Cannibal
 

Bob wrote:
On Jan 30, 8:33 pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:55:22 -0600, CaveLamb
wrote:

Would a swivel shackle help prevent 3 braid hockle?
I assume you mean a swivel at the anchor? If yes, perhaps.

There are a lot of different "hockle" issues. Like most cruisers with
boats over 40 ft or so, we anchor with a chain rode and then use a
hook line to provide some shock absorption, and also to take the load
off of the windlass and anchor pulpit. For years we used a hook line
made from three strand nylon. Unfortunately three strand nylon tries
to unlay its own twist when you put a strain on it, and that in turn
twists the chain. Some of that twist goes away when you remove the
strain but not all of it, probably due to frictional forces. Over
time you end up with a hockled chain, even with a swivel at the
anchor. We've recently switched over to an 8-plait nylon braid for
the hook line. It's difficult to splice but does seem to help with
eliminating twisted chain. The 8-plait braid would also make a
superb all nylon rode if properly chafe protected because it does not
hockle up when stowed.



A well thought out relpy Wayne. My experince with my 17 grt Freya is
similar. I tried the bridal and the "shock obsorber? gizmo. Both with
the same result. Do you remember those 10 cent balsa rubber band
airplanes? (circa 1950s-early 60s)

That is what happens with three strand line when put under a load. Ive
watched 100 feet of four inch three strand nylon undrer FULL load
last winter...... (hang off line) it was attacched to the stern of the
boat I was on(180', 930 GRT) and a structure. It parted 10 feet
forward of the 6 foot eye splice. It looked just like that rubber band
on that 10 cent airplane. WIth each surg it twisted complet rotations
seveal times. Bammm! Im sure Joe will chime in here with his crew boat
storyies with their 1 1/2 lines.

Ive also seen 100+ ton codends being drug up the stern ramp of factory
trawlers in the Bering Sea. They used double braid in the 80s but ALL
use AMSTEAL now. Its a plait line. That stuff has completely replaced
wire roap in the commercial trawl fisheries. Why? Amsteal is rock
****ing rugged, dont rust, no fish-hooks, light and faster to splice.
Its a god send to riggers.

Now for the swivel controversy...... if you use double braid you now
eliminate one more link (the swivel) in your ground tackle which
follows my rigging guidlines..... less is better. Also, take a dock
walk and look at those boat owners using those swivels. My experince
is 30%+ are installed incorrectly. There is a right end and wrong end
to attach to the road....

Best wishes.......
Bob.


I copy you both...
It's not a twisting issue - it's a tension thing.

I have two 250 foot rodes. One 1/2" double braid, on 1/2" 3 laid.

Or maybe I should say I have one 250 foot double braid and a piece
of spare 3-lay?

And I'll lose the swivel...

Thanks guys.

Richard


--

Richard Lamb
email me:
web site: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb

Cannibal
 

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 19:23:17 -0800 (PST), Bob
wrote:


As for being pooped, boat length has nothing to do with it. If the
wave travels faster then the boat you get pooped, if the boat is at
wave speed, or faster, then you don't. But then, you don't have to
read a book to discover that little gem... just go sailing.

My dear Bruce. I belive the defintion of getting pooped is when water
is shiped on deck. TO have a wave pass the boat is simply that: a wave
going by.

Please forgive me if I misunderstood your post.

Bob

I suspect that you are correct and I was guilty of jumping to the
conclusion that Willie was talking about running before the wind as a
storm tactic, in which case being pooped is usually when you aren't
traveling at wave speed and the waves are breaking over the stern.
Cheers,

Bruce

Cannibal
 

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:55:22 -0600, CaveLamb
wrote:

Bob wrote:
Wilbur Hubbard (wishing I were about forty years younger)


I dont want to waste my time finding your original post. However, the
one I recall that cought my eye was your statment that anchor rode
should be 3 strand nylon.

Here I completly disagree in one aspect. Yes, 3 strand is okay for day
anchors in winds below 20 k how ever in conditions where "extream"
loads are experinced nylon double braid is best. Why? It wont hockle
and part do to the hockle. Yes double braid has less stretch but if
you ballance the correct working load, length, and chain/line ratio it
will counter the reduced stratch. Your ground tackle In a survival
situation should be double braid not 3 strand. And i dont give a ****
what Ocean Navigator or Cruising WOrld mag you quote. Recreational
sailing advice/best practices is driven by marketing stratiges to get
you to buy a product or erronious tradition.

Do a review of the approperate case studies and youll find that rodes
part in three typical places:
1) Chafe point where line gets fair lead through a closed chock on
deck. ( this can be cured)
2) standing part of line due to hockle (this can be cured with double
braid)
3) eye splice/shackle connection to chain. (this can be cured)

This aint briain surgury its jsut plain riggin.

BOb

BOb,

Would a swivel shackle help prevent 3 braid hockle?

I guess in theory it should but I've seen moorings made with 1-1/2 or
2 inch three strand that had a swivel and were still hockled. I've
also heard arguments about whether the swivel should be at the top or
the bottom.

I took the easy way out and made my mooring out of chain, although I
do know that it isn't as strong as any of the modern "wonder ropes".

Cheers,

Bruce

Cannibal
 

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 23:33:00 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:55:22 -0600, CaveLamb
wrote:

Would a swivel shackle help prevent 3 braid hockle?

I assume you mean a swivel at the anchor? If yes, perhaps.

There are a lot of different "hockle" issues. Like most cruisers with
boats over 40 ft or so, we anchor with a chain rode and then use a
hook line to provide some shock absorption, and also to take the load
off of the windlass and anchor pulpit. For years we used a hook line
made from three strand nylon. Unfortunately three strand nylon tries
to unlay its own twist when you put a strain on it, and that in turn
twists the chain. Some of that twist goes away when you remove the
strain but not all of it, probably due to frictional forces. Over
time you end up with a hockled chain, even with a swivel at the
anchor. We've recently switched over to an 8-plait nylon braid for
the hook line. It's difficult to splice but does seem to help with
eliminating twisted chain. The 8-plait braid would also make a
superb all nylon rode if properly chafe protected because it does not
hockle up when stowed.

I always used a nylon line as a snubber to the anchor chain and I
agree that it does untwist as load is put on it. In the other hand,
the chain runs in over a bow roller with a groove in it that tends to
untwist the chain and I go forward and operate the anchor winch from
there and the chain is always twisted to some extent, even at times
when I just threw the chain over and locked the gipsy instead of
rigging the snubber.

As for swivels, I once had a swivel, not on the anchor, break and have
been a bit wary of them ever since and don't use them. Illogical,
perhaps, but it is just one thing less to worry about (if you are a
worrier :-)
Cheers,

Bruce

Cannibal
 

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Ah Willie, I see you've been reading the Pardey's. If you read Lynn's
earliest stories you world have discovered that the major reason for
building Seraffyn (24'7") was lack of money to build bigger and the
Pardey's first published exercise was a letter to the editor of a
sailing magazine, in response to a published article, in which they
argue that a little boat can be as seaworthy as a big boat.

But your argue that a 27-30 ft. boat is ideal is just a pipe dream. A
VLCC or Box Carrier will be doing 30 K in weather that will keep you
in the harbor. Obviously you (once again) don't know what you are
talking about.

As for being pooped, boat length has nothing to do with it. If the
wave travels faster then the boat you get pooped, if the boat is at
wave speed, or faster, then you don't. But then, you don't have to
read a book to discover that little gem... just go sailing.


Boy, you sure display your sailing ignorance with each and every post.

If you have a boat that is fifty feet LOA and she is in a wave train that is
45 feet crest to crest just imagine what happens when running. Yes, the bow
goes up the wave in front and the stern drops just in time for the crest of
the following wave to poop the hell out of the transom. A 25-foot boat is
totally unaffected.


How so Backwater? Are you comparing your S. Florida cove with Bali,
Jakarta, Singapore, Port Klang, Pinang, Or any of the Thai ports, and
that just covers a fraction of the places I've anchored in the past
few years.

Proof? How about some photos.

snip


I'm beginning to wonder about your continued rabbeting on about goals.
What ever are you going on about? My "goals" have been varied over the
years but have never been to sail a boat somewhere. It isn't a "goal"
to somehow be accomplished any more then driving to the convenience
store to get a can of beer. You just get in and go.

You see Willie-boy, you are romanticizing a subject that is just an
everyday occurrence. One of the shortcomings of reading rather then
doing.


Like I said, I have thousands of miles under my keel. I regularly sail in
more challenging conditions than you dream of. I've been on the open ocean
several times and it's nothing. Piece of cake and a rather boring one at
that. The real challenge is coastal cruising. The real enjoyment is coastal
cruising.





snip


The more you talk the more it appears that you really know nothing
about sailing. Your talk about winners and losers, failure and
winning, and all the other bumph that you spout is just that and
exposes your utter lack of knowledge about boats.


Says the ground-to-a-halt voyager (since 35 years) who doesn't even
understand simple wavelength concepts. Says the dock dweller. Pah!


Boats are not some sort of Everest that has to be conquer. It is just
a form of transportation. Like your bicycle, a motor-car, even shoes.
Go you rabbit on about riding your bike to the 7-11 to get a tube of
toothpaste? Or extol your shoes and how you walk from house to house
reading the water-meters?

Now I think I begin to understand why you failed. Modern sailboats to us
real sailors represent a lifestyle. A sailboat is a home, a time machine, an
interface dancer, a compilation of systems the sailor must be intimately
familiar with and able to repair and modify when necessary. A sailboat is
FAR more than transportation. Your attitude that a sailboat is just
transportion tells me you weren't ever able to appreciate what a sailboat
really is by virtue of the fact of your self-centeredness and ungodliness
where you place yourself in the center of the universe. This arrogance is
why you failed - you failed to appreciated the beauty of the machine and the
lifestyle. You viewed it as just another way to move your sorry fat carcass
around. This is so sad.


Willie-boy you go on about the romance and mystique of boating just
exactly like all the other wannabes. Try talking to someone who has
actually sailed to somewhere and you will be surprised at the lack of
romance there is. Just load the boat, check the mail, and go.


Perhaps you are to be pitied because you are too staid to ever appreciate
the beauty, romance, utility and connectedness of sailing. But, now all our
readers understand why you failed - one cannot master something one does not
understand.


Wilbur Hubbard

Cannibal
 

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 19:23:17 -0800 (PST), Bob
wrote:


As for being pooped, boat length has nothing to do with it. If the
wave travels faster then the boat you get pooped, if the boat is at
wave speed, or faster, then you don't. But then, you don't have to
read a book to discover that little gem... just go sailing.

My dear Bruce. I belive the defintion of getting pooped is when water
is shiped on deck. TO have a wave pass the boat is simply that: a wave
going by.

Please forgive me if I misunderstood your post.

Bob

I suspect that you are correct and I was guilty of jumping to the
conclusion that Willie was talking about running before the wind as a
storm tactic, in which case being pooped is usually when you aren't
traveling at wave speed and the waves are breaking over the stern.
Cheers,

Bruce




What a simpleton! A ballasted, monohull sailboat will not be able to outrun
the wave train. Fast multi-hulls may but the type of sailboat under
discussion here will have waves approach from astern (when running which is
the hoped-for case in the trades and elsewhere as in 'fair winds') slip
under the stern or quarter and move away from the bow.

If the wavelength happens to be (because of any number of diverse conditions
of wind, sea and depth) just slightly different than LOA, as the bow is
lifted by the wave exiting the bow the stern falls into the trough just in
time to have the top of the wave approaching from the stern poop it.

Pah! You must have been lying about voyaging - either that or too drunk or
asleep to observe how things work.


Wilbur Hubbard

Cannibal
 

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:51:35 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
. ..
emptied ballast

Sir Eric may well have said/written that, however, given that Hiscock
was writing in an earlier time ("Wandering Under Sail" -1939) and who
died in 1986 I suggest that he was not writing about a rubber dinghy
which is a far different design from the small rowing boat that was
likely what Hiscock had experience with.

Poppycock! Sir Eric knew more about sailing than you can ever hope to. He
was talking about rowing dinghies and not so abortion of an inflatable
which
he could not and would not abide for all the obvious reasons. You must
think
I have a rubber duck. I do not. My dinghy is constructed of GRP and is six
feel long. Six-foot oars is the max length for my dinghy as they will lay
inside just like Sir Eric recommends. You are the clown the attempted to
say
it was nonsense to suggest oars should fit in the length of the dinghy.
So,
stop trying to obfuscate, man up, admit your mistake and apologize for
your
ignorant abusive tone.

Are you sure that you know what you are talking about?
For a very quick example, you refer to "Sir Eric Hiscock". He was
never knighted and never used that title.

My mistake. I was thinking he was knighted too just before he died. Like Sir
Robin Knox-Johnson and Sir Eric Hiscock. At any rate, he should have been
knighted. Maybe it was his wife, Susan? Dame Susan Hiscock???


did you really read the book? Of just see it in the window when
passing the store?

Of course I've read the book. Several times and it is in my library. Perhaps
you should acquire a copy and read it, too. It might help to dispell your
absurd notion that a sailboat is only transportation.


It is nonsense to suggest that oars short enough to fit inside the
boat is a major criterion for oar design. and arguing is simply
attempting to justify yet another stupid statements.

It is NOT nonsense! It is one of the necessary attributes according to
Hiscock and other authorities. Only a fool uses oars that extend outside the
ends of a rowing dinghy. Most any dinghy used by cruising sailors is eight
feet or more in lenght. Eight-foot oars will fit inside when no in use. Are
twelve-foot oars really better than eight-foot oars in an eight-foot dinghy?
C'mon - wake up.


Wilbur Hubbard

Cannibal
 

"Justin C" wrote in message
...
In article , Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 00:43:08 +0000, Justin C
wrote:

Just a small point. Eric Hiscock was never knighted and therefore is not
entitled to the title Sir. He (and his wife) were awarded the MBE, but
that does not bestow a title.

Justin.

It is difficult for outsiders, remember that wogs start at Calais, to
understand the British honors system.

No, that's 'frogs'.


(Particularly one that was said to have originated with someone
recovering a garter (:-)
Cheers,

T'weren't easy for me to work out either, I just started by looking up
EH on Wikipedia, then I had to start with the whole honours thing. Fkin
can of worms that was. Elton John a 'Sir'?! Yet someone like EH, who
actually *did* something.... oh, let's just not go there.

Agreed! Some pathetic loser, gender-confused, rock and roller druggie gets
knighted and a man like Hiscock who was moral, accomplished, god-fearing and
worthy of respect gets ignored?

Something's dreadfully wrong with the system used to "honor" people with
knighthood. Elton John gives it a black eye for sure. But, then again, the
Queen is quite senile in her dotage.

urs added


Wilbur Hubbard

Cannibal
 

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:54:30 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
. ..


Dinghy Dock? And you've spent all this time nattering on about Marinas
and now you admit to anchoring off to avoid paying dockage and then
sneaking into the dinghy dock??


More proof that you never go anywhere. If you were a real cruiser you
would
use dinghy docks regularly when anchored in distant harbors. What do YOU
do?
Haul your dinghy ashore on private property? Probably. Some dinghy docks
charge a small fee and some are free - either way trying to change the
subject about the stupidity of having long oars protruding over the ends
or
sides of a dinghy just won't cut the mustard.

Wilbur Hubbard

Err... What "distant harbours are you referring to? The places I
anchor don't have "dinghy docks", they only have a beach. Private
property? Whatever are you talking about, there is no one there but
me.

Ah Willie... the penny drops - you are talking about the coast of
Florida. Not the far flung harbors and bays of the world. But I do
suppose that reading books give one a bit of a restricted viewpoint.

By the way, Willie-boy, the secret of not having your oars stick out
of your dinghy isn't to cut the oars off, a much better solution is to
build a longer dinghy.

Oh, but I forgot, you lack the skills to built a dinghy so you buy a
"rubber duck".

Cheers,

Bruce




Where did you ever get that rubber duck nonsense? I can't abide an
inflatable because they are more properly named a "deflatable." My dingy is
a six-foot bluff bow pram with a relaxed 'V' entry. It is constructed of GRP
and weighs only fifty pounds empty. It can be rowed fast and efficiently
with six-foot oars or motored with at 2hp outboard. It is light enough for
me to lift out of the water, turn upside-down and secure to my custom,
stainless steel stern pushpit for rough water and ocean cruising. For inland
and sheltered waters I tow it astern but to do so otherwise is not very
seamanlike.

I suppose you don't use your dinghy for anything but visiting secluded
beaches because you live at a dock and have all your groceries, water, fuel,
etc. delivered? Some sailor. We real sailors use our dinghies to ferry
supplies from the shore to the mother ship. Dinghy docks are the preferred
loading points as they are generally provided by the purveyors of said
supplies. Living aboard at a dock is just plain disgusting and depraved.
It's tantamount to trying to kayak down Mt. Everest. Wrong tool for the
wrong place.

Pah! You are no cruising sailor. Everything you write demonstrates that
fact.


Wilbur Hubbard

Cannibal
 

"Bob" wrote in message
...

snip

And the Coast Guard officers couldn't care less about even looking at the
damned thing. -- WH

Not true........ Ive had USCG boardig team request my "mariners
papers" which included my TWIC

But, did they scan it? No they did not because they don't have scanners.
That's why they don't care about it. It means nothing to them. A fellow
captain whom I know had the CG request his mariners credentials and he
handed his little packet with Master's license and TWIC card. They didn't
even glance at the TWIC card. Ignored it completely. It's a joke. Only the
TSA gives a flying crap about it. Just more job security for them.


They know it's a farce. -- WH

That is a huge assumptoin on your part. The USCG people Ive met were
exemplary professionals. Their personal opinions were not evident.
They were there reperseinting the laws of the land.

Sorry, but they represent the laws of the sea. Get a clue. Stop demeaning
them. They are professionals and military professionals at that. They don't
truck lubberly bureaucrat crap. Comparing them to TSA rabble is
unacceptable.

They respect the Master License they
issue but they reject the redundant TWIC card. --WH

Respect has nothing to do with it. Pure and simple its a job. They ask
for certain documnets and I as a workig mariner present thoes
documents.

What they ask for, if it's included in "mariners documents" category and
what they look at are two different things. They don't look at the stupid,
redundant TWIC card because they can't scan it. All the information on the
rf chip is not even available to them. Besides, what if I'm not carrying
passengers for hire? What the hell do I need a TWIC card for? Give me a
break, dOOd! Stop with the Big Brother, love attitude. PUTZ!



Wilbur Hubbard