Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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' |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name, BTW.
What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded- out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less than head height. To make things safer for yourself either raise the boom to specs or install a sit-under bimini which makes it impossible for you to get your head smacked by the boom. You may even have the wrong mainsail on that boat. Check the specs on the original and measure yours against it. It could be the leech is longer which some racers do to lower the end of the boom. Check out my website for a few pictures of a bimini which is made to sit under. However, even with the bimini laid down the boom is high enough not to smack someone upside the head. If you have a boat with such obvious dangers it is smart to get rid of them one way or the other before they do you in. Listen to a man with impeccable credentials and years of experience. Capt. Neal USCG Master, Near Shore, 25GT also Operator Uninspected Passenger Vessels, Near Shore http://captneal.homestead.com/index.html wrote in message ... 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' |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name, BTW. What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded- out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less than head height. I thought you had walked the plank somewhere! Anyway, the Mirage 33 I crewed on for 4 years had a boom that was about 6' 1" off the cockpit sole. When I got hit, it was because I was standing on the seat trying to stow away excess halyard line and I made the mistake of letting the skipper control the ship's wheel. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Don White" writes: "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name, BTW. What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded- out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less than head height. looks like I'll have to do some usenet archaeology. I presume that the first part of this posting is a reply to my own posting. Only I never saw that reply even though I have read usenet at least twice a day since I posted. Anyway, I did not choose the name of my boat ('Tavernier') but I do like it, too. And yes, I know that there is a community called Tavernier in the Fla. Keys. I know very little of my boat's history (bought her when she was 25 years old to the month) but there are some indications that she spent a lot of time in Florida. If you really want to know mo the island of Tavernier was probably named after Bertrand Tavernier, a quite famous French guy who explored much of Florida in the 1400s or 1500s. Literally, it translates to 'bartender' (someone who has a taverne). Anyway, that's an interesting thought, that someone lowered the boom to increase sail area. The PO was very much into racing and I could see him doing this. Next time at the boat (this weekend, probably), I will definitively look for a 'faded black line' or any other indication that the boom was lowered. But wouldn't lowering the boom leave a lot more physical evidence than a faded black line; like holes in the mast where the gooseneck fitting was attached previously etc? --Ernst |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... "Don White" writes: "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name, BTW. What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded- out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less than head height. looks like I'll have to do some usenet archaeology. I presume that the first part of this posting is a reply to my own posting. Only I never saw that reply even though I have read usenet at least twice a day since I posted. Anyway, I did not choose the name of my boat ('Tavernier') but I do like it, too. And yes, I know that there is a community called Tavernier in the Fla. Keys. I know very little of my boat's history (bought her when she was 25 years old to the month) but there are some indications that she spent a lot of time in Florida. If you really want to know mo the island of Tavernier was probably named after Bertrand Tavernier, a quite famous French guy who explored much of Florida in the 1400s or 1500s. Literally, it translates to 'bartender' (someone who has a taverne). Anyway, that's an interesting thought, that someone lowered the boom to increase sail area. The PO was very much into racing and I could see him doing this. Next time at the boat (this weekend, probably), I will definitively look for a 'faded black line' or any other indication that the boom was lowered. But wouldn't lowering the boom leave a lot more physical evidence than a faded black line; like holes in the mast where the gooseneck fitting was attached previously etc? --Ernst Depends on the gooseneck fitting. Mine is a sliding gooseneck that can be raised or lowered at will. Oftentimes the gooseneck will fit an internal track in the mast and although it may have been riveted on to begin with it is a simple matter to drill out the rivets and change the location while adding new rivets. This would leave holes in the mast to show that it was done, however. More likely is a mainsail cut to lower the boom on the aft end by increasing the length of the leech on the mainsail. This would result in the aft end of the boom being lower than the forward end. The original sail held the boom horizontal, I'm sure. I heard a different story about Tavernier. At one time it was a busy port for exporting pineapples, hardwood, and vegetables. There were several taverns available for the workers. Word got out that there was always a tavern near the port . Then the Frenchies came along and changed the spelling. Your explanation sounds more plausible. CN |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Capt. Neal® wrote:
Depends on the gooseneck fitting. Mine is a sliding gooseneck that can be raised or lowered at will. Oftentimes the gooseneck will fit an internal track in the mast and although it may have been riveted on to begin with it is a simple matter to drill out the rivets and change the location while adding new rivets. This would leave holes in the mast to show that it was done, however. I believe the gooseneck was riveted to the mast on this vessel when originally manufactured More likely is a mainsail cut to lower the boom on the aft end by increasing the length of the leech on the mainsail. This would result in the aft end of the boom being lower than the forward end. The original sail held the boom horizontal, I'm sure. What sort of racing allows modifcation of the main so as to increase area beyond the manufactures specifications? Cheers Marty |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Martin Baxter" wrote in message ... What sort of racing allows modifcation of the main so as to increase area beyond the manufactures specifications? Don't ask me. I hate yacht racing. I do know some racers will embrace any and all cheats they think they can get away with. CN |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Martin Baxter wrote: What sort of racing allows modifcation of the main so as to increase area beyond the manufactures specifications? More roach. Cheers |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Martin Baxter writes: Capt. Neal® wrote: Depends on the gooseneck fitting. Mine is a sliding gooseneck that can be raised or lowered at will. Oftentimes the gooseneck will fit an internal track in the mast and although it may have been riveted on to begin with it is a simple matter to drill out the rivets and change the location while adding new rivets. This would leave holes in the mast to show that it was done, however. I believe the gooseneck was riveted to the mast on this vessel when originally manufactured I believe so, too (it is definitely not on a rail or track) but will check next time at the boat (weekend). --Ernst |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Capt. Neal® writes:
Depends on the gooseneck fitting. Mine is a sliding gooseneck that can be raised or lowered at will. Oftentimes the gooseneck will fit an internal track in the mast and although it may have been riveted on to begin with it is a simple matter to drill out the rivets and change the location while adding new rivets. This would leave holes in the mast to show that it was done, however. More likely is a mainsail cut to lower the boom on the aft end by increasing the length of the leech on the mainsail. This would result in the aft end of the boom being lower than the forward end. The original sail held the boom horizontal, I'm sure. Good points, all. I actually do think that my boom 'droops' quite a bit so your theory of the too-long-leech has a lot for it. The sail is definitively not original (the boat will be feting its 30th birthday soon...). I heard a different story about Tavernier. At one time it was a busy port for exporting pineapples, hardwood, and vegetables. There were several taverns available for the workers. Word got out that there was always a tavern near the port . Then the Frenchies came along and changed the spelling. Your explanation sounds more plausible. Yes, I think so. Good story, though. --Ernst |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|