Capt. Mooron wrote:
Oh here we go.... the sidewind of the engineer in dire straits.... let's
bring "specialty" manufacturing alloys and specific design criteria into the
equation! It's a smoke screen and I'm not falling for it.

It's a "smoke screen" to say that equipment should be designed & built
to do it's job??


| You assume that the rig, particularly the boom, and the vang must be
| weak. It ain't so.

That's totally incorrect... I never stated such a thing nor utilized any
such reasoning in my argument.

Well, you keep saying over and over, "It can't be as strong as a topping
lift" as though somehow calling a piece of rigging 'topping lift'
magically renders it invulnerable.


|
| I suspect that you cannot envision a box section boom, or a custom
| section boom. Have you ever seen a boat where the boom was not the same
| extruded section as the mast? They exist.

Pardon Me Doug... who the hell do you think you are discussing with here..
jaxxies or horvath???

That may have been a bit over the top. I apologize.

But you sure don't act as if you ever saw any such thing. If you have,
then why all the bogus assumptions?

I gave a simple engineering explanation of the forces & stresses, which
you agreed with, and then you started right back up with "it can't
possibly be as strong." First, the matter is not one to be settled by
debate. Second, believe what you want... I have spent more time than I
should trying to explain, maybe some day you'll actually sail a properly
rigged boat with a solid vang and see for yourself.

Understand this.... every poster that has joined this discussion has found
in my favour regarding the suitability of the topping lift versus the vang
for hoist situations.

Ok, I'm glad that makes you feel better. Does that mean you "win"?

Fresh Breezes- Doug King