"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:12:37 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

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.

there is room for you, and a rat, on the yellow dinghy?

Many ocean-going sailors will confirm the fact that a 27-30 foot sailboat is
the ideal size because of the wavelength and frequency of prevailing winds
generated wave trains. Something about twice that size ends up being a
rougher ride by far and can be overwhelmed and pooped in a following sea
whereas the modest-size vessel just rides up and over like a duck. So, get a
clue. Loose that stupid bigger is better attitude. It only paints you as
ignorant of real world sailing.

snip


Errr, Willie, I'm here in Thailand, and you are still anchored in
Florida? And somehow this indicates that you are the sailorman and I'm
not.....

Admission of failure noted. While I have cruised thousands of miles, I have
never been stranded in some backwater for 30 years like you have. I have met
all my goals and have not been forced into expatriation by virtue of a
dearth of perserverance and/or skills.

Something wrong with your logic I'm afraid.

You're afraid, alright. Afraid of going the rest of the way around. LOL!
Keep telling yourself that half of your goal is success. One day in the
distant future you might even come to really believe it.


Liberal drones? what ever gave you that idea? I certainly would like
to see your evidence to support that statement..


Your brainwashed state and Joe's brainwashed state respecting equating
trying with succeeding is at the very core of liberal drone thinking. It's
the very same thought process that has children playing soccer, softball,
etc. and not keeping score because there can be no losers. Get a clue. In
life there ARE winners and losers and just because one tries, it doesn't
keep one from being a failure and a loser when one does not succeed. You and
Joe are quite pitiful really. Joe brags that he's the better man because he,
at least, tried. Never mind that he tried AND failed miserably. So, by his
reasoning, a miserable failure is better than somebody with goals he tries
and succeeds at attaining even though the goals don't seem quite so lofty?
So you have a failure presuming to be the arbiter of loft? That doesn't
strike you as ludicrous and inane? You can't see that grinding to a halt
half-way around is no success no matter how hard you try to rationalize it,
after the fact?


Wilbur Hubbard

On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:35:26 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:12:37 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

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.

there is room for you, and a rat, on the yellow dinghy?

Many ocean-going sailors will confirm the fact that a 27-30 foot sailboat is
the ideal size because of the wavelength and frequency of prevailing winds
generated wave trains. Something about twice that size ends up being a
rougher ride by far and can be overwhelmed and pooped in a following sea
whereas the modest-size vessel just rides up and over like a duck. So, get a
clue. Loose that stupid bigger is better attitude. It only paints you as
ignorant of real world sailing.

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.


snip


Errr, Willie, I'm here in Thailand, and you are still anchored in
Florida? And somehow this indicates that you are the sailorman and I'm
not.....

Admission of failure noted. While I have cruised thousands of miles, I have
never been stranded in some backwater for 30 years like you have. I have met
all my goals and have not been forced into expatriation by virtue of a
dearth of perserverance and/or skills.

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.


Something wrong with your logic I'm afraid.

You're afraid, alright. Afraid of going the rest of the way around. LOL!
Keep telling yourself that half of your goal is success. One day in the
distant future you might even come to really believe it.

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.



Liberal drones? what ever gave you that idea? I certainly would like
to see your evidence to support that statement..


Your brainwashed state and Joe's brainwashed state respecting equating
trying with succeeding is at the very core of liberal drone thinking. It's
the very same thought process that has children playing soccer, softball,
etc. and not keeping score because there can be no losers. Get a clue. In
life there ARE winners and losers and just because one tries, it doesn't
keep one from being a failure and a loser when one does not succeed. You and
Joe are quite pitiful really. Joe brags that he's the better man because he,
at least, tried. Never mind that he tried AND failed miserably. So, by his
reasoning, a miserable failure is better than somebody with goals he tries
and succeeds at attaining even though the goals don't seem quite so lofty?
So you have a failure presuming to be the arbiter of loft? That doesn't
strike you as ludicrous and inane? You can't see that grinding to a halt
half-way around is no success no matter how hard you try to rationalize it,
after the fact?

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.

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?

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.


Wilbur Hubbard

Cheers,

Bruce

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

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

"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

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

"CaveLamb" wrote in message
news
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

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

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Trimmed some repeats

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.

Duh, you did so imply just that as if a monohull could outrun the wave train
then it could NEVER be pooped unless it fetched up on a reef or some such.

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),

Pretty hard to see it happen when tied to the Thailand dock. The most wave
action you see is a Tsunami from time to time. And, you wouldn't even see
that if you were actually out voyaging in deep water.


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(ing) libations while
anchored (from the picture with the oars sticking out of the dinghy)
very close to shore.


They don't 'stick out'. The fit withing the length of the dinghy. They just
happen to be in the rowlocks in that photo. When stowed as in and around a
dinghy dock they lay completely within the lenght of the dinghy and they are
locked to it with a small length of SS wire.


Wilbur Hubbard

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