or even Coastal skipper) for it is also the application his knowledge that makes the vessel seaworthy (or not). Are you boasting about this?? No. Just stating facts FYI. You have little men in peaked caps who have the authority to stop you from setting to sea because they dissapprove of your vessel?? What kind of fascist dictatorship do you live in? I think it's quite fair. The southern ocean is a big hostile place Donal. Suicide is illegal too -does that make the UK a fascist dictatorship? In many cases vessel arrive here from overseas which are patently unseaworthy and these days they are allowed to leave -after a strong talking to by the inspector as to why their vessels are unsuitable ... and what qualifications do these "inspectors" have? I bet that they are recruited from the educational system's failures. I bet that they are paid a low salary, and they have a great pension scheme. The ones I've met are all ex professional mariner with ocean yachtmaster examiner certs or equivalent. Most have circumnavigated under sail -or at least crossed the pacific. All are (or were) boating education instructors. and what will likely happen to them in bad conditions. For that reason, it would seem that many US and EU vessels arrive but never leave. ...and I bet that an even greater number never even arrive! Why would someone sail around the world to visit a country that paid idiots to tell the visitors that their craft were not seaworthy? Fer cryin' out loud, if you sail to NZ, then your boat *must* be seaworthy. No it may not be think about it... From the very definition of the word and that most people have never experienced a storm at sea. When the real sailor thinks about his vessel he thinks about how she will cope if hit by storm force winds in the open sea if he wishes to call his vessel seaworthy. If the vessel is not seaworthy then it is just a toy for amusement on nice fair wind days. The question is, to you have a toy or a seaworthy vessel? How many people here even have a storm jib? Mind your own bloody business. The real question is "Do you need some small minded civil servant to tell you if your vessel is seaworthy?". I do NOT. So you think it is? Actually, I don't. I wouldn't choose to take her across the Atlantic. However I would feel happy about taking her across Biscay. Go figure? I often find it difficult to imagine the sailing conditions in different parts of the world, so I have modified my opinions after reading the responses in this thread. I still have a problem with civil servants deciding whether my boat is fit, or not. However, I accept that providing a rescue service over such a wide area is difficult - and expensive. Regards Donal -- |
Seaworthiness... fire
Peter Wiley wrote: .... The toy fire extinguishers most people have are a waste of space, they might snuff a cigarette lighter on a good day but a spilt pan of fat that's flashed - probably not. Some of them are definitely toys, the smallest ones I have are dry chemical about 3kg and rated "8-10-12 A-B-C." I'm not sure what the numbers mean but they will put out all three types of fire. I don't expect them to do more than put out a cupful of fuel, and would hate like hell to have to clean the crud out of any electrical components. We also carry three much bigger A-B-C rated dry chem extinguishers. I'd prefer CO2 for electrical fires but don't want to have to remember which type I'm grabbing when something catches fire. Most people get the smallest cheapest fire extinguishers. Big mistake if you ever need them. Anything that's not rated A-B-C is a waste of space. OTOH the fire blankets are surprisingly (to me when I first used one) effective on contained fires. Yes and they totally prevent reflash. Thanks for mentioning them, I will get a couple for our boat this weekend (scribbling on to-do list). Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Seaworthiness ?
The navigatorİ wrote:
So, what an excellent example of the human race you are. Why yes. Thanks for noticing. First you BS and then when called out and shown to the world to be a BS artist you threaten me with a hiding? Actually, it's funny that you accuse me of being a BS artist. Just within the last week you have: - conveniently dropped the distinction between section & profile when discussing aerodynamic shapes - failed utterly to correlate factors of small boat seaworthiness, and name some more seaworthy small boats. Probably more that's worthy of being listed, but I don't read all your posts. You are as big a waste of bandwidth as the Crapton. DSK |
Seaworthiness ?
It was probably an A4 starting up.
Cheers MC Donal wrote: "The_navigatorİ" wrote in message ... Ever seen an LPG explosion or its aftermath? Yes - or at least I think so. I saw a large puff of smoke appear from a 35-40ft yacht a couple of years ago. I assumed that it was a gas explosion. Regards Donal -- |
Seaworthiness ?
DSK wrote: The navigatorİ wrote: So, what an excellent example of the human race you are. Why yes. Thanks for noticing. First you BS and then when called out and shown to the world to be a BS artist you threaten me with a hiding? Actually, it's funny that you accuse me of being a BS artist. Just within the last week you have: - conveniently dropped the distinction between section & profile when discussing aerodynamic shapes I never used those terms so this a pure fabrication. This shows you again to be a complete liar. You really are pathetic in your attempts to dicredit me. So come on, post the evidence you liar. - failed utterly to correlate factors of small boat seaworthiness, and name some more seaworthy small boats. "failed utterly to correlate factors of small boat seaworthiness" are you really so demented? No one was either asked to correlate nor discuss factors determining seaworthiness in detail. Your trouble is that you are a such a little ignorant man. You very ignorant about yacht design and meterials feel compelled to advise others. I correctly pointed out that the B. Micro is not a suitable serious cruising vessel and when even Bolger himself recognises this view you deny it. You even go so far as to make up a ridiculous LPOS figure that is quite critical for seaworthiness in sailing vessels (but not the only factor). I've called you on it and have offered ways of establishng facts that you ignore. So, now you are trying to weasel out of your bet by discrediting me. I offered a design type that is more seaworthy (which you denied). I'll guess that you are so pathetic in trying to cover your ignorance and lies that you made the bit about sailing with the designer of the cornish crabber. So, Doug when did you sail with the original designer of the cornish crabber and where does he live? Would you like me to give give him a call for you and see if he remembers sailing with Doug King -how could he forget -someone with your 'knowlege' of design? I'll also see what he thinks about his designs being less seaworthy that a Bolger Micro? Probably more that's worthy of being listed, but I don't read all your posts. You are as big a waste of bandwidth as the Crapton. You may think that but at least the record shows that I don't lie and make things up all the time. What a nasty little piece of work you are. Cheers MC |
Seaworthiness ?
The navigatorİ wrote: - conveniently dropped the distinction between section & profile when discussing aerodynamic shapes I never used those terms so this a pure fabrication. This shows you again to be a complete liar. You really are pathetic in your attempts to dicredit me. So come on, post the evidence you liar. Nope, sad to say, it is quite true. Not only that, you began the discussion about lift/drag ratios and relative developed power in light air, and then claimed it was more important to reduce heeling moment. Now (drum roll please) the bare facts, from the Google archive From: DSK ) Subject: Hey simple! Newsgroups: alt.sailing.asa Date: 2003-11-28 04:27:51 PST The navigatorİ wrote: I wonder if our disagreement arises because your theories are based on ideas originating from the "eliptical wing" and a desire to make the main adopt an eliptical shape as far as camber is concerned (by making the top fuller)? Huh? AFAIK the elliptical wing is usually referred to profile, not section shape. So, I can definitely say, no that's not it. Increasing fullness also helps solve the roach support problem -which is offset in modern sails with full length battens and stiffer fabrics. Some sudies (e.g. here at Auckland) have shown this is not correct for high aspect roachy mains where the camber (and lift) should be reduced at the top of the sail to reduce heeling moment. Hello? Why are you talking about 'reducing heeling moment' in light air? In the extreme case, negative (!) camber could improve performance by reducing the heeling of the vessel.. Yes it could, but not in light air. *** *** *** There you have it folks. Yet another fine example of Navvieİ losing his grip on his own malarkey and attempting to change the subject. Happens every time he tries to discuss real sailing... check the record. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Seaworthiness ?
Keep it as long as the canister is OK - I suspect you can still get the
thing checked by one of the FE companies. Halon works well, better than anything else - that's why our ship still has Halon for the engine room fire suppression system. It's been used in anger twice so far. In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: That's what I thought. So halon for boat fires is best. Right now we are syupoosed to be decomissioning all our halons. I've handed on in but there's still another on board (in addition to the dry powder). I wonder if I should keep it -just in case. what do you think? Cheers MC Peter Wiley wrote: In a space that can be closed off, yeah. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt..... PDW In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: Halon is best? Cheers MC Peter Wiley wrote: In article , Donals Dilemma wrote: On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:05:43 -0000, "Donal" wrote: "Peter Wiley" wrote in message news:031220031120583773%peter_d_wiley@hotmail .com... Here in Australia we can build/buy anything we like and sail it anywhere there's enough water to float it. Top marks! If Oz has his way, you won't be able to get out if bed without a bloody certificate! Quite the contrary my dear Donal. I have no sailing qualifications and carry letters of recommendation whenever I travel and plan on doing any sailing or chartering. There was a few years ago a push by Govt to require licensing of anyone who wished to take a boat outside of enclosed water. I was a vigorous campaigner against this move but was behind regulations that require certification regarding First Aid and use of survival equipment for offshore races where boats are pushed into conditions where the normal rec sailor wouldn't venture. Heh. All of my people (including myself) have current first aid, survival at sea & marine firefighting certs. Most of us are qualified SCUBA divers and have boat licences of various types, limited coxwain or full coxwain being most common. Try putting out a fuel oil fire in a (simulated) bilge with grates, deck plates etc if you want something really scary. PDW |
Doug S. KING the liar
Still working on it aren't you? If anyone rereads the posts they will
see that I was offering YOU a way of explaing YOUR ideas. Hence the elliptical wing which I did not discuss. But the real point is that you try to besmirch me yet again by saying that I "conveniently dropped the distinction between section & profile when discussing aerodynamic shapes" which is plainly a lie. There was no convenience about it. You did not pick up and discuss elipitical theories anyway. Furthermore I certainly did not use the terms "section and profile" -as i said. So try to twist as you want but but you are still a liar. C'mon why don't you threaten me again with a hiding? Why not come here and deliver it in person? Cheers MC DSK wrote: The navigatorİ wrote: - conveniently dropped the distinction between section & profile when discussing aerodynamic shapes I never used those terms so this a pure fabrication. This shows you again to be a complete liar. You really are pathetic in your attempts to dicredit me. So come on, post the evidence you liar. Nope, sad to say, it is quite true. Not only that, you began the discussion about lift/drag ratios and relative developed power in light air, and then claimed it was more important to reduce heeling moment. Now (drum roll please) the bare facts, from the Google archive From: DSK ) Subject: Hey simple! Newsgroups: alt.sailing.asa Date: 2003-11-28 04:27:51 PST The navigatorİ wrote: I wonder if our disagreement arises because your theories are based on ideas originating from the "eliptical wing" and a desire to make the main adopt an eliptical shape as far as camber is concerned (by making the top fuller)? Huh? AFAIK the elliptical wing is usually referred to profile, not section shape. So, I can definitely say, no that's not it. Increasing fullness also helps solve the roach support problem -which is offset in modern sails with full length battens and stiffer fabrics. Some sudies (e.g. here at Auckland) have shown this is not correct for high aspect roachy mains where the camber (and lift) should be reduced at the top of the sail to reduce heeling moment. Hello? Why are you talking about 'reducing heeling moment' in light air? In the extreme case, negative (!) camber could improve performance by reducing the heeling of the vessel.. Yes it could, but not in light air. *** *** *** There you have it folks. Yet another fine example of Navvieİ losing his grip on his own malarkey and attempting to change the subject. Happens every time he tries to discuss real sailing... check the record. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Seaworthiness ?
In article , Donals Dilemma
wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 09:45:21 +1100, Peter Wiley wrote: Not banned for ship engine rooms. Nothing else is as effective. My computer room on the ship has a halon-based fire suppressant system too. Probably redundant these days - was put in when the room was full of DEC Vaxen, now we use a handful of Solaris/Linux machines to do the same job. One lonely Win2K machine because it runs an app for which thre is no linux equivalent, unfortunately. PDW Your thoughts on this? http://lists.samurai.com/pipermail/t...ary/000706.htm l Interesting for small boats. I've never heard of a runaway on halon, didn't think of it as a fuel and too lazy to check. Certainly diesels can runaway on oil fumes & the like. Our ships have watertight & damn near airtight doors (wouldn't guarantee they were airtight totally) so engine rooms can be shut off & fires starved of oxygen. Under those circumstances a runaway diesel will draw a partial vacuum but stop. I'm pretty sure Halon has now been banned everywhere http://www.deh.gov.au/minister/env/97/mr16sep297.html We still have it on the ship and I *think* we still have it on the Antarctic bases for the same reason. Might catch up with you some other Xmas. Wherever you're heading, have a good one. PDW |
Doug S. KING the liar
MC, have you implanted some Neal and Booby genes in yourself as some =
weird experiment? ala Isle of Dr. Moreau? Your strident and = argumentative tone suggests all is not well in NZ. --=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 |
Doug S. KING the liar
NO I want my MONEY.
Cheers MC katysails wrote: MC, have you implanted some Neal and Booby genes in yourself as some weird experiment? ala Isle of Dr. Moreau? Your strident and argumentative tone suggests all is not well in NZ. |
~name removed~ the liar
The navigatorİ wrote: NO I want my MONEY. Well then, you'll have to win the bet. So far you have lost pathetically, and if you don't mind your manners a little better you might find yourself with a bit of legal bother. A lawyer who hangs around our office says it could well be actionable as slander and certainly malicious mischief, to title one's posts with another person's name and call them a liar. The fact that I am the one presenting accurate and truthful information has no legal import, apparently. DSK |
~name removed~ the liar
Well ask your friend about threats. And as for truth what about your
truthful statment that the LPS of 180 for a Bolger Micro? That was a lie and you know it. So ask your friend how publishing the truth is actionable? Now, who do you want as an itermediary for the resolution of this bet? As I've said, I've got the name of at least one pocket cruiser, a design of a boat with 180 LPS, my calculations and Bolger and Friends and I'm waiting for you to simply agree to send the money to a third party! IYou see, I don't think you are honorable at all and I don't trust youi to pay up -hence the need for an intermediary. After all, if I reveal my information why would someone like you pay up? Cheers MC DSK wrote: The navigatorİ wrote: The fact that I am the one presenting accurate and truthful information has no legal import, apparently. DSK |
Seaworthiness ?
My Dilemma wrote in message ... As an aside. Air Services Australia, the body that controls and regulates Oz airspace, is responsible for 14% of the Earths surface. I understand! My opinion is revised, and now I am undecided on the issue. I have an intrinsic hatred of government interference in sailing. Maybe PDW's idea of special insurance for EPIRB owners would offer an acceptable compromise. Regards Donal -- |
~name removed~ the liar
He's probaly lying again because I know that truth is an absolute
defense to claims of libel and slander as should all lawyers. Do you think his constant lying migh be a manifeststion of mental instability. After all, he has also threatened me twice now and used great verbal abuse? Cheers MC wrote: On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 17:49:16 -0500, DSK wrote: The navigatorİ wrote: NO I want my MONEY. Well then, you'll have to win the bet. So far you have lost pathetically, and if you don't mind your manners a little better you might find yourself with a bit of legal bother. A lawyer who hangs around our office says it could well be actionable as slander and certainly malicious mischief, to title one's posts with another person's name and call them a liar. The fact that I am the one presenting accurate and truthful information has no legal import, apparently. DSK Your lawyer is as wrong as you are. BB |
~name removed~ the liar
The navigatorİ wrote:
... as for truth what about your truthful statment that the LPS of 180 for a Bolger Micro? You can calculate whatever LPOS you think best, but if the boat rolls back up from a capsize then as far as I (and the *real* world) am concerned, it might as well be 180. Now, who do you want as an itermediary for the resolution of this bet? I want you to either send me my money, in US funds, and quit your blather about things you don't know anything about. As I've said, I've got the name of at least one pocket cruiser, a design of a boat with 180 LPS, my calculations and Bolger and Friends Well, tell us all the name of your pocket cruiser and the specs. DSK |
~name removed~ the liar
DSK wrote: The navigatorİ wrote: You can calculate whatever LPOS you think best, but if the boat rolls back up from a capsize then as far as I (and the *real* world) am concerned, it might as well be 180. This would seem a very importnt point, Doug -are you saying you have no idea what LPS is? Now, who do you want as an itermediary for the resolution of this bet? I want you to either send me my money, in US funds, and quit your blather about things you don't know anything about. As I've said, I've got the name of at least one pocket cruiser, a design of a boat with 180 LPS, my calculations and Bolger and Friends Well, tell us all the name of your pocket cruiser and the specs. How will you pay if I do? I want you to send the money to an intermediary. What's so hard to understand about that? It's standard practice for wagers! Come on answer the question, who do you want to act as intermediary? Would you trust my barrister to execute the terms of the wager? DSK |
Seaworthiness ?
Does that include antarctica?
Cheers MC Donal wrote: My Dilemma wrote in message ... As an aside. Air Services Australia, the body that controls and regulates Oz airspace, is responsible for 14% of the Earths surface. I understand! My opinion is revised, and now I am undecided on the issue. I have an intrinsic hatred of government interference in sailing. Maybe PDW's idea of special insurance for EPIRB owners would offer an acceptable compromise. Regards Donal -- |
~name removed~ the liar
The navigatorİ wrote:
-are you saying you have no idea what LPS is? How do you put such "translations" into what seems to everybody else to be quit plain English? Your posts suggest that you have but a dim idea what factors affect boat stability, and that you keep changing the subject is a poor way to hide it. Well, tell us all the name of your pocket cruiser and the specs. How will you pay if I do? I want you to send the money to an intermediary. I don't give durn what you want. If you know of a boat in the same size range as the Bolger Micro which has better reserve stability and a higher LPOS, then post it. The fact that you have not posted any factual info, and suggested that you could design your own boat to fit the criteria (and that, in itself, sounds like it could be amusing) suggests that you don't know of any. The first two boats you posted were much bigger, and had a higher capsize screening ratio. If you have calculated data for any boats LPOS then you can post it publicly for inspection. So far you have failed in all counts and are the loser. Would you trust my barrister to execute the terms of the wager? I suggest you show your barrister this thread, and when he gets done laughing at you, take his advice regarding slander. He can also tell you what measures you can take to protect your boat from attachment. Meanwhile, if you have not posted your answer and all pertinent data promptly, you will be confirmed as a loser and a welsher. Either you know of such a boat or you don't. It's quite simple. DSK |
Wager finshed
DSK wrote: The navigatorİ wrote: -are you saying you have no idea what LPS is? How do you put such "translations" into what seems to everybody else to be quit plain English? Well do you? You previous statements suggest that you think that any baot that can recover from a capasize must have an LPS of 180... Stop evading the issues. Your posts suggest that you have but a dim idea what factors affect boat stability, and that you keep changing the subject is a poor way to hide it. Well, tell us all the name of your pocket cruiser and the specs. How will you pay if I do? I want you to send the money to an intermediary. I don't give durn what you want. If you know of a boat in the same size range as the Bolger Micro which has better reserve stability and a higher LPOS, then post it. So now you are trying to change the terms of the bet Doug. That won't work because the bet is part of the public record. You refusal to agree to the normal terms for resolution of a bet shows me that you have no intention of honoring your bet. So have felt free to call me a welsher and other things -for which I did not threaten you by the way, you now try to bluster your way out. A gentleman would apoloigise and ask that the bet be forgiven but you have demonstrated what you are. You have lied and attempted to coerce me to send you money by threats. I'm not going to pursue this now, because I think you've shown everyone world wide what you are. I'm also heading off the weekend. Take a bottle and tape a coin to the side of it to act as ballast. You now have a vessel with a LPS of 180 degress. Try it! This principle has been used many times in producing "capsize proof" boats measuring 8' and up for ocean crossings and similar tasks -for example see the Selway-Fisher Micro 8 mini yacht. The current enclosed ship rescue pods also use this idea. The bolger micro does not have an LPS of 180 degress because of it's box sections -a bit like current container ships. As I said the form stability of a box section drops badly at 45 degrees, and without the keel would be stable on it's side (think of a wooden block). However that initial good form stability ( 45 degrees) also means that when inverted it will also be stable and and may only recover if it floods down. Nevertheless, it has a good range of positive stability thanks to form and the ballasted keel and my quick analysis suggests somewhere between 115 and 130 degress -figures that I know Bolger and Friends will confirm for you if you contact them yourself. Many boats have LPS's greater than 140 degrees, even small Hunters can get up there! But the Micro 8 design types go to about 170-175 degrees. Contact the designer yourself if you don't believe me. Since you won't pay I'll not waste their time getting them to confirm these figures. For you information, I did stability calculations as an apprentice Naval Architect at a major ship builder in the EU. I also worked from time to time in a yacht design office during university holidays. So you see I think I know a bit about this subject. So there you are. You lost your wager and I'm not expecting you to honor it. If you wish you can send me a gift to make amends but I'll not expect that either. MC The fact that you have not posted any factual info, and suggested that you could design your own boat to fit the criteria (and that, in itself, sounds like it could be amusing) suggests that you don't know of any. The first two boats you posted were much bigger, and had a higher capsize screening ratio. If you have calculated data for any boats LPOS then you can post it publicly for inspection. So far you have failed in all counts and are the loser. Would you trust my barrister to execute the terms of the wager? I suggest you show your barrister this thread, and when he gets done laughing at you, take his advice regarding slander. He can also tell you what measures you can take to protect your boat from attachment. Meanwhile, if you have not posted your answer and all pertinent data promptly, you will be confirmed as a loser and a welsher. Either you know of such a boat or you don't. It's quite simple. DSK |
~name removed~ the liar
In article ,
The_navigatorİ wrote: He's probaly lying again because I know that truth is an absolute defense to claims of libel and slander as should all lawyers. Good thing that what you 'know' is restricted to NZ and maybe the USA. Truth most cerrtainly in NOT an absolute defence to libel in Australia and a court here has ruled that stuff published on the Web can be used as a basis for court action in Australia regardless of the country of origin of the article. Not that I'm saying anything one way or another as to the merits or otherwise of this....... PDW |
~name removed~ the liar
Good lord. Are you saying that you can't always publish the truth????
Cheerrs MC Peter Wiley wrote: In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: He's probaly lying again because I know that truth is an absolute defense to claims of libel and slander as should all lawyers. Good thing that what you 'know' is restricted to NZ and maybe the USA. Truth most cerrtainly in NOT an absolute defence to libel in Australia and a court here has ruled that stuff published on the Web can be used as a basis for court action in Australia regardless of the country of origin of the article. Not that I'm saying anything one way or another as to the merits or otherwise of this....... PDW |
Wager finshed
If you know of a boat in the same size range as the Bolger Micro which has better reserve stability and a higher
LPOS, then post it. The navigatorİ wrote: So now you are trying to change the terms of the bet Doug. That won't work because the bet is part of the public record. Those are the terms of the bet. You can try and twist the meaning around to suit yourself, but it's plain to everybody else. You refusal to agree to the normal terms for resolution of a bet shows me that you have no intention of honoring your bet. So send your money to a third party, then I'll collect it. You lost. Pay up. What is more worrisome is that you seem to like playing stupid hacker games at the same time (and you are losing them too). That is definitely malicious mischief. ..... I'm not going to pursue this now, because I think you've shown everyone world wide what you are. Yes, somebody who knows about boats. .....-for example see the Selway-Fisher Micro 8 mini yacht. The current enclosed ship rescue pods also use this idea. Is an 8 meter LOA the same as 15' ?? For you information, I did stability calculations as an apprentice Naval Architect at a major ship builder in the EU That's a laugh. You have no clue what the math of stability involves or you would never have made the mistake of saying that the capsize screen indicates 'initial stability.' . I also worked from time to time in a yacht design office during university holidays. So you see I think I know a bit about this subject. Well, you can say whatever you like, but it seems to me and anybody else who has followed this thread, and read the references I linked to, that you don't have a clue and are lying yet again. And you have the brass to title your posts with my name and brand me a liar. ... You lost your wager and I'm not expecting you to honor it. Does that mean that you don't intend to send my money? I will email you the address of my financial agent. Perhaps I will donate my winnings to a NZ home for the psychologically disturbed, and you can benefit that way. DSK |
Seaworthiness ?
Don't take this as gospel but I think our area of responsibility
extends from approx 200NM west of Heard Island, north to Indonesia (in the Indian Ocean) south to the ice and east to somewhere between us & NZ. You NZ guys don't have much to send south excepting 'Tangaroa' far as I know so I suspect we'd have to send something anyway if the problem was in the high 50's or 60's. Those are not nice waters. We sent the RV Franklin down into the 50's *once*. Got pinned over by wind/water in a F12 gale and took an hour to finish coming about - had to wait until the wind/wave combination moderated a bit. My friends tell me they all had their lifejackets on. Never went that far south again. I've seen a 100m long ship do a 180 deg course change on the crest of a single wave, and the same ship roll through 45 deg when the skipper mistimed it. Taking yachts down there is fine as long as you're prepared to die if you make a mistake, or if the odds catch up with you. It's 12 days steaming at 14 knots to go from Hobart to the westernmost Australian base on the Antarctic continent. I'm not disparaging Great Britain, but your SAR zone is a tiny fraction of ours and you have a lot more Naval resources than we do. I don't like bureaucratic interference either. The US culture of 'blame anyone but me' for acts of supreme stupidity is unfortunately propogating and people take less & less responsibility for their own safety/wellbeing, expecting other people to put their lives & money at risk to save their useless necks. A few more dying wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if the message got across to the rest. PDW In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: Does that include antarctica? Cheers MC Donal wrote: My Dilemma wrote in message ... As an aside. Air Services Australia, the body that controls and regulates Oz airspace, is responsible for 14% of the Earths surface. I understand! My opinion is revised, and now I am undecided on the issue. I have an intrinsic hatred of government interference in sailing. Maybe PDW's idea of special insurance for EPIRB owners would offer an acceptable compromise. Regards Donal -- |
Doug S. KING the liar
NO I want my MONEY.
Cheers MC Why? It's not like it's worth anything.... --=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 |
~name removed~ the liar
Correct. The test is truth *and* public interest. guess who defines what's in the public interest? Hell, you can be sued for libel here if some smart lawyer (using the word loosely) can convince a jury that a mythical 'reasonable person' could draw libellous imputations from what's written. NSW (dunno about Tas) has some of the best libel laws that lawyers and corrupt politicians can think of. Truth should be sufficient defence but it's not. PDW In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: Good lord. Are you saying that you can't always publish the truth???? Cheerrs MC Peter Wiley wrote: In article , The_navigatorİ wrote: He's probaly lying again because I know that truth is an absolute defense to claims of libel and slander as should all lawyers. Good thing that what you 'know' is restricted to NZ and maybe the USA. Truth most cerrtainly in NOT an absolute defence to libel in Australia and a court here has ruled that stuff published on the Web can be used as a basis for court action in Australia regardless of the country of origin of the article. Not that I'm saying anything one way or another as to the merits or otherwise of this....... PDW |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:54 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright İ2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com