![]() |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
Jeff Morris wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message ... Unfortunately, the unconditionally stable position is with the mast pointed down. Monohulls are unconditionally stable when sitting on the bottom. Why does it usually seem that this subject is argued on an "either/or" basis. There are advantages to either approach. Is this really surprising to anyone here? It was a joke, Armond. We gave up on rational discussion when Jax entered. I don't read the JAX Daily, but I still think my question was within the realm of reasonable discussion. I sailed the '79 and '81 Multihull Race to Bermuda in a Newick Native, and 1 or 2 Marion races in plastic and wooden monohulls, and I had fun each and every time. Along the way I never quite understood why proponents on either side refused to "lighten up" and go with the flow. I would perhaps trade my 28 "get-the-lead-out" boat for an F-31 anytime, but I'm stuck in my ways and I continue to insist that neither is "superior" beyond a reasonable doubt. -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://kerrydeare.home.comcast.net/ |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
|
Unconditionally stable sailboats
|
Unconditionally stable sailboats
Waste of time, Steve.
Rehab only works if the individual in question is interested in rehab. Jax enjoys being a total, asshole, troll, with no other interest than a vain attempt to show up others as being greater incompetents or fools than himself. You'll note that fewer and fewer individuals are responding to his obvious "trolls", except to note that they are enjoying a good laugh at his expense (though I doubt his IQ is sufficient to realize this). You will note, that be it Jax's "Mayday" call or problems rounding Hatteras, etc., our friend Jax was never the person in charge, but, alas, only some "knowitall" deckhand who was great as a Monday night quarterback, but of no other or worthwhile value at the time. I fully expect to see a message from Jax saying "otn wrote []". To this I say "Jax ALWAYS writes []". otn Steven Shelikoff wrote: On 25 May 2004 15:02:36 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote: you were obvilously waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over-served last night, steviee, go sleep it off. Please learn how to follow a thread. that's what I said, steveie. while you were wandering about in some deluded fog about rowboats crossing the ocean, the rest of the thread was talking about stupid statements made regarding the stability of cruising catamarans. Sorry, you're wrong again. If you actually knew how to follow a thread you could tell that I didn't bring up the part about rowboats. I just responded to it. Now go back into your fog. It definitely seems like the rehab you were on during your welcome absense from the newsgroups didn't take. Time to try again. Steve |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
You should try a cat sometime, jaxie, if you're not afraid of going too fast.
I have seen many, many, many cruising cats on different waters. none were going *too* fast for me. In fact, most weren't going any kind of fast at all. Now, Stilletos and tri's -- like Corsairs -- do indeed go fast, but no one calls them cruising boats. Cruising cats are only marginally faster than cruising mono's, and cats are not safe in stormy seas. cruising cats are better suited for coastal cruising, and offshore work thoroughly planned around weather. cats can be tipped over by wind. cruising mono's can't. |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
I would perhaps trade my 28
"get-the-lead-out" boat for an F-31 anytime, an F-31 is a screamer, but in no way should be considered an offshore cruiser. |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
you were obvilously waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over-served last night,
steviee, go sleep it off. Please learn how to follow a thread. that's what I said, steveie. while you were wandering about in some deluded fog about rowboats crossing the ocean, the rest of the thread was talking about stupid statements made regarding the stability of cruising catamarans. Sorry, you're wrong again. If you actually knew how to follow a thread you could tell that I didn't bring up the part about rowboats. I just responded to it. Now go back into your fog. It definitely seems like the rehab you were on during your welcome absense from the newsgroups didn't take. Time to try again. Steve you were obvilously waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over-served last night, steviee, go sleep it off. |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
You will note, that be it Jax's "Mayday" call or problems rounding
Hatteras, etc., our friend Jax was never the person in charge In addition to sailing my own boat, I have done some crewing. I have never seen any unusual trouble on my own boat, so have no stories to tell of them. Most boats I crewed on were just fine, thank you. One I didn't crew on -- because I walked off it before it set sail -- sank two weeks later 160 miles east of Hatteras. |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
steve dan, you missed the irony of the statement. chickensquat guys blame "the
wife" for the fear, never taking responsibility for themself. that is where you get all that convoluted b/s about how a catamaran is "unconditionally stable". by all means, if something frightens you don't do it. I have purposely turned airplanes upside down in flight, but damned straight don't like to be on a ladder 2-1/2 stories up in the air. I stay off ladders that high, and never once blamed "the wife" for it. |
Unconditionally stable sailboats
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
... You should try a cat sometime, jaxie, if you're not afraid of going too fast. .... Cruising cats are only marginally faster than cruising mono's, Marginally? Perhaps - but its often a 25% margin. Sometimes 50%. If we're talking "cruising boats" they tend to stay below about 8 knots, while I've been above 12 knots a number of times. and cats are not safe in stormy seas. How so? The record says otherwise. cruising cats are better suited for coastal cruising, and offshore work thoroughly planned around weather. You can say that about lots of boats. The vast majority of mid-sized cruising boats, both monos and cats, are designed as coastal cruisers because that's what people actually do. That's what makes this argument particularly silly. And if you really want a "blue water" catamaran you can get a Prout - 5000 built, hundreds circumnavigations, thousands of long distance passages, zero capsizes. cats can be tipped over by wind. But, in fact, its only happened a few times to a modern cruising cat. I asked you to provide a link to such an event - you provided a number of links, but they were to the Iroquois, a small, 45 year old design that did indeed have problems, several beach cats, and a Rout du Rhum extreme racing tri. We're still waiting for you to prove your allegations. Frankly, I've been searching for such events for about 10 years and the list is pretty small. Most writers put the number at 3 or 4 in the last 20 years, depending on how you define "modern cruising cat." cruising mono's can't. That isn't really so. But certainly any weather that has the capability to flip a cat could also roll or sink a mono. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:20 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com