| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sailing Newbie Question
I am learning to sail and have a few questions. I understand that the
sails can act either as an airofoil (lile an aircraft wing) or like a parachute where the wind simply blows the sail directly. My question is this. If the wind is ahead of the beam ie we are sailing windward then I expect that the airofoil principle must always hold there otherwise we would be sailing backwards! However, if the wind is aft of the beam on say the starboard side then surely we have a choice where to set the sails ie they can be on the starboard side (ie the boom is pointing to the starboard side) where they act as an airofoil or on the port side where they act as a 'parachute' - is this right or am I missing something. If so which is best? Thanks |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Very perceptive. However, when off the wind on most boats, the
rigging disallows the positioning of the sails to act as an airfoil. CN "Love a Sheep" wrote in message om... I am learning to sail and have a few questions. I understand that the sails can act either as an airofoil (lile an aircraft wing) or like a parachute where the wind simply blows the sail directly. My question is this. If the wind is ahead of the beam ie we are sailing windward then I expect that the airofoil principle must always hold there otherwise we would be sailing backwards! However, if the wind is aft of the beam on say the starboard side then surely we have a choice where to set the sails ie they can be on the starboard side (ie the boom is pointing to the starboard side) where they act as an airofoil or on the port side where they act as a 'parachute' - is this right or am I missing something. If so which is best? Thanks |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Peter Bennett" wrote in message
news.com... On 21 Nov 2004 12:18:14 -0800, (Love a Sheep) wrote: I am learning to sail and have a few questions. I understand that the sails can act either as an airofoil (lile an aircraft wing) or like a parachute where the wind simply blows the sail directly. My question is this. If the wind is ahead of the beam ie we are sailing windward then I expect that the airofoil principle must always hold there otherwise we would be sailing backwards! True However, if the wind is aft of the beam on say the starboard side then surely we have a choice where to set the sails ie they can be on the starboard side (ie the boom is pointing to the starboard side) where they act as an airofoil or on the port side where they act as a 'parachute' - is this right or am I missing something. If so which is best? No. If the wind is from starboard, and abaft the beam, the sails will not normally stay out to starboard, as the sheets are rigged to pull the boom (and jib) into the boat. It is possible with the wind very nearly dead astern to have the main and jib on opposite sides - this usually works best with the wind slightly to the same side as the boom. This is called "sailing by the lee", and will lead to an accidental jibe if you let the wind get too far to the same side as the boom (then you will find out why it is called a boom :-( ) For either the slow, stupid, or stunned, it's called the boom boom. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:30:46 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote: For either the slow, stupid, or stunned, it's called the boom boom. We had a regatta in my club in 2001 during which a fellow was killed via "boom boom". A storm front went through creating 50 knot winds that...unusually...stayed at 30-35 knots most of the day even as the sun came out. During the races, a poor ******* got clipped in the head...hard...during a crash jib (no preventers or concept of "duck", I assume). He failed to fall down and got smashed on the opposite side of the head a couple of seconds later. They pulled the plug on him after a week in a flatline coma. Even though I recall the boat was a C&C 29, the motion was so fast and hard that even that boat's 10 foot boom had enough velocity to crunch a skull. So use preventers and watch sea-state roll in downwind situations. R. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Poor fellow! The man lost his life primarily because
of poor design by the naval architect. Those C&Cs are a death trap in more than one way it seems. But, to design a cruising boat with a boom so low that it can smack you up side the head is criminal. I should think a nice little lawsuit would straighten out C&C and the negligent designer. You won't find a Wm. Tripp Jr. designed cruiser with such flaws. CN "rhys" wrote in message ... On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:30:46 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz" wrote: For either the slow, stupid, or stunned, it's called the boom boom. We had a regatta in my club in 2001 during which a fellow was killed via "boom boom". A storm front went through creating 50 knot winds that...unusually...stayed at 30-35 knots most of the day even as the sun came out. During the races, a poor ******* got clipped in the head...hard...during a crash jib (no preventers or concept of "duck", I assume). He failed to fall down and got smashed on the opposite side of the head a couple of seconds later. They pulled the plug on him after a week in a flatline coma. Even though I recall the boat was a C&C 29, the motion was so fast and hard that even that boat's 10 foot boom had enough velocity to crunch a skull. So use preventers and watch sea-state roll in downwind situations. R. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Capt. Neal® writes: Poor fellow! The man lost his life primarily because of poor design by the naval architect. Those C&Cs are a death trap in more than one way it seems. But, to design a cruising boat with a boom so low that it can smack you up side the head is criminal. I should think a nice little lawsuit would straighten out C&C and the negligent designer. You won't find a Wm. Tripp Jr. designed cruiser with such flaws. CN R. Actually, you will. I have a Columbia 32, designed by none other than William Tripp Jr, and the boom sweeps over the cockpit definitely below head-height. At least if I have the 'flattening reef' in the main out (I think there is a fancier name for it but I forgot it). If I have inexperienced crew, I sometimes put the flattening reef in even in light airs so that the boom is a half-foot higher and less dangerous. --Ernst Columbia 32 #25 'Tavernier' |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:56:43 -0500, Capt. Neal®
wrote: Poor fellow! The man lost his life primarily because of poor design by the naval architect. Actually, probably poor instruction from the skipper, but it was rough enough that he might simply have been "thrown upright" to catch his balance and got clipped. I don't know the fine details, only that he got "boomed" on both sides of his head, with the second one basically mushing his brain. Those C&Cs are a death trap in more than one way it seems. I own a C&C design and I find them quite safe. I will cop to the crappy cored decks, however...but they can be remedied. But, to design a cruising boat with a boom so low that it can smack you up side the head is criminal. I should think a nice little lawsuit would straighten out C&C and the negligent designer. Too late. Company was sold 15 years ago although the trademark lingers. You won't find a Wm. Tripp Jr. designed cruiser with such flaws. If you say so... R. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| American Sailing Association frequently asked questions | ASA | |||
| American Sailing Association frequently asked questions | ASA | |||
| American Sailing Association frequently asked questions | ASA | |||
| American Sailing Association frequently asked questions | ASA | |||
| newbie tacking question | ASA | |||
Hybrid Mode
