Thank You JEFF!!!
 

Disturbing, but funny.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
ups.com...
Interesting that Neal is *still* obsessed with me. I guess he just
can't get
over his infatuation.


You should be flattered. For a while Neal was sending me pics of John
Candy in drag and claiming it was Loco's mother. Really disturbing
stuff.

RB
35s5
NY

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...


Well, I thought you said that yourself... upwind, very light wind. I would
think that when there's a lull in light wind, the heel would go to zero,
if it wasn't nearly there already. I'm not sure how one would judge that,
since I don't have nor have I seen a tilt meter that accurate.

I'm not talking about momentary zero heel, rather zero heel when moving
along hard on the wind. Only rail ballast can effect zero heel, or even
windward heel, in such cases. When racing dinghies in drifter conditons,
most do slightly better if artifically heeled to minimize wetted surface
area. So in those conditions when you might expect zero heel, some heel is
preferable.

Ok... so feathering is zigzagging.

Done properly its a very smooth procedure, and really doesn't result in a
zigzag CMG, rather a slight serpentine. If you're zigzagging, you're
oversteering or moving the helm too abruptly.

Yup... straight line sailing is faster.. turn = slowing.

I'd agree that it's faster, but one can sail higher on the wind by
feathering. It's helpful in making a mark that you might be slightly below
and want to avoid having to tack at the last minute. To continue your
argument, one can always go faster by footing than by sailing as high as
possible. I should have made the comment that while some of those who don't
touch the helm do win, so do those who steer constantly, feathering into the
wind. The ability and experience of the skipper has more to do with winning
than any given technique on one point of sail. But you know that.

Max

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:14:06 -0800, "Capt. JG"
scribbled thusly:

Yup... straight line sailing is faster.. turn = slowing.

Yup, it's faster, but letting the boat roll up in the gusts and
shooting just a tad gains a whole lot of ground to windward.
Straight line an Etchells and you'll get murdered!

You said that better than I did. Thanks.

Max

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...
The way I think of it, in windward sailing you are either gaining speed

or gaining height.


I've never seen such obvious stuff posted.

This is like saying to someone who just sold his boat, "Hey, if I'd know you
were selling it, I'd have bought it."

Max

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message


When I'm teaching, I've noticed that students, especially those relatively
new to sailing, get very focused on the boat alone, rather than what's
around them... typically ignoring the small waves, lulls and puffs.

This is typical of newcomers. They haven't sailed enough to know how the
boat responds to various inputs to the helm and various sail trims, so they
watch the boat, not the environment. With experience they learn to sense
the boat and watch other racers and the water and wind.


Max

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

"Maxprop" wrote in message
.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...


Well, I thought you said that yourself... upwind, very light wind. I
would think that when there's a lull in light wind, the heel would go to
zero, if it wasn't nearly there already. I'm not sure how one would judge
that, since I don't have nor have I seen a tilt meter that accurate.

I'm not talking about momentary zero heel, rather zero heel when moving
along hard on the wind. Only rail ballast can effect zero heel, or even
windward heel, in such cases. When racing dinghies in drifter conditons,
most do slightly better if artifically heeled to minimize wetted surface
area. So in those conditions when you might expect zero heel, some heel
is preferable.

I know you're not... I've never heard of anyone getting zero heel when hard
into the wind. On the lake where I also teach, I have students sit on the
low side to get a feel for the difference in light wind.

Ok... so feathering is zigzagging.

Done properly its a very smooth procedure, and really doesn't result in a
zigzag CMG, rather a slight serpentine. If you're zigzagging, you're
oversteering or moving the helm too abruptly.

Well, call it whatever you like, it's not a straight course.

Yup... straight line sailing is faster.. turn = slowing.

I'd agree that it's faster, but one can sail higher on the wind by
feathering. It's helpful in making a mark that you might be slightly
below and want to avoid having to tack at the last minute. To continue
your argument, one can always go faster by footing than by sailing as high
as possible. I should have made the comment that while some of those who
don't touch the helm do win, so do those who steer constantly, feathering
into the wind. The ability and experience of the skipper has more to do
with winning than any given technique on one point of sail. But you know
that.

Sure, I get what you're saying. If one were sailing on a beam reach, for
example, a straight course would be faster than constantly turning. For up
wind, it's a different story.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message

We have three new hunters at the yard and I'm not aware of any service
issues.

Well duh. Doncha think service issues tend to show up after a boat has been
in its owner's hands for a while?

I'm also selling a 1997 Hunter 43 and have access to it's
service history, which shows very little in the way of trouble. What
type of problems have you seen?

Hunter 410--keel pulling loose from the hull, despite tightening the keel
bolts. (Hunter's fix: "slap some flexible caulk in there.") Numerous
electrical problems. Hunter 320--this boat has hatches (the sort that
typically are found on a relatively level deck) attached to near-vertical
house sides, and they've cracked and leaked, even after being replaced
twice. Electrical problems. Poor design of the various cubby holes in the
cockpit, the weep-hole drains of which don't seem to drain the water that
accumulates in them. Older Hunters--softening of the *pine* mast step,
which is encased in glass and sits on a reinforced hull member, but doesn't
stay water-tights and eventually softens and allows the base of the mast to
sag into the wood. This has been a problem with older Catalinas as well.
And wet decks are almost ubiquitous on older Hunters and Catalina, and even
on some newer ones. Also, those numerous fixed deck windows on older
Hunters generally leak after about 7 years in the sun and rain. One 37.5
Hunter we inspected in a driving rain literally had a waterfall cascading
down the face of the power panel. Nice. The hull liner was almost
completely black with mildew.


I'd take the Swan, but not the Wauquez or J. We could have had either,
but the designs were not comparable to the 35s5. In the case of the
Wauquez we looked at one in CT in very good shape. Bunks were too
short, head was tiny, no swim platform.

A swim platform is a necessity for a sailboat to be worthwhile?

Teak decks may be nearing the
end of their life cycle on boats so fitted.

Or, if maintained properly, they might be just fine. Best non-skid
available.

Look at the prices on
Yachtworld...

Hmmm. I thought you were criticizing me for reading yachtworld.com. Now
you are suggesting I do so. Which is it?

pretty much the same as the 35s5. The J 34C was in the
running for a while. We really liked sailing it, just as much as the
35s5 in fact. But the fit and finish below was inferior. No aft cabin,
no swim platform and another head designed for short people. J-boat
does seem to understand that people over 6 feet also need to sleep. We
could have bought the beautiful 34C, but the cabin was not even as well
done as our C&C 32.
The features we wanted are important to us as we'd tried them on other
boats and could see their practicality. Because of the failings of the
Wauqiez and Jboat, they can't compete with the 35s5 from a design
standpoint. I'd take the Swan I suppose, but are you so certain that
lofty build quality would still make a boat the right fit for everyone?

I don't know about everyone, but it would for me.

Max

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 04:29:49 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:


OzOne wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:29:49 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:


"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Keeping a boat on it's feet vs. excessive heeling... that's what
you're
saying right? Because zero heel may indicate pinching too much.

No. There is no such thing as zero heel--a boat will always heel when
beating to windward unless it's a small dinghy with a 300lb. skipper and
similarly-sized crew. But limiting the heel to a practical minimum will
generally allow better helm control and less leeway slippage. It also
keeps
the sailplan presented to the wind more optimally.

Rubbish!

"Rubbish" hardly makes a valid statement. If you disagree, fine--but make
your argument. Otherwise you're wasting our time and bandwidth.


Max


Boats, even large yachts are often stacked to windward in light
conditions, particularly now that the plastic sails no longer need
heel to induce some sort of shape.
It produces better gust response, and helmmovement in the gust among
other things

You seem to have read my post selectively. I commented that a heavy crew
can rail ballast a boat to zero heel. But under normal, non-drifter
conditions, when hard on the wind with a normal crew complement, a boat will
heel past the vertical to leeward. These days dinghies are also heeled to
windward for the same reason you cite. Some believe that with a low boom,
such as on a Finn, a high pressure zone builds between the boat and the foot
of the sail when stacked to windward, augmenting the Bernoulli effect and
thus the power generated by the sail. It hasn't been proven, but Finn
sailors must believe it because you see them do it when racing in very light
conditions. And they have been for decades.

Max

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

"DSK" wrote in message

No. There is no such thing as zero heel--a boat will always heel when
beating to windward unless it's a small dinghy with a 300lb. skipper
and
similarly-sized crew.

Not true.

Explanation of your response, please.

Yep. The boat accelerates much better and if it's one of those gawd-awful
days with chop & light air, it can go thru the lumpy parts better.

I agree that it does, but what is your explanation for this effect?

It doesn't take a heavy crew, even.

Not in light air. That's what I said originally.

OTOH there are times when I like a lot of heel, like just before a tack
;)

For roll-tacking?

Max

Thank You JEFF!!!
 

"Captain Joe Redcloud©" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 07:24:28 -0500, DSK wrote:


OTOH there are times when I like a lot of heel, like just before a dump
;)

DSK

The only time your boat heels is when the holding tank is full.

That's why he "tacks"--to get the holding tank on the high side.

Max