Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
!!
Jeff wrote: JimC wrote: Jeff, as previously stated, the Mac 26M is well suited for the conditions experienced by most sailors 95% of the time. And I haven't read of any instances in which a Mac skipper was caught offshore in heavy weather that prevented him from making it back to shore. It's a coastal cruiser, and I have never claimed that it was suitable for extended crossings, live-aboards, trips to Mexico, or the like. But, you keep saying that the big engine is an safety feature, but then you claim it isn't needed because the Mac is safe without it. Which is it? This is the fundamental problem - you make these claims, I point out the paradox, you come back with the opposite claim. I point out your hypocrisy, you then claim I'm ranting and raving. The big engine is a safety feature. But also, the Mac would make it back to shore safely under sail without the engine, IMO. So, although the 50 hp engine isn't "needed," in that the Mac is seaworthy under sail, the large engine is, nevertheless, a safety factor. As I stated previously, I think an outboard of 20hp or above could keep the boat on course. At 40-kts., the Mac would not be comfortable, but it would make it back to shore. Would it? You keep saying that the windage on the hull makes the engine a safety feature, and that it doesn't do well upwind. Are you really saying you can make progress upwind against 40 knots? It wouldn't make much progress going directly into the wind, Jeff. But IMO, it would do all right on a a close reach. Actually, neither you nor I have sailed one in a 40 know wind, so neither of us actually knows how the boat would handle under such conditions. - Again, the difference between us is that I'm willing to acknowledge that fact. Incidentally, what would you do if your cat flipped over off the crest of a wave offshore and turtled? That wouldn't happen in the Mac, which would simply ride down the wave and pop back up again. What would I do? Perhaps you can show me an example of even a single modern production cruising cat, 35 feet or bigger, that has capsized within 100 miles of land. There have been a few cases of older smaller cats capsizing, and some homemade boats. And there's no trouble finding racing cats that have capsized, but that's different. And there have been a few caught in hurricanes offshore, but generally the crew survived. Do you really want to compare your boat to a passage-maker? Of course, I wasn't comparing my boat to anything. - I was talking about your boat. - Which would flip over and turtle if caught in the crest of a wave, under severe conditions. - But I suspect that most cat sailors have enough sense to get the hell out of there if heavy weather is approaching. - One flip on a cresting wave, and you're turtled. My understanding is that most cat sailors, other than pros and racing crews, recognize that fact and tend not to take their boats out in severe weather or on long crossings. - Perhaps that's why most of them don't flip over. But would your boat pop up? Yes, mine would. - Would yours? These people got a medal for rescuing Mac sailers: http://www.ussailing.org/Pressreleas...HIrishMist.htm 2000. - Is that the most recent incident that you could come up with Jeff? - Six years ago? Of course, that was a Mac 26X (not the 26M, and it certainly sounds like they were trying to sail or motor in severe weather without the water ballast. By the way, when are you going to come up with evidence or statistics to support your anecdotes and "everyone knows...." assertions? There have actually been a number of Macs that have capsized Really, Jeff? And what is that number? And do you have some evidence or statistics to support that particular assertion? More significantly, what percentage of the thousands of Macs on the water have capsized? (Ballpark figures, supported by evidence, not anecdotes.) - one was lost in the Bristol Channel in F6, for example. Most of the cases seem to involve using the engine in unprotected waters. BTW, Have you ever read the CG safety reports? Capsizing is much more of a risk than sinking. In any case, Jeff, I would feel safer on my Mac in heavy winds and waves than on a cat. - One flip, and that's all she rote. What confuses me, Jeff, is the fact that I post the same comments, such as those above about the limitations of the boat, over and over and over again. - Yet to you, each day seems to be a brand new discussion, a fresh clean slate. What you keep missing Jim, is that I haven't been complaining about the Mac, which I always thought was an interesting design, and a good choice for some people. While I would never buy one, I actually have nothing against water ballast or even the big engine. What I've been complaining about is the way that you tout every aspect of it that you perceive as a feature, especially when many of them are non-existent. And which "aspect" discussed above is "non-existent"? (Hint: "non-existent" means that it doesn't exist. It doesn't mean that it isn't all-important or universally operative, or that the Mac is superior to other boats in every respect.) I also object to the fact that it is marketed as a beginner's boat ("learn to sail in an afternoon...") but to operate it safely requires an understanding beyond most beginners. Dismissing capsizes as operator error is not fair if the operators are novices. When you have provided evidence regarding the frequency of such Mac capsizes, as a percentage of Macs in use, then you could rationally discuss whether the boat qualifies as a good "beginner's boat." Until you do, all we have are your opinions and your anecdotes, unsupported by evidence or statistics. And then when the obvious flaws in your logic are pointed out, you fight tooth and nail, never giving up an inch, even when everyone can see you're completely wrong. Your "double hull" is a great example, you're still defending that as though it somehow makes the boat superior. As much as it bothers you, the boat does indeed have a "double hull" in the area of the hull beneath the ballast tank. And, whether you like it or not or are willing to acknowledge it or not, it is a safety factor. Neither you nor I have stats on the effectiveness of the double hull as a safety factor. Until one of us does have such stats or evidence, it would probably be helpful for us to acknowledge that fact in the event we choose to discuss the subject again. Claiming that an oversized outboard contributes nothing to the moment of inertia is another case. In fact, you even denied that the pitch moment of inertia is something that boaters are even concerned with, claiming that my "theories are all wrong." Again, Jeff, you stoop to posting outright lies about what I said. - I never claimed that the motor contributes "nothing" to the moment of inertia. But I did demonstrated to you mathematically that the motor is less of a factor than the skipper and a normal (two person)crew sitting in the cockpit. - Regarding your own guesstimate as to how many, and where, the crew and skipper would be positioned relative to the COB or COG, if you work out the figures, you will again find that the motor is less of a factor than the crew and skipper, even using your figures. (My point isn't that the motor isn't a factor, but that, by way of perspective, it is less of a factor than that of the crew and skipper.) But that still isn't the significant issue. The real issue is whether the motor introduces a substantial effect on inertia that makes the boat unstable, or makes it pitch excessively, or whatever. Since you keep talking about the motor as it relates to the pitch moment of inertia, what, EXACTLY, is the effect you claim the motor has on the boat? What problems does the boat have that are caused by the motor, in your opinion? (Since you seem to have a fetish with the motor, tell us about how it's effect on the boat?) No Jim, the Mac is an OK boat, within its limitations. Its you that I object to. Well, have a nice day anyway, Jeff. Happy sailing. Jim |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Google Announces Plan To Destroy All Information It Can't Index | General | |||
Bill Moyers on environment, politics and Christian fundamentalists | General | |||
Google Picks only the best Pics of sailboats! | ASA |