2 questions for Doug.
 

It's generally agreed that having a fine trailing edge on foils is a
good idea.

Q1. (easy) Is it better to a have a squared off edge or a rounded edge
to minimise drag?

Q2. (slightly harder) Assuming no ventilation, what is the equation for
the limiting drag on a plate section? You'll need to explain your answer
for the edification of others!

These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!


C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

Q2 is ill posed. Is that an infinitely thin plate? What is the surface
roughness?


"MC" wrote in message
...
It's generally agreed that having a fine trailing edge on foils is a
good idea.

Q1. (easy) Is it better to a have a squared off edge or a rounded edge
to minimise drag?

Q2. (slightly harder) Assuming no ventilation, what is the equation for
the limiting drag on a plate section? You'll need to explain your answer
for the edification of others!

These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!


C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

The answer will certainly surprise you! An equation can include as many
or as few factors as are needed...

Cheers

Bobsprit wrote:

Q2 is ill posed. Is that an infinitely thin plate? What is the surface
roughness?


"MC" wrote in message
...

It's generally agreed that having a fine trailing edge on foils is a
good idea.

Q1. (easy) Is it better to a have a squared off edge or a rounded edge
to minimise drag?

Q2. (slightly harder) Assuming no ventilation, what is the equation for
the limiting drag on a plate section? You'll need to explain your answer
for the edification of others!

These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!


C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC,
When didst thou become contentious? Hath some great trouble befallen thee?
Doth some dolor darken thy soul? Whence comes this brutish broadcast? Speak,
for we are all friends here!
Scout


"MC" wrote
These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!
C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

2 questions for Doug.
 

He's trying to sucker Doug into another bet to get out of paying the first
one.

SV

"Scout" wrote in message
...
MC,
When didst thou become contentious? Hath some great trouble befallen thee?
Doth some dolor darken thy soul? Whence comes this brutish broadcast?
Speak,
for we are all friends here!
Scout


"MC" wrote
These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!
C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

2 questions for Doug.
 

"MC" wrote

These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!
C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

In NZ time or real time? Anyway, why should I help you with your science
homework?


"Scout" wrote...
MC,
When didst thou become contentious? Hath some great trouble befallen
thee?
Doth some dolor darken thy soul? Whence comes this brutish broadcast?

Speak,

for we are all friends here!



Cool Shakespeare chops, Scout! Anyway, MC (or Navvie as some call him)
doesn't have friends, a true pedant doesn't want or need them.


Scott Vernon wrote:
He's trying to sucker Doug into another bet to get out of paying the first
one.

heh heh not likely. Think I should get lawyers involved?

DSK

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:


heh heh not likely. Think I should get lawyers involved?



S'funny you avoided that last time. I offered the use of an independent
person but you ran away from that and refused all reasonable terms for
settling the bet. Could it be that you lost it?

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:

"MC" wrote

These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!
C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

In NZ time or real time? Anyway, why should I help you with your science
homework?



Didn't you clam to to have expertise in shaping foils at one time? I'm
still waiting for your answers Doug!

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
S'funny you avoided that last time. I offered the use of an independent
person but you ran away from that and refused all reasonable terms for
settling the bet. Could it be that you lost it?

"All reasonable terms for settling the bet" means that the loser pays.
You lost. So pay up.

Have you gotten any unusual attention from the Inland Revenue lately?

DSK

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
Didn't you clam to to have expertise in shaping foils at one time?

I don't ever "claim" anything. That's for doofii like you, Boobsie, and Jax.

I have made a number of under water foils, including centerboards &
rudders, and worked on a number of others. Could easily include
"shaping" although when working from scratch, have always used standard
foil sections. In some cases, one-design rules have to be kept.

Now why, since you alway insist that sailing small boats is beneath your
lofty dignity, would you be interested?

... I'm
still waiting for your answers Doug!

Try holding your breath.

DSK

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:

MC wrote:

Didn't you clam to to have expertise in shaping foils at one time?


I don't ever "claim" anything. That's for doofii like you, Boobsie, and
Jax.

I have made a number of under water foils, including centerboards &
rudders, and worked on a number of others. Could easily include
"shaping" although when working from scratch, have always used standard
foil sections. In some cases, one-design rules have to be kept.


So you made and worked foils but didn't shape the trailing edge? How can
that be? Could this be prevarication?

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:
MC wrote:

S'funny you avoided that last time. I offered the use of an
independent person but you ran away from that and refused all
reasonable terms for settling the bet. Could it be that you lost it?


"All reasonable terms for settling the bet" means that the loser pays.
You lost. So pay up.


No it means that the bet monies are sent to a reputable third party who
then adjudicates the result. I offered this but you declined. (Even an
idiot would know why). As it stands you simply declaie "I won" ignoring
the data I posted which shows clearly that I won. As I said before,
such childish behaiour is tiresome -even if is encouraged by others here.

Have you gotten any unusual attention from the Inland Revenue lately?


Bwhahahhahaha. Was that another thinly vieled threat? If it was, should
the group start to call you "Doug the cur"?

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
So you made and worked foils but didn't shape the trailing edge?

What gives you that idea?

DSK

2 questions for Doug.
 

I don't think Doug is my friend. He really doesn't like me and has even
threatened me. But then he is the engineer who is paid for his expertise
and whose solutions always work! He also makes everyone he meets sail
faster! I'm hoping he will deign to solve all our foil trailing edge
uncertainties and make us all highly successful in our sailing
endeavors? But I worry, why doesn't he answer my simple questions?

Cheers

Scout wrote:

MC,
When didst thou become contentious? Hath some great trouble befallen thee?
Doth some dolor darken thy soul? Whence comes this brutish broadcast? Speak,
for we are all friends here!
Scout


"MC" wrote

These are easy questions for an engineer but how long will it take Doug
to post the answers? Google may not help!
C'mon Doug the clock is ticking.

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:

MC wrote:

So you made and worked foils but didn't shape the trailing edge?


What gives you that idea?


Well, you don't seem to have an opinion as to whether they should be
rounded or squared off. Is this not inconsistent with your claim to have
shaped foils?

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
I don't think Doug is my friend. He really doesn't like me and has even
threatened me.

I have never threatened you.

DSK

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
Well, you don't seem to have an opinion as to whether they should be
rounded or squared off.

Oh, I have an opinion. This is a great example of your misquoting or
deliberately misinterpreting what I say.

... Is this not inconsistent with your claim to have
shaped foils?

Since it is BS on your part, not really, no.

DSK

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:

MC wrote:

I don't think Doug is my friend. He really doesn't like me and has
even threatened me.


I have never threatened you.

DSK


Not even a threat of giving me a hiding?

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
Not even a threat of giving me a hiding?


Is this a threat? In any event, the exchange shows your nature quite well.


From: DSK )
Subject: Seaworthiness ?
View: Complete Thread (66 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: alt.sailing.asa
Date: 2003-12-03 06:29:50 PST

The navigator© wrote:
Yes, I'll accept any books you send in partial payment of your debt to
me.

I don't owe you anything except possibly a hiding, you welsher.

Talking of geodesics, have you found out what one is yet

Considering that I have built them, probably yes.

and why
they DON'T completely obstruct the interior of racing boats?

Of course, ones that don't have them.


bwhahhahaha

What an intelligent response. Did you learn that in your Junior Naval
Architecture course?

DSK

2 questions for Doug.
 

Perhaps this is a case of a simple miscommunication due to divergent uses of
the language!
Once, my friend in Sydney called to say he was "****ed" and I replied, "Why?
What have I done to make you angry?"
He laughed and explained that at his end, "****ed" means drunk. Imagine my
relief!
I read you both to be honorable and knowledgeable gentlemen and I have
complete faith that this will end well!
Scout

2 questions for Doug.
 

Scout wrote:
Perhaps this is a case of a simple miscommunication due to divergent uses of
the language!

Possibly, but to me it looks more like maliciousness and envy on
Navvie's part...


Once, my friend in Sydney called to say he was "****ed" and I replied, "Why?
What have I done to make you angry?"
He laughed and explained that at his end, "****ed" means drunk. Imagine my
relief!
I read you both to be honorable and knowledgeable gentlemen and I have
complete faith that this will end well!

In order to find any knowledgable and useful sailing related input from
MC, you'd have to go back a few years.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
..... ignoring
the data I posted which shows clearly that I won.

Oh, I'm sorry, did you post any data that even met the conditions of the
bet, much less won?

Here's what happened as I see it.

1- I offered a comment on a small boat that I like

2- You ridiculed the boat and my statement

3- I said "Name something better" and gave some pretty specific
conditions, including size of the boat

4- You offered info on 3 or 4 boats which were neither better in the
specific named characteristics, and were very much larger anyway

5- when I said, "I've won" you retreated to insults and then silence.
Frankly I'm a little surprised you bring it up, considering that you've
made some ridiculous claims.


...Was that another thinly vieled threat?

Of course not. It was a rather simple question. Are you so paranoid that
you see threats in everything?

... If it was, should
the group start to call you "Doug the cur"?

What with this "the group," have you got a mouse in your pocket? As
Scout inferred, I consider most of the regular posters here as friends.
Some of them I have been in contact with in the real world, and are
great folks. Then there's a few stains on the carpet... that's why this
newsgroup is kind of like in a comfy living room.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:
MC wrote:

..... ignoring the data I posted which shows clearly that I won.


Oh, I'm sorry, did you post any data that even met the conditions of the
bet, much less won?

Here's what happened as I see it.

1- I offered a comment on a small boat that I like

2- You ridiculed the boat and my statement

3- I said "Name something better" and gave some pretty specific
conditions, including size of the boat

4- You offered info on 3 or 4 boats which were neither better in the
specific named characteristics, and were very much larger anyway

The one I selected wasn't and with that you lost the bet. Also since you
said "anything in a comparable size range" a design would also win me
the bet as it is included in "anything". I offered you that too.


5- when I said, "I've won" you retreated to insults and then silence.
Frankly I'm a little surprised you bring it up, considering that you've
made some ridiculous claims.


Like your saying a Bolger micro is seaworthy and has a 180 degree LPS?
Come on! You know that is potentially dangerous BS. I remind you that
seaworthy means capable of withstanding a _storm_ at sea. I feel my
opposing your view in this point is a matter of integrity.


...Was that another thinly vieled threat?


Of course not. It was a rather simple question. Are you so paranoid that
you see threats in everything?

No, it is a common veiled threat and you know it. Why would prompt you
to ask it? Come on, explain YOUR actions.

2 questions for Doug.
 

In article , MC
wrote:

DSK wrote:
MC wrote:

..... ignoring the data I posted which shows clearly that I won.


Oh, I'm sorry, did you post any data that even met the conditions of the
bet, much less won?

Here's what happened as I see it.

1- I offered a comment on a small boat that I like

2- You ridiculed the boat and my statement

3- I said "Name something better" and gave some pretty specific
conditions, including size of the boat

4- You offered info on 3 or 4 boats which were neither better in the
specific named characteristics, and were very much larger anyway

The one I selected wasn't and with that you lost the bet. Also since you
said "anything in a comparable size range" a design would also win me
the bet as it is included in "anything". I offered you that too.


5- when I said, "I've won" you retreated to insults and then silence.
Frankly I'm a little surprised you bring it up, considering that you've
made some ridiculous claims.


Like your saying a Bolger micro is seaworthy and has a 180 degree LPS?
Come on! You know that is potentially dangerous BS. I remind you that
seaworthy means capable of withstanding a _storm_ at sea.

Funny, I thought your definition of 'seaworthy' was a boat that had an
EPIRB, a liferaft and an HF radio or satellite phone. At least, you
give the impression of thinking they're more important than hull form.

PDW

2 questions for Doug.
 

Peter Wiley wrote:

In article , MC
wrote:


DSK wrote:

MC wrote:


..... ignoring the data I posted which shows clearly that I won.


Oh, I'm sorry, did you post any data that even met the conditions of the
bet, much less won?

Here's what happened as I see it.

1- I offered a comment on a small boat that I like

2- You ridiculed the boat and my statement

3- I said "Name something better" and gave some pretty specific
conditions, including size of the boat

4- You offered info on 3 or 4 boats which were neither better in the
specific named characteristics, and were very much larger anyway

The one I selected wasn't and with that you lost the bet. Also since you
said "anything in a comparable size range" a design would also win me
the bet as it is included in "anything". I offered you that too.


5- when I said, "I've won" you retreated to insults and then silence.
Frankly I'm a little surprised you bring it up, considering that you've
made some ridiculous claims.


Like your saying a Bolger micro is seaworthy and has a 180 degree LPS?
Come on! You know that is potentially dangerous BS. I remind you that
seaworthy means capable of withstanding a _storm_ at sea.


Funny, I thought your definition of 'seaworthy' was a boat that had an
EPIRB, a liferaft and an HF radio or satellite phone. At least, you
give the impression of thinking they're more important than hull form.


You've confused me with someone else. Are you often so confused?

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

A duel! We need a duel!

Doug has built many boats and boat parts. He has tons of hands on experience
and has sailed in many different types of places. This reminds me of
"Return to Snowy River", Jim Craig vs Patten.

RB

"Scout" wrote in message
...
Perhaps this is a case of a simple miscommunication due to divergent uses
of
the language!
Once, my friend in Sydney called to say he was "****ed" and I replied,
"Why?
What have I done to make you angry?"
He laughed and explained that at his end, "****ed" means drunk. Imagine my
relief!
I read you both to be honorable and knowledgeable gentlemen and I have
complete faith that this will end well!
Scout

2 questions for Doug.
 

Pipe down you phony baloney. I'm trying to type.

baloney, yummy!

RB

"Bobsprit" wrote in message ink.net...
A duel! We need a duel!

Doug has built many boats and boat parts. He has tons of hands on experience
and has sailed in many different types of places. This reminds me of
"Return to Snowy River", Jim Craig vs Patten.

RB

MC off the air next?
 

hoLy mother of pearl.

RB

"Navvie" wrote in message ...
I think it's a pretty cowardly thing to complain to a provider to shut
someone up. I would never do it. As for selecting posts out of context!
Now, I though I was generally quite reasonable here and just met like
with like. How could someone be so nasty? I've heard others complain
about this but is that what this NG is really all about -suspension of
free speech and dissent for non-americans?

There's a lot of
 

I do believe your right old bean.
send complaints to

RB


"Navvie" wrote in message ...
posts from someone who is pretending to be Bobsprit. Is that not a
violation of TOS by most providers? It wouldn't be so bad if they were
clever humerous, but they're mostly really stupid and boring.

Cheers

2 questions for Doug.
 

Doug, I have no clue who is right in this matter. But I can tell you
that 30 years ago I was in a mechanical engineering class at Lehigh Univ.,
and my professor taught me one thing well (at least it's the only thing I
can remember from his class): "this field will humble all who enter it." He
was right, I've been humbled plenty, and everyone I've worked with has done
likewise at some point. 100 things in a row will go perfectly, and then a
"Challenger" happens and brings us all back down to earth.
Regarding the ongoing rift here - talented people will always find
something to disagree about, but I think sometimes uncontrolled-for
variables are the culprit lurking behind differentiated conclusions. I
suspect that happens all too often here, and the phenomenon is only
exasperated by the limited medium of NG posting (e.g., consider the number
of times a variant of the phrase "that's not what I said, or meant" has been
used here). In other words, it is possible for two people to argue a point
for which THEY ARE BOTH CORRECT but fail to communicate that their
experimental conditions are not identical.
Navigator obviously appreciates the Socratic approach and I believe he
is well-intended. At times he appears arrogant (IMHO) only because we can't
see or hear him as his progression of questions unfold. The questions may
come off as intellectual snares for which one becomes suspicious - thusly,
the stage is set for confrontation. Defensive postures are assumed, and the
rest is a predictable downhill slide. Unfortunately, at other times he seems
to prefer the bumble-bee approach, in which he pollinates a cross-section of
posts with sarcasm and sometimes brutal criticism. Some deserve this but
some do not. But I've also seen how far he will go to help a sailor with
less experience than he; just as you have done! It is with those positive
experiences in mind that I post this missive.
The reason I take long breaks from posting here (I still lurk often and
have been reading/posting here for about 4-5 years) is that I've found that
I don't like serious confrontation in this particular forum. There is too
much that can go wrong in the communication process and my carpal tunnel is
not conducive to typed tit-for-tat. It's a blast to watch others "go at it"
for fun but it's not fun to watch even virtual friends get hurt. Not that
anyone asked for my opinion, but there it is.
Scout


"DSK" wrote
Cool Shakespeare chops, Scout! Anyway, MC (or Navvie as some call him)
doesn't have friends, a true pedant doesn't want or need them.

2 questions for Doug.
 

Doug remonstrated: MC (or Navvie as some call him)
doesn't have friends, a true pedant doesn't want or need them.

MC does have friends here. People have differences of opinions all the =
time. If you (the generic "you, not the specific) let that get in the =
way of friendship, then it is you )generic) who loses in the end. Like I =
mentioned to Booby in an earlier post, there is always someone who has =
more, does more, knows more...and then there are those that have less, =
do less, and know less. What usually happens is that what you have and =
what you have not are balanced so that some of what you may not have =
someone else may have, while in another area the reverse might be true. =
Is it worth the ulcer to get so embroiled in it? Takes a lot of antacids =
to get rid of that much vitriol.=20


--=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

2 questions for Doug.
 

Scout,

A good discourse about DSK & MC. I'll stick my ancient nose in, when I'm
old enough to know better.

Both have a wealth of knowledge. both have the ability to argue the
exception.

I really don't know or do I care who is playing the upper hand.

I am reminded however of the discussion of sailing theory of Bernoulli
or Newton. When specific examples were necessary and ignored but to be
correct a much greater law was interjected which couldn't be found wrong
but was useless to the discussion. The "Law of Conservation"

It drove me out of the discussion. The Law covered both theories but
sure as hell didn't help settle a damn thing.

It did however, make me aware of smoke
screening a discussion. I say this and jumped into this with both feet.
As long as I'm entered, I may as well be a complete ass and offer
advice.

Both had better just back away and let past comments be accepted as
history.

OT

2 questions for Doug.
 

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Scout,

A good discourse about DSK & MC. I'll stick my ancient nose in, when I'm
old enough to know better.

Both have a wealth of knowledge. both have the ability to argue the
exception.

I really don't know or do I care who is playing the upper hand.

I am reminded however of the discussion of sailing theory of Bernoulli
or Newton. When specific examples were necessary and ignored but to be
correct a much greater law was interjected which couldn't be found wrong
but was useless to the discussion. The "Law of Conservation"

It drove me out of the discussion. The Law covered both theories but
sure as hell didn't help settle a damn thing.

It did however, make me aware of smoke
screening a discussion. I say this and jumped into this with both feet.
As long as I'm entered, I may as well be a complete ass and offer
advice.

Both had better just back away and let past comments be accepted as
history.

OT

Well said, Thom!

Asa benefits greatly from both Doug's and MC's input.

Regards


Donal
--

2 questions for Doug.
 

Scout wrote:
Doug, I have no clue who is right in this matter. But I can tell you
that 30 years ago I was in a mechanical engineering class at Lehigh Univ.,
and my professor taught me one thing well (at least it's the only thing I
can remember from his class): "this field will humble all who enter it." He
was right, I've been humbled plenty, and everyone I've worked with has done
likewise at some point. 100 things in a row will go perfectly, and then a
"Challenger" happens and brings us all back down to earth.

That's very true. I also think that there is a type of personality
common in engineering, just like other professions... the engineer gene
immediately wants to redesign from scratch.

Regarding the ongoing rift here - talented people will always find
something to disagree about,

That may also be, but the issue here
1- MC constantly harps about what I do or don't know, whereas I only
criticize his posts.

2- He constantly insists that info I post is wrong, when it is correct

3- He constantly lies about what he has posted... for example, see his
reply to Peter Wiley.

Frankly, I hope I don't do do any of those things. When I have made a
mistake I admit it (painful though it is). I started the thread on
sailing aerodynamics to have a discussion on the subject and possibly
learn something, not to get yapped at.

for
..... consider the number
of times a variant of the phrase "that's not what I said, or meant" has been
used here

OK, answer me this- how many times has MC/Navvie used that phrase? More
often he will lie about what he posted earlier, or say (in effect) "I
was right all along, you're too stupid to understand." I do not find
this helpful nor entertaining.




Navigator obviously appreciates the Socratic approach and I believe he
is well-intended.

I will try to give him the benefit of the doubt. But he still owes me money.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

2 questions for Doug.
 

You're a good man Doug. Anyone can see that. That's why I posted in the
first place.
Scout

"DSK" wrote
I will try to give him the benefit of the doubt. But he still owes me
money.
Fresh Breezes- Doug King

2 questions for Doug.
 

DSK wrote:

MC wrote:

Well, you don't seem to have an opinion as to whether they should be
rounded or squared off.


Oh, I have an opinion. This is a great example of your misquoting or
deliberately misinterpreting what I say.

Doung, it's short thread -go back and reread your answers. You say you
know but won't give the answer? C'mon! What is your 'opinion'?

2 questions for Doug.
 

MC wrote:
Well, you don't seem to have an opinion as to whether they should be
rounded or squared off.


Oh, I have an opinion. This is a great example of your misquoting or
deliberately misinterpreting what I say.

Navvie wrote:
Doung, it's short thread -go back and reread your answers. You say you
know but won't give the answer? C'mon! What is your 'opinion'?

My opinion is: There are a lot of things that make tremendously more
difference in a boat's performance. A squared edge is better than round
or even sharp, although I shape mine with an alternating bevel. However,
if the helmsman isn't the sharpest, or the crew is hiking lazily, or
the jb leach is slightly blown, or some other detail of set & trim isn't
just right, then a perfectly formed centerboard trailing edge is not
going to make the boat faster by magic.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King