modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

Are you calling Oz a Pom?

"Scotty" wrote in message
...

OzOne wrote in message
...




Can I answer that in the morning,
went to a new Italian restaurant opening tonight..

They won't survive........

Bad food or too expensive?



The whine was good!

you whine too much!

Scooter

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

"Joe" wrote in message
ps.com...
I think you may be overlooking the dhow with it's lateen rigs from
some 2000 years ago.

The ones sailing the Nile?

Joe

No, they are not dhows but are calle djaishers (?spelling). They have very
high sailplans to catch the wind above the Nile's banks.
Dhows are the ones sailing the trade route from the Persian Gulf to East
Africa and back. They did not go to windward but waited until the monsoon
changed around to give them a fair wind where they wanted to go. They were,
and are, fast on a reach , but not much good to windward.

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 10:51:02 -0400, katy
wrote:

Scotty wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...
Scotty wrote:
OzOne wrote in message
...
Can I answer that in the morning,
went to a new Italian restaurant opening tonight..

They won't survive........
Bad food or too expensive?



The whine was good!
you whine too much!

Scooter



There are far too many Italian restaurants in the world
anyway...and the
preponderance serve bad food...I like Tuscan cuisine but
finding food
restaurants that serve it well is difficult...

Ugh, ever been to an Olive Garden? there food is OK, a bit
mediocre IMO, but there is always a line to get into the
place. Guess nobody cooks anymore.

Scotty


Franchise restaurants very rarely have good food (IMO) When I go out to
eat, I want the food to be worth the money I spent. You don't expect
good food at Olive Garden, you just go there because it's convenient and
cheap. Same goes for places like Appleby's and Fridays...

You can't expect much from places where the "chefs" are high school
kids working for minimum wage.

CWM

The food was much better when oil field geologists and engineers where the
chefs.

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

"Edgar" wrote in message
...

Dhows are the ones sailing the trade route from the Persian Gulf to East
Africa and back. They did not go to windward but waited until the monsoon
changed around to give them a fair wind where they wanted to go. They
were,
and are, fast on a reach , but not much good to windward.

How could that be?

The great and powerful Oz has spoken!

Shall we pay no attention to the man behind the curtain?

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

"Walt" wrote in message
...
Scout wrote:

Question: if a square rig's sails could be turned 90 deg (with the wind
abeam), and a centerboard or sideboard were dropped to resist sideways
movement, and enough ballast were present to prevent capsize, could the
boat move in a track that is more perpendicular relative to the wind?


More perpedicular? More perpendicular than what? Since a square rigger
can sail on a beam reach 90 deg to the wind without much problem, the
answer would be no. You can't get any more perpendicular than 90 deg.

Somehow I don't think this is what you are asking...

Then that is my misunderstanding, I thought a square rigger could sail
downwind only, or on a broad reach, at best.
Scout

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

Scout wrote:
Read that somewhere recently.
I knew downwind sailing was "it" for a very long time, but did the
concept of sailing to wind really come about with the evolution of the
wing and mechanical flight?
Scout

So this discussion tweaked my curiosity about just how weatherly the
old square riggers were. Some of the modern square riggers actually
do fairly well, with modern sailcloth and yards setup for getting to
about 45 degrees off the wind, with modest leeway. However, the old
ships couldn't come close to this.

There was certainly a huge variation, and many ships could not go
upwind at all, but most of the ships made for exploration and general
commerce (as opposed to specific routes) could go upwind to a limited
degree. And there are famous stories of long and tedious beats to
windward.

But what was the standard? Texts from 200 years ago, such as Bowditch
and Darcy, list six points as the closest you can make to the wind.
This is 67.5 degrees. Some ships, such as the USS Constitution, were
considered quite weatherly, and did somewhat better, perhaps as much
as a point in ideal conditions, but this was a fairly recently
development.

And how much leeway? Bowditch summarizes several other earlier
writers and claims:
"1st. When a ship is Close-Hauled, with all her sails set, the water
smooth, and a moderate gale of wind, she is then supposed to make
little or no lee-way.
2d. Allow 1 point, when the top-gallant sails are taken in.
3d. Allow 2 points, when the top-sails must be close-reefed."

And so on. So in ideal conditions, 6 points net off the wind might be
held, but if sails have to be taken in, the leeway is 1 point (11 1/4
degrees) or more. Bowditch finishes the navigation text section of
his book with an example journal of dead reckoning, "The journal of a
Voyage from Boston to Madeira." It includes all of the log entries
shown with speed, wind, and leeway estimates, along with notes on how
to do the various computations. All of the close hauled sailing is at
6 points off the wind, with leeway estimates of zero, a half point, or
a full point. When footed off to 7 points, generally there is no
leeway, but a few entries list half a point. BTW, Bowditch was famous
for the high accuracy of his dead reckoning, so this technique,
although it seems crude, must be effective.

Ans what does this mean for the VMG to Windward? The cosine of 6
points is .38, so if she were making 6 knots, the VMG would be 2.3
knots. With half a point of leeway, that becomes 1.75 knots, and with
a full point its only 1.2 knots. In other words, a ship beating into
the wind will make some headway, but it might only be 30 to 40 miles
in a full day. And its easy to see that with rough seas, or an
adverse current, or even a minor mishap, all headway for a watch could
be lost.

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Scout wrote:
Read that somewhere recently.
I knew downwind sailing was "it" for a very long time, but did the
concept of sailing to wind really come about with the evolution of the
wing and mechanical flight?
Scout

So this discussion tweaked my curiosity about just how weatherly the old
square riggers were. Some of the modern square riggers actually do fairly
well, with modern sailcloth and yards setup for getting to about 45
degrees off the wind, with modest leeway. However, the old ships couldn't
come close to this.

There was certainly a huge variation, and many ships could not go upwind
at all, but most of the ships made for exploration and general commerce
(as opposed to specific routes) could go upwind to a limited degree. And
there are famous stories of long and tedious beats to windward.

But what was the standard? Texts from 200 years ago, such as Bowditch and
Darcy, list six points as the closest you can make to the wind. This is
67.5 degrees. Some ships, such as the USS Constitution, were considered
quite weatherly, and did somewhat better, perhaps as much as a point in
ideal conditions, but this was a fairly recently development.

And how much leeway? Bowditch summarizes several other earlier writers
and claims:
"1st. When a ship is Close-Hauled, with all her sails set, the water
smooth, and a moderate gale of wind, she is then supposed to make little
or no lee-way.
2d. Allow 1 point, when the top-gallant sails are taken in.
3d. Allow 2 points, when the top-sails must be close-reefed."

And so on. So in ideal conditions, 6 points net off the wind might be
held, but if sails have to be taken in, the leeway is 1 point (11 1/4
degrees) or more. Bowditch finishes the navigation text section of his
book with an example journal of dead reckoning, "The journal of a Voyage
from Boston to Madeira." It includes all of the log entries shown with
speed, wind, and leeway estimates, along with notes on how to do the
various computations. All of the close hauled sailing is at 6 points off
the wind, with leeway estimates of zero, a half point, or a full point.
When footed off to 7 points, generally there is no leeway, but a few
entries list half a point. BTW, Bowditch was famous for the high accuracy
of his dead reckoning, so this technique, although it seems crude, must be
effective.

Ans what does this mean for the VMG to Windward? The cosine of 6 points
is .38, so if she were making 6 knots, the VMG would be 2.3 knots. With
half a point of leeway, that becomes 1.75 knots, and with a full point its
only 1.2 knots. In other words, a ship beating into the wind will make
some headway, but it might only be 30 to 40 miles in a full day. And its
easy to see that with rough seas, or an adverse current, or even a minor
mishap, all headway for a watch could be lost.

Jeff,
Thanks for the details - great reading!
Scout

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

Read Alan Villiers "The set of the sails" (qv.)
"My progress was one long dour beat. To wind'ard! To wind'ard! Day after
day. week after week: sometimes after a week's hard beating I had made sixty
miles..."

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Scout wrote:
Read that somewhere recently.
I knew downwind sailing was "it" for a very long time, but did the
concept of sailing to wind really come about with the evolution of the
wing and mechanical flight?
Scout

So this discussion tweaked my curiosity about just how weatherly the
old square riggers were. Some of the modern square riggers actually
do fairly well, with modern sailcloth and yards setup for getting to
about 45 degrees off the wind, with modest leeway. However, the old
ships couldn't come close to this.

There was certainly a huge variation, and many ships could not go
upwind at all, but most of the ships made for exploration and general
commerce (as opposed to specific routes) could go upwind to a limited
degree. And there are famous stories of long and tedious beats to
windward.

But what was the standard? Texts from 200 years ago, such as Bowditch
and Darcy, list six points as the closest you can make to the wind.
This is 67.5 degrees. Some ships, such as the USS Constitution, were
considered quite weatherly, and did somewhat better, perhaps as much
as a point in ideal conditions, but this was a fairly recently
development.

And how much leeway? Bowditch summarizes several other earlier
writers and claims:
"1st. When a ship is Close-Hauled, with all her sails set, the water
smooth, and a moderate gale of wind, she is then supposed to make
little or no lee-way.
2d. Allow 1 point, when the top-gallant sails are taken in.
3d. Allow 2 points, when the top-sails must be close-reefed."

And so on. So in ideal conditions, 6 points net off the wind might be
held, but if sails have to be taken in, the leeway is 1 point (11 1/4
degrees) or more. Bowditch finishes the navigation text section of
his book with an example journal of dead reckoning, "The journal of a
Voyage from Boston to Madeira." It includes all of the log entries
shown with speed, wind, and leeway estimates, along with notes on how
to do the various computations. All of the close hauled sailing is at
6 points off the wind, with leeway estimates of zero, a half point, or
a full point. When footed off to 7 points, generally there is no
leeway, but a few entries list half a point. BTW, Bowditch was famous
for the high accuracy of his dead reckoning, so this technique,
although it seems crude, must be effective.

Ans what does this mean for the VMG to Windward? The cosine of 6
points is .38, so if she were making 6 knots, the VMG would be 2.3
knots. With half a point of leeway, that becomes 1.75 knots, and with
a full point its only 1.2 knots. In other words, a ship beating into
the wind will make some headway, but it might only be 30 to 40 miles
in a full day. And its easy to see that with rough seas, or an
adverse current, or even a minor mishap, all headway for a watch could
be lost.

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

That's what happens when you're too proud to fire up the engine!

Edgar wrote:
Read Alan Villiers "The set of the sails" (qv.)
"My progress was one long dour beat. To wind'ard! To wind'ard! Day after
day. week after week: sometimes after a week's hard beating I had made sixty
miles..."


....

And what does this mean for the VMG to Windward? The cosine of 6
points is .38, so if she were making 6 knots, the VMG would be 2.3
knots. With half a point of leeway, that becomes 1.75 knots, and with
a full point its only 1.2 knots. In other words, a ship beating into
the wind will make some headway, but it might only be 30 to 40 miles
in a full day. And its easy to see that with rough seas, or an
adverse current, or even a minor mishap, all headway for a watch could
be lost.

modern sails spun off mechanical flight technology?
 

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 16:33:29 -0600, "Gilligan"
scribbled thusly:


"Edgar" wrote in message
...

Dhows are the ones sailing the trade route from the Persian Gulf to East
Africa and back. They did not go to windward but waited until the
monsoon
changed around to give them a fair wind where they wanted to go. They
were,
and are, fast on a reach , but not much good to windward.

How could that be?

The great and powerful Oz has spoken!

Shall we pay no attention to the man behind the curtain?


You're an obnoxious SOB aren't you!?


Are you asking or telling?