|
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 |
Cannibal
"Bob" wrote in message
... 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 More lack of experience with small sailboats noted. Now, I know why Joe thinks you're woefully uninformed. First off, I never said "all nylon rode" as I've always been a proponent of eight to ten feet of heavy chain attached to the anchor then a shackle and eye-spliced nylon around a thimble. Now that I'm well off and retired I even use stainless steel chain lengths. An all-chain rode (and you need at least two minimum, preferable three at the ready) is untenable because of way too much weight which will compromise a small vessel's ability to sail. Hockling is NO PROBLEM unless you anchor for days or weeks at a time and go round and round on the anchor. Even then a wise sailor like myself will have a swivel attached to the rode so it can't twist and hockle. ANY time you see a hockled rode you are seeing ineptitude and neglect. Wake up! Three-strand is easy to eye splice. Double-braid is a real pain in the ass. Three-strand is more stretchy which is exactly what one wants in an anchor rode to reduce shock loads on attachment points. Three-strand molds and mildews far less. Three strand is less expensive. Only an ignorant sailor thinks double-braid is the superior choice for an anchor rode. Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
"CaveLamb" wrote in message
m... That's not what the magazine article that he read said though! Stow it! I speak from 35 years of ACTIVE sailing and living aboard experience. As is the usual case, Bob is ill-informed. He seems to delight in displaying his usual lack of due diligence and presumptuous mental impecuniousness See my reply to the PUTZ, further up this thread, debunking his misconceptions. Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
"CaveLamb" wrote in message
m... 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? Bingo! But, unless one anchors for a long time and goes around and around, no such device is necessary. It takes many, many, many times boxing the compass before hockling rears it's ugly head. If you don't have a swivel the simple expedient of rotating the bitter end of the rode in the opposite direction your vessel boxes the compass will relax the twist and set it aright. Hockling is nothing but a symptom of ignorance and neglect. Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
What they ask for, if it's included in "mariners documents" category and what they look at are two different things. I apologize for my hasty reply. A liscensed master or a mariner with a rating now carries a Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC). They are orange and look just like a US Passport. It takes the place of the "Z Card" and that pretty 25 ton master license proudly hanging onyour wall. I do better with more accurate and detaild reples so not to add to the banter. Besides, what if I'm not carrying passengers for hire? Its very simple I a person has a USCG master license they are required to have a TWIC. The CG assumes the license is for those who actually use it for work not for an ego stroking wall art. What the hell do I need a TWIC card for? CFRs require it for all people needing dock acess for thier job. But since you dont sail your license you reall have no use for either a TWIC or that master license (sutible for framing and display) Hang on to that purdy license. You wont ever get another one. Give me a break, dOOd! Stop with the Big Brother, love attitude. PUTZ! Dood then stop voting for republicans! They have consistantly grown our national debt and taken our personal freedoms more than any group in moder history. Bob Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
"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 Talk about simpletons.. I've seem video of a TP53 doing 25 knots - yes, under sail! -- Richard Lamb email me: web site: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb |
Cannibal
"CaveLamb" wrote in message
m... Wilbur Hubbard wrote: "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 Talk about simpletons.. I've seem video of a TP53 doing 25 knots - yes, under sail! OMG! Try reading with comprehension. We are talking here about ballasted, cruising sailboats which are limited to a concept called "hull speed." Race boats are not cruising boats in case you've not noticed. Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
"CaveLamb" wrote in message m... Wilbur Hubbard wrote: "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 Talk about simpletons.. I've seem video of a TP53 doing 25 knots - yes, under sail! OMG! Try reading with comprehension. We are talking here about ballasted, cruising sailboats which are limited to a concept called "hull speed." Race boats are not cruising boats in case you've not noticed. Wilbur Hubbard You wish! quote (right above) A ballasted, monohull sailboat -- Richard Lamb email me: web site: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb |
Cannibal
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:16:57 -0800 (PST), Bob
wrote: CFRs require it for all people needing dock acess for thier job. But since you dont sail your license you reall have no use for either a TWIC or that master license (sutible for framing and display) Hang on to that purdy license. The latest CFRs actually go farther than that. They say that without a TWIC card your Masters ticket or OUPV are no longer valid. |
Cannibal
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
... On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:16:57 -0800 (PST), Bob wrote: CFRs require it for all people needing dock acess for thier job. But since you dont sail your license you reall have no use for either a TWIC or that master license (sutible for framing and display) Hang on to that purdy license. The latest CFRs actually go farther than that. They say that without a TWIC card your Masters ticket or OUPV are no longer valid. There will be lawsuits. The government sold you something you paid good money for and invested good time for that gave you certain rights and privileges and now they say it's no longer valid. That is fraud in anybody's book. Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
First off, I never said "all nylon rode" as I've always been a proponent of eight to ten feet of heavy chain attached to the anchor then a shackle and eye-spliced nylon around a thimble. Now that I'm well off and retired I even use stainless steel chain lengths. That may be well and good for your smaller day sailor but heavier boats who anchor in places with unknown bottom obstructions or lack a slip to retreat to when small craft or storm warnings are raised may use a different arrangment. Personallly I have two ground tackel legs each is 300'. 150' of 3/8" HT chain followed by 150' of double braid line. NO SWIVEL. I use a snubber on the chain if I use less than 150' but if weather comes up I ease out more scope . when i do that i now have the double braid in the water plus increased scope plus 150' of chain (which act as cantanery) . But of course when just passing through and expect easy weather I use something different I think recreational sailors call it a "day hook." OH, the big difernce I do is I have my bow cleats located on the toe rail area. Why...... look how deck cleats are positioned on CG 47' lifeboats, tugs and other safely designed workboats. When a line is passed through a closed chock located at the toe rail the line has an increased posibility of parting when loads approach BS of line. That is why the cleat goes on the toe rail area. I, of course, had to reinforce the deck to hull joint and add bracing and extra glass on the inside of the boat in my case the anchor locker area. I dont want the cleats to pull out or take a chunk of my boat when a 26,000 lb strain was placed on the cleat. Fortunalty, do to planning, I have not expeienced anchoring in sustained 90k+ winds............ so to be honest I dont if it will work. I have sat nicely in sustained 50k gusts to 80k... Hockling is NO PROBLEM unless you anchor for days or weeks at a time and go round and round on the anchor. The other condition when hockeling occures is when 3 strand is loaded beond its SWL and put under repeating loads. Youknow.... as in anchoring with a swell. that constant slack-load-slack-load will cause the 3 strand to do all sorts of movement. There several toys that demonstrate that action nicely. Three-strand is easy to eye splice. Double-braid is a real pain in the ass. 3 strand is easy yes..... for some. Double braid is also easy for some...... I am able to make a simple 7/8" double braid eye splice in about 20 minuits. Of course my firs half dozen took almost an hour each. But when its quiet on the bridge its a good way for an AB suck up to the captain learning a new skill instead of sittin in the ness drinking coffee or taling on the cell phone. I dont attempt splicing used line. To many tricks I dont kow about with that stuff. But new DB is very easy to work with. Three-strand is more stretchy which is exactly what one wants in an anchor rode to reduce shock loads on attachment points. This is the common montra found in recrational sailing magzines.Yes, 3 strand nylon typically has a stratch Samson 3 strand Elastic Elongation... Total stretch of 35% at 75% of break strength and 42% at break At % break strength: 10%-7.8% 20%-11.3% 30%- 15.9% New England Double braid nylon Elastic Elongation At % break strength: 10%-3.5% 20%-5.6% 30%-8.5% So if I have 150' of DB line 150 x 8.5% = 12.75 feet of give. PLUS the small cantanary from the 150' chain and Im just fine. So the question is my dear friend is................. how much play is adiquite for a given boat and given wave chariteristeics and given wind For me 12 feet stretch is what I prefer. I havnt ripped any deck hard wear off my boat nor have I parted any lines. I hope this is detailed enough Willbur. Three-strand molds and mildews far less. Three strand is less expensive. A folly of comparisons. You may be a broke ass nigga I on the other hand have a sizable investment to protect. Me and my boat. I use materials best paired with a system and application. Only an ignorant sailor thinks double-braid is the superior choice for an anchor rode. Wilbur Hubbard Go vist Samson or England Rope and look at the Professional Marine products ..... chose anchoring and docking. While your looking review the other specility line product catigories. read and learn. Only the cookasses in Louisiana still use 3 strand for dock n hang off lines cause they are too stupid to be able to read and learn the DB splicing instructions. The more professional boat companines.... such as Edison Chouest Offshore use plait lines. Why, cause thoes boat companies have a higher percent of literate mariners. plus they also have a pretty good inhouse training facility. Three strand is something like the 'answering machine" It a buggy whip of lines. Time for you to get our to the stone age Wilbur. Time marches on. Bob |
Cannibal
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 .... Cheers, Bruce Hello Bruce... No aplogizes needed I tend to shoot off my mouth after giving a post only a brife look. I think the last time I did that was some psot about house bank size and 12 and 110 volt charging systems. I need to give each post a sincer reading but I am not as patient as you. so at times i sound like an idiot because i didnt read a post closley enough but thats okay with me cause most the post here lack credible content. bob |
Cannibal
"Bob" wrote in message
... 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 .... Cheers, Bruce :: Hello Bruce... No aplogizes needed I tend to shoot off my mouth after :: giving a post only a brife look. I think the last time I did that was :: some psot about house bank size and 12 and 110 volt charging systems. :: I need to give each post a sincer reading but I am not as patient as :: you. so at times i sound like an idiot because i didnt read a post :: closley enough but thats okay with me cause most the post here lack :: credible content. Could your elevated blood/alcohol level have something to do with it? LOL! Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:09:51 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Jessica B" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 12:50:15 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote: snip I love it! So, what are you going to say to your boss then he tries to write you up for putting the sticker back on? "You'd better talk to YOUR boss because he told me it was OK." That'll larn him! It was perfect. I actually just walked in there before I left (leave at 3pm), and sort of casually said, hey about that sticker thing... I was talking to Greg and he seemed ok with it, but I can remove it if you really think it's a problem. So, he says, oh yeah, Greg said something to me about the (his Mystery Spot) sticker, but didn't say to take it off. So I guess just don't worry about it. (I don't think anyone complained. I think he just had a hair up his butt about something and I happened to be there.) He's probably one of those control freaks who thought he could browbeat a "defenseless" woman. LOL! He can be I guess. Mostly, he's ok. I think he's having marital problems. He's showed up a couple of mornings looking like he slept in his clothes. snip Ah.. ok. Never heard it called that. No kids and I limit my time with my nieces. :) Are your brothers older or younger? Probably older if they have kids already. Older. One lives sort of near here.. San Diego.. stock broker. The oldest is military... currently in Germany just outside of Frankfurt. snip But, you can only get away with it once a month provided they have halfway decent memories. ;-) That's true, but that "once a month" could be a week! I know some girls who would remove said pound of flesh if someone looks at them the wrong way. Never thought of that. Some PMS does last a week unfortunately. And some women outright lose their minds. Best to steer clear of them until their hormones get back to normal. Ha ha! YES! We lose our minds and men better remember it!! :-) snip You should get yourself a nice pair of black, shiney jackboots and a riding crop - really intimidate them. LOL! Heh... Well, I prefer to go down the easy road first. I don't need the stress. I mean if they want to blow up their house, all their possessions, kids, wife, car... fine with me, as long as I told em and wrote it down. It would just like those Rubes to try to sue you if you FAILED to write it down. I can see it now . . . "Your honor, my house passed inspection with flying colors so it's HER (points at little ole you) fault it caught on fire and burned up. It was HER job to find anything wrong." Exactly. If I don't write it down, they would blame me and I'd get fired. If I do write it down, they blame me and try to get me fired. I prefer the latter to the former! snip Well, heck! Even I can lift 35 lbs! Snub? Ok... like shorten it, so you're pulling until you're right over it. Got it. The guy with the Catalina had this monster-looking anchor, but we didn't use it. You'd better be able to lift 35 pounds or you're awful puny. LOL! Yup, you got snub right. A boat that displaces, say four tons of water can lift that much wheight when a sizable wave rolls under it. If the anchor rode is vertical the anchor doesn't stand a chance of staying stuck in the bottom. When I work out, I put two 5lbs on the bench press bar, which weighs 45lbs, and I can press it 10 times for 2 sets before I have to stop. Not bad I think! Ok. That makes sense. You can actually use the wave action of the boat to get it out of the mud. Then it's just a straight lift.. 35lbs plus whatever the chain weighs, and I guess you can rest by wrapping it around something if you had to. Yes... I think he had all of it chain or well all I could see. It went into a hatch, so I don't know. There was definitely chain though. Some sailors are too stupid to realize that an all-chain rode is dysfunctional because it's prohibitively heavy and the weight of it is usually all right at the bow of the boat which causes the boat to hobby horse it's way through the seas. A combination of chain and nylon three-strand line is the better arrangement for smaller sailboats. Again, it's a case of pretend sailors not really knowing what they're doing. They see big ships and huge ship's anchors and all-chain rodes and they think if it's good for big ships it must be good for small ships. Nothing could be further from the truth. |
Cannibal
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:14:27 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Justin C" wrote in message ... In article , Jessica B wrote: On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 17:48:35 -0600, CaveLamb wrote: I'm guessing that on a two or three year cruise it might be nice to processionally have clean clothes. But that's just me. YMMV? Doesn't the boat ever stop somewhere? Seems like all you have to do is pull in somewhere and deal with it. What happens in the middle of the ocean? You're going to do laundry in your bring-along system? Seems at odds with sailing some how. I've heard of two suggestions... actually, three. 1. A big bucket into which you put water, detergent and the offending items (they're likely to be offending the nose of others after a while, I'm sure). You then 'tread' them for a while, like the French used to with grapes. A seamanlike arrangement. Also when camping. Put the clothes in a 5 gal bucket, add water, some detergent, and stomp for a while. Works fine. It's not like I'd be bringing chiffon dress or something (well maybe for a shore excursion). 2. All that needs washing ends up in the shower stall. Whoever takes a shower 'treads' the clothes as they do so. I am not certain of the efficacy of this method. Shower stall? C'mon. Real sailboats don't waste space and water with a shower stall. That's way too lubberly to even consider. Can't you just use one of those solar showers? I think they make 5 gal sizes, and that's plenty of water, even for a shampoo. Well, I guess the salt water wouldn't be good for my hair... it would turn it dull and I wouldn't want that. 3. Small mesh netting (small enough that your smalls don't go through the holes) from which you make a bag, into which you put your laundry. The neting bag is then towed behind the boat for a while. That should work and I've heard of that method, too. That sounds good, but wouldn't it be better to do the stomp method, then use that to rinse? It seems like the clothes could use a quick dip in fresh water to keep them soft. The very best way, however, when cruising is to just say no to clothes. If you don't wear them then they don't get soiled. But, you still have to wash sheets, towels, etc. Well, minimal clothes... lol |
Cannibal
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:45:55 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Jessica B" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:12:37 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote: "Bruce" wrote in message ... snip This from a bloke that brags a photo of himself sitting in a tiny boat petting a pussy? A kitty cat is a proper addition to a sailing yacht as they will eliminate any mouse or rat that might come aboard from who knows where. Do you have a kitty?! I love cats, but don't have any pets right now. Yes, I rescued this feral kitten and now he's all grown up. He's still very timid around people and hides when strangers visit but he's a good hunter. He mostly hunts insects as that is about all that can get aboard. There was a mangrove snake he cornered one time in the lazarette just forward of the outboard motor, though. I had to grab it and toss it overboard but it swam to the dinghy and crawled up along the transom and got in so I rowed it over to the shore and put it off so it wouldn't keep coming back. Is that kind of snake poisonous? Yikes! My brother had a dog that went after two killer bees that got into the house. They chased my bro into the bathroom and he said he could hear them bumping against the door, which attracted the dog. Munch, munch, no more bees! I think if you left off the word conservative, you would have said it all. :) Seriously though... I just don't get this liberal nonsense, especially what goes on in a place like this. How about some reasoned approach to finance?? Hello? Well, aren't you sweet! But, you are right; one of these days people are going to have to WAKE UP and realize that money doesn't grow on trees. People who don't produce a damned thing are going to have to realize that they aren't worth a dime as far as payment for not producing a thing goes. This country is going to hell in a handbasket. Every high school student should have to read (and understand) Ayn Rand's, "Atlas Shrugged," before they are given a diploma. You seem so very sensible. If you haven't read "Atlas Shrugged" please do so as you are very much in the mold of Dagny Taggart. Yeah, I agree! The builders around here really took it hard when the economy went into the toilet. I know a bunch of them through work. They were scrambling for a while - still are I guess, and those guys actually made things. I don't much like our new gov. Brown... too lame-brain liberal, but he's talking some decent stuff about cutting some of these nonsense programs. I would have preferred Meg... tough as nails, but she got sandbagged by the volume of disinformation about the nanny. We'll see with Brown. snipped to end Not painful I hope! :-) Wilbur Hubbard |
Cannibal
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:56:40 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Jessica B" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 10:52:09 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote: "CaveLamb" wrote in message ... snip Why does a couple of feet of oar sticking out of the boat matter? Spoken like a clueless dolt! An oar or oars sticking out of a dinghy can catch under the dinghy dock on a rising tide and capsize the boat. Duh! Just one of the many hazards that are eliminated with oars that fit inside the length of the dinghy. Perhaps some of you pretend sailors need to sail once in a while to learn how things really go down? Wilbur Hubbard Or, even just scratch the sides... You could put fenders to protect the boat from the dinghy, but they wouldn't protect it from the oars. They might even get broken off. Broken off or lost overboard. Bruce is very naive. It makes me wonder if perhaps he didn't arrive in Thailand as deck cargo aboard a freighter. Ok... that's funny... deck cargo! Sorry Bruce, but it is funny. Oh, one other thing. You sure have a good head on your shoulders. . . I'm just try to be sensible. I deal with the real world every day... people spending real money on real things to get real benefit. The only depressing thing I see fairly regularly is when I visit a residence and see that they used inferior material or hired a lousy contractor. We know who the good ones and bad ones are, but we're not really supposed to say. |
Cannibal
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 00:51:21 +0000, Justin C
wrote: In article , Jessica B wrote: Ok, but wouldn't it be more convenient to just keep them out of harms way in the dinghy if you can? A dinghy can flip, and an inflatable, in a strong breeze can become a kite, then you lose everything that's in it, thwart and all. Twart? Isn't that across something? Don't people put their whole dinghy on their boats? Yeah, but they're heavy (or can be) and damn difficult to handle - there's not a lot of room on most boats what with masts, shrouds, and spinnaker poles. If you're only going a few miles, and the conditions are OK then it's just easier to tow. I would never tow one far, there's drag, wear and tear on both your boat and dink... I've heard of some people towing to arrive at their destination and look to the dink and find it not there! Justin. I've seen boats that have these elbow-shaped tubes on the back that have like a cradle/pulley system for dinghies. I guess you have to tie them off so they don't bang around, but at least you aren't towing them. |
Cannibal
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 02:33:01 -0800 (PST), Bob
wrote: Hi Bob... well, I don't know... Halvorson design: Freya 39 Must be your boat! lol |
Cannibal
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 08:44:37 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Jessica B" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:28:18 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote: "Jessica B" wrote in message ... snip Whoa... you're a captain? That's so cool! That says a lot about you... you have to pass all sorts of background checks if it's anything like getting even a local government job like mine. Thanks, I have an excellent security background having had a Top Secret clearance for security work as a military policeman in the U.S. Army This is why I am highly insulted being subjected to a government bureaucrat, dog and pony, jump-through-the-hoops show. This is why I just said, NO! I've never been arrested for anything. Never even had a speeding ticket. I can even produce a valid birth certificate. Few, if any of the people who would have me jump through hoops can claim the same. And, this in the name of anti-terrorism, which is as much as accusing ME of being a terrorist threat, while the government ignores actual terrorists and cries and agitates for releasing them from Guantanamo Bay. Ludicrous! Yes, and don't listen to Bruce, stuck at the Bangkok dock. He's just envious of my greater qualifications. I qualified for and was duly issued a USCG, Master of Steam or Motor Vessels of not more than 25 gross tons upon near coastal waters; also operator of uninspected passenger vessels as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101 (42) upon near coastal waters not to exceed 100 miles offshore, which is way more than Brucie-Poo ever accomplished. Don't be fooled by those envious people like Joe who claim that near coastal is less than open ocean for everybody knows near coastal is where the hazardous sailing takes place. Open ocean is a joke and the realm of autopilots. That's where the rocks are... So, if you stay away from the rocks, then you have one less thing to worry about I guess. Every story my friend tells of mishap is in and around the marina or surrounding area. Yes, they say it's usually not the water that puts a boat in jeopardy but rather the hard stuff around the edges. LOL! Any old fool can pilot a boat in the open ocean. Heck, there's nothing out there to hit. Many big ships put the damned things of autopilot and nobody is even keeping a lookout when on the open ocean and this is the so-called shipping lanes where there IS some little traffic, at least. Goes to show you have to try pretty hard to have a collision out there. So, when some pretend sailor makes light of a near coastal license it just demonstrates a lack of understanding of where the real challenges are and where it takes real knowledge to cope. I don't get what's going on with the government... all this money coming in, and the whole infrastructure seems to be falling apart. I don't mind a few rules, but come on. Especially when it comes to paperwork. You've already been through the checks, you've already passed your exam (or whatever), so give the individual a break already. Job security for govt. pencil pushers! (no offense, not meaning you because you actually get out of the office and do productive work). Thanks! I have to write up stuff, but it's from actionable items... red-flags, resolutions, follow-up recommendations. I'm sick of all the money that seems to be frittered away on endlessly studying the mating habits of magpies or whatever. Has anybody ever offered you a bribe to look the other way on something? I've been offered a bribe just once. He was actually a nice guy, and I said I really couldn't accept it because it would put my job and his life in jeopardy. The situation was that some moron installed a furnace so poorly in his house that the burners weren't getting enough air (it's almost always a ducting issue), which meant they were sucking air from the house and the gas wasn't being burned efficiently... a good way to get asphyxiated. In addition to red-flagging it, I had to turn off the gas to it. So, he was trying to get me to leave it on. No go on that, but I showed him how to turn the gas to it back on sort of in a sly way. I said, "Hey, here's what I have to do. This shuts off the gas. (I shut it off.) It's just a hand valve that's 90 to the pipe when it's off. You'll notice that when I turn it on (I turn it on) by putting it in line with the pipe, the pilot lights automatically after a few seconds after the thermostat kicks in. I don't recommend you turn it on. It's dangerous. I strongly recommend you leave a window open unless you want to wake up dead." I mentioned a couple of reputable companies, then, I left. :-) I did get asked out a few times, but only accepted one time. He was nice, but it just didn't work out. |
Cannibal
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 22:23:19 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote: On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 16:23:02 -0800, Jessica B wrote: On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:05:11 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 14:30:04 -0800, Jessica B wrote: Why do they charge $100 for that card ..TIWC? Seems like it's kind of over the top. What does it get you? It gets you a fancy ID card that has all of your biometric data, including fingerprints, encoded on to an internal chip. All people involved in public transportation are now required to have one. Sounds like it gets the government a whole lot more than they need for people who take a few people sailing. I guess I could see it for a tanker or a ferry or something. I really wouldn't want all that info on a chip. Typical government stuff, one size fits all. We had a joke in the army that you could have any color shirt you wanted as long as it was green. That joke obviously predates today's fancy desert camouflage outfits. The idea with the TWIC card is to ensure that all people with access to port infrastructure areas, docks, builldings, etc., have proper security credentials. It's entirely possible that our friend in question has some sort of, uhhh, "issue" in his past that would preclude security authorization. Or, more likely, he's just as tired of needless paperwork as I am. |
Cannibal
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:13:57 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Wayne.B" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:16:57 -0800 (PST), Bob wrote: CFRs require it for all people needing dock acess for thier job. But since you dont sail your license you reall have no use for either a TWIC or that master license (sutible for framing and display) Hang on to that purdy license. The latest CFRs actually go farther than that. They say that without a TWIC card your Masters ticket or OUPV are no longer valid. There will be lawsuits. The government sold you something you paid good money for and invested good time for that gave you certain rights and privileges and now they say it's no longer valid. That is fraud in anybody's book. Wilbur Hubbard I'm no lawyer, but it's changing the rules after the fact. That's bogus. |
Cannibal
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 12:19:51 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Jessica B" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:55:46 -0800 (PST), Bob snip And I support increased requirments completely. It time to keep the drug users and fat asses off the water. Somehow I don't get the impression that Capt. Wil is either a drug user or a fat ass. Thank you, Jessica, and well-said. As usual, you are more perceptive than the so-called sailors. Beauty AND brains - so wonderful. Wilbur Hubbard (wishing I were about forty years younger) You're welcome! I didn't get the impression that you were doing anything more than trying to give your honest, experienced opinion. Well, I'm not beautiful.. I'm better looking than a sack of potatoes.. that's what my next oldest brother says... it's kind of an inside joke, since I used to play with sacks of potatoes when I was a kid... don't ask! |
Cannibal
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:45:55 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: Well, aren't you sweet! But, you are right; one of these days people are going to have to WAKE UP and realize that money doesn't grow on trees. People who don't produce a damned thing are going to have to realize that they aren't worth a dime as far as payment for not producing a thing goes. This country is going to hell in a handbasket. Every high school student should have to read (and understand) Ayn Rand's, "Atlas Shrugged," before they are given a diploma. You seem so very sensible. If you haven't read "Atlas Shrugged" please do so as you are very much in the mold of Dagny Taggart. I forgot to write you back about Ayn Rand's book. I have not read it but I heard a bunch about it actually recently by coincidence. I was having dinner with my aunt and uncle and he was saying that it's about being an individual who knows her own mind and isn't willing to compromise her beliefs for other people's benefit. I was sort of nodding my head, because I tend to go my own way... (you might have gotten that impression?). He of course knows that I think this, so I think it was all for my niece's benefit. (She's the most adorable person, but is kind of hand fed if you know what I mean.) It seems to me that people need to stand up for themselves, stop feeding at the public trough, and stop feeling sorry for themselves. |
Cannibal
I'm no lawyer, but it's changing the rules after the fact. That's bogus.- Hide quoted text - No its called a "Revision." |
Cannibal
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:17:53 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "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. Good thinking.... and true, however... A wave that was only 45 feet from crest to crest is a pretty small wave. In fact, I can't even find a calculation that can be used to calculate the dimensions of a wave this small. The closest I can find by interpretation from the charts I have is: A wave with a velocity of 10 M/S (36 MPH) in 10 M (~32 ft.) of water would have a wave period of less then 4 seconds and a length of 200 M. In other words your example is a highly unlikely (perhaps impossible) situation. 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. Sure, as soon as you post your log books along with proof that you didn't concoct them out of thin air. Shoot! You can't even prove who you are. 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. You are perfectly correct that you claim to have sailed thousands of miles. In more challenging conditions then I, and you again claim that conditions were more challenging, and all of it coastal, i.e., never out of sight of land. But that is your claim. I've actually done it. Says the ground-to-a-halt voyager (since 35 years) who doesn't even understand simple wavelength concepts. Says the dock dweller. Pah! But, as I wrote above, I do understand wave dynamics and that is why I don't listen to fools like you. 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. What absolutely ignorance. A Home, is it? Well, I've lived on a sailboat for most of 20 years now. A time machine? Well, I'll admit I am getting older. An "interface dancer"? what in the world is that? A compilation of systems? What are you going on about? Sailing a boat is hardly as difficult or challenging as flying an airplane and I could do that, albeit with an adult in the plane, when I was 12 years old. I sailed a 28 (FOD) Miscongus Bay Sloop (you may call it a "Friendship Sloop, but that is wrong), with no engine, for several years up and down the Maine coast with a one burner kerosene stove, a compass and a Mobile Oil road map. No electrics except for a flashlight; no radio. Canvas sails, manila ropes and a lead line. I built my first boat when I was 12 years old (with my father's help. It was only a small row boat, but it was a boat. I have always made my own repairs, wood, fiberglass hulls, Wood and aluminum spars, I can (under duress) splice wire rope from 1 X 19 through 7 X 7, and could do that since I was 19. I was a code welder and can weld most metals including aluminum and titanium. So don't go blathering on about the romance of boating. The essence of a boat is "another way to get there". If you don't believe read Bill Tilman, CBE, DSO, MC and Bar, was rather famous mountaineer and sailor who when asked why he took up sailing replied, "There were a lot of mountains I wanted to climb that were only accessible by boat... So I learned to sail one in order to get to the mountains". 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. Failed? I'd say that I succeed. After all, I got to exactly where I was going. 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. You have a rather overheated imagination. Try talking to anyone who has actually sailed somewhere and see whether your ethereal and romantic outlook finds a soul mate. The usual "sea story"of a real sailor after a trip is more like, "The damned autopilot broke down about a week out and we had to hand steer all the way". Or, perhaps, "We didn't have a breath of wind and had to motor for two weeks". Another I heard was, "a damned storm hit us about 200 miles north of Chagos and we layed a-hull for three days before we could get going". I have never heard a real sailor rabbit on about romance, connectedness or any of the other platitudes heard from the romantic dreamers who's maritime experience is measured by how many books they've read. Wilbur Hubbard Cheers, Bruce |
Cannibal
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:25:00 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "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. You are really an ignorant oaf, aren't you? Did I ever say that a monohull could outrun a wave? Nope, as I was replying to someone who misinterpreted an earlier post I specified as many details as possible. 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. Yes, I keep hearing that but frankly, have never seen it happen and as I wrote in another message I'm not sure that it can happen. Mind giving us a reference (other then your wild claims), Pah! You must have been lying about voyaging - either that or too drunk or asleep to observe how things work. Drunk? Am I the guy that went on about his even libations while anchored (from the picture with the oars sticking out of the dinghy) very close to shore. Wilbur Hubbard Cheers, Bruce |
Cannibal
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:31:41 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "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 And, as usual you are toe dancing all around the subject.. You are the one who stated, in your intrepid way that oars should fit inside the boat... When I objected saying that wasn't the main criteria in selecting oars you argued. Now you are saying that you don't need 12 foot oars to row a 8 ft. boat.... Probably not but the main criteria, that the oars need to, as I said, reach the water, still hasn't changed. In other words, one selects ones oars to fit one's physical shape, fitness and the size, mainly the width, of the boat. If they should fit inside the boat then lucky you but it is rather unworldly to say it is logical to saw off a perfectly good set of oars just to fit them inside the boat. Cheers, Bruce |
Cannibal
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:47:33 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "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. Yes, I did look at your photo of sunset over the mangrove swamps that included a bit of your dinghy. Your custom stern davits are not of the off shore cruising type. Too flimsy. In fact I don't believe I know anyone who starts an offshore voyage with the dinghy on aft davits. Too easy to get the dingy full of water and busted loose. Most experienced people get it up on deck and bottom up and tied down before heading out. Aft stern davits are for when you get there and are using the dinghy every day. Never for off shore trips. 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. Yes, I lived at anchor in the Singapore straits for several years. Not only did I dinghy back and forth to the boat but lugged all my provisions some 20 miles by bus, another 5 miles to the island by speed boat and finally by dinghy to the boat, and if you find hauling groceries out to a boat as something to rhapsodize over then you are a far stranger individual then I've previously encountered. Pah! You are no cruising sailor. Everything you write demonstrates that fact. Wilbur Hubbard Cheers, Bruce |
Cannibal
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:16:22 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "CaveLamb" wrote in message om... That's not what the magazine article that he read said though! Stow it! I speak from 35 years of ACTIVE sailing and living aboard experience. Willie-boy! Living on an anchored boat (live aboard, they call it, sort of like maritime trailer trash) does not qualify you as an expert in anything but ferrying groceries out to the boat and garbage back. So, 35 years of being a grocery delivery boy and a Sanitation engineer qualifies you for .? As is the usual case, Bob is ill-informed. He seems to delight in displaying his usual lack of due diligence and presumptuous mental impecuniousness See my reply to the PUTZ, further up this thread, debunking his misconceptions. Wilbur Hubbard Cheers, Bruce |
Cannibal
"Jessica B" wrote in message
... On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 12:19:51 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote: "Jessica B" wrote in message . .. On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:55:46 -0800 (PST), Bob snip And I support increased requirments completely. It time to keep the drug users and fat asses off the water. Somehow I don't get the impression that Capt. Wil is either a drug user or a fat ass. Thank you, Jessica, and well-said. As usual, you are more perceptive than the so-called sailors. Beauty AND brains - so wonderful. Wilbur Hubbard (wishing I were about forty years younger) You're welcome! I didn't get the impression that you were doing anything more than trying to give your honest, experienced opinion. Sometimes I'm guilty of a little irony with some of the pretend sailors but, for the most part, I try to be honest about my opinions. Well, I'm not beautiful.. I'm better looking than a sack of potatoes.. that's what my next oldest brother says... it's kind of an inside joke, since I used to play with sacks of potatoes when I was a kid... don't ask! Mr. Potato Head? LOL! You're too young for that one for sure. But, you're wrong, you're quite beautiful. Both in mind and body so don't underestimate your attributes. I think there are more men than anybody thinks who would rather have a fit, attractive Tomboy type than some prissy debutante who faints at the sight of a little dirt and sweat and is too weak to do any real physical effort or enjoy the outdoors. Wilbur Hubbard |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:01 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com