"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.

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.

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.

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'

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'

"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.

"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

Capt Neal says:

Poor fellow! The man lost his life primarily because
of poor design by the naval architect.

Except that he could have been standing on a cockpit seat, or the coachroof. I
would not design a boat 29ft long with a boom more than 6ft above the top of
the coachroof, and I would imagine you wouldn't buy it if it existed somewhere.
6ft above cockpit sole, with a couple of extra inches for the tall folks, is
about it for a boat that size, usually. Plenty of dinghies have booms that
long, and minimal "ducking room"

I'm not trying to excuse C&C here, if they need it, just pointing out that a
fragmented report can be taken awrong.

Steve
Stephen C. Baker - Yacht Designer
http://members.aol.com/SailDesign/pr...cbweb/home.htm

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.

Capt. Neal® wrote in message ...
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


I' d have to disagree about the poor design by the naval architect
statement - only because there are many an older cruising boat that
don't have the benefit or newer design of today's taller rigs, so they
indeed have a lower (and longer) boom than one's head might prefer in
an accidental jibe. My 1969 Morgan 33 Classic was one helluva boat for
instance, but indeed, the boom was low enough to clobber you if you
weren't careful. When it came to design, Charley knew/knows his stuff.
I would suspect he expected those that were sailing his boats to know
theirs, too.

Anyway, I'd say if you had to place blame, it was negligence on the
skipper's part, and the poor guy that got knocked. Beyond that, what
can you do? Accidents do indeed happen. Sometimes with very
unfortunate and dire consequences.

Capt. Rob Welling
Sarasota, FL