The guy at the Windows 7 Pro Generator Key store just told me Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit Key Starter is easier to use and it Win 7 Cd Key you how to use the programs, and it's Win 7 64 Bit Key complicated.In what way is it less complicated to use than Microsoft Windows 7 Update Key? I still don't get the difference.

The guy at the Win 7 Activation Key store just told me Windows 7 32bit Key Starter is easier to use and it Windows 7 64bit Key you how to use the programs, and it's Windows 7 Enterprise 64 Bit Key complicated.In what way is it less complicated to use than Win 7 Cd Key? I still don't get the difference.

The guy at the Windows 7 Pro Generator store just told me Microsoft Windows 7 Generator Key Starter is easier to use and it Windows 7 Pro 32 Bit you how to use the programs, and it's Windows 7 Home Basic Code complicated.In what way is it less complicated to use than Win 7 Update Key? I still don't get the difference.

In article , jessicab47
@hush.com says...

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:28:09 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article , jessicab47
says...

On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:39:40 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article s.com,
says...

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:18:02 -0500, Gogarty
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 16:37:19 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
m...
snip


Willie-boy, I keep telling you and telling you that you exhibit your
lack of knowledge every time you open your mouth. My mate, the
Australian, is 76 years old and sails a 55 ft Ferro boat with a
mechanical anchor windless and gets along quite well single handing
it.

Of course, he IS a sailor, not a wantabe.
Cheers,




Nothing looks quite a silly as an old man with skinny arms off of which
the
skin hangs in folds standing on the bow of an overly large and
cumbersome
yacht pulling on the lever of a creaky old mechanical windlass, slowly
stroking away with one inch of chain coming in at a pull.

If that isn't a good enough argument for downsizing then nothing will
convince you.


Just goes to show you how little some people know about boats. People
who sail 50' ferro boats don't have an expensive lever operated
Simpson Lawrence winch. they have a geared two speed, local made,
fisherman windlass. the one with the exposed gears. See
http://motivationdocksupply.com/winc...nd-winches.php for an
example.

Wow! I will recommend those windlasses to my freind with the Endeavour 42.


Well... an Endeavour 42 IS a bit more upmarket then a ferrocement
boat, usually :-)


Those things are so S-L-O-W! (and ugly)

S-L-O-W and ugly are relative. Are you in such a big hurry that the
difference between 4Kt and 6Kt makea a big difference?

Mark Borgerson


I just did a simple calculation... say you wanted to go 1000 miles,
1000m/6mph = 7 days vs. 1000m/4mph = 10 days. This seems like a big
difference to me, but what do I know.

I guess I agree that ugly is relative.

That's a valid point for open ocean cruising. The faster voyage will
also reduce the supplies you have to carry. Of course, you can take
the speed thing a bit too far and end up with a boat that will be
dangerous in moderately heavy weather---particularly if operated
with a small crew.

Ok, but I don't understand the taking it too far comment. Are you
talking about pushing the limits of speed the boat can take and still
be safe?

I was thinking more of the ultra-light boats with the big rigs.
They're very fast, but can be dangerous in heavy weather with
a small crew.

I was think more of coastal cruising, particularly in trawler
yachts. In those boats, I often cruise at about 3 to 5 knots
as opposed to the 8 to 9 that the boat will do at full cruise.
The result is that I spend 5 hours a day between anchorages
instead of 2.5 and use less than half the fuel I would if traveling
the same distance at the faster speed. The scenery looks just
as nice and the boat is a lot quieter. I get twice the time to
react to floating logs and other hazards.

OIC. Even then, if you're trying to make it someplace for dinner, it
would still make sense to be able to go a bit faster. I guess then you
can just go ahead and waste fuel. I thought the discussion was about
sailing not using an engine.

In the Pacific Northwest, even the sailboats use their engines a
lot of the time.

Of course, the cruising I do here in the Pacific Northwest
is a bit different than that in Florida and the Caribbean.
The basic principles here a

1. If the weather is nice there won't be enough wind
to sail (80% of the sailboats I see have their engine
running.)

2. When the weather is rainy enough to have some wind,
the wind will be coming down the fjord when you are
going up, and vice-versa.

3. The current is always against you--and generally
over 2 knots.

4. If you insist on sailing, you will not make it
through Dodd Narrow on this afternoon's slack.

5. Ferry boat skippers will generally not run
over sailboats waiting for wind. But they will
surely be unhappy.

6. Gill nets are REALLY hard to see at 5 knots in
good weather. If there's enough wind to sail at
7 knots, there is a good probability that you will
really **** off some fisherman because you won't
see the net until you are too close. I saw some
really exciting jibes and tacks North of Campbell
river last summer.


If your goal is to go long distances, or to spend as much
time as possible at anchor, by all means, get the fastet
boat you can afford! ;-)


Mark Borgerson


I can afford a Honda. LOL

Mark Borgerson

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 17:10:35 -0800, Jessica B
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 05:36:23 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:39:11 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Jessica B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:39:40 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article s.com,
says...

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:18:02 -0500, Gogarty
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 16:37:19 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
m...
snip


Willie-boy, I keep telling you and telling you that you exhibit
your
lack of knowledge every time you open your mouth. My mate, the
Australian, is 76 years old and sails a 55 ft Ferro boat with a
mechanical anchor windless and gets along quite well single
handing
it.

Of course, he IS a sailor, not a wantabe.
Cheers,




Nothing looks quite a silly as an old man with skinny arms off of
which
the
skin hangs in folds standing on the bow of an overly large and
cumbersome
yacht pulling on the lever of a creaky old mechanical windlass,
slowly
stroking away with one inch of chain coming in at a pull.

If that isn't a good enough argument for downsizing then nothing
will
convince you.


Just goes to show you how little some people know about boats. People
who sail 50' ferro boats don't have an expensive lever operated
Simpson Lawrence winch. they have a geared two speed, local made,
fisherman windlass. the one with the exposed gears. See
http://motivationdocksupply.com/winc...nd-winches.php for an
example.

Wow! I will recommend those windlasses to my freind with the Endeavour
42.


Well... an Endeavour 42 IS a bit more upmarket then a ferrocement
boat, usually :-)


Those things are so S-L-O-W! (and ugly)

S-L-O-W and ugly are relative. Are you in such a big hurry that the
difference between 4Kt and 6Kt makea a big difference?

Mark Borgerson


I just did a simple calculation... say you wanted to go 1000 miles,
1000m/6mph = 7 days vs. 1000m/4mph = 10 days. This seems like a big
difference to me, but what do I know.


Right you are, Jessica. You sure have a good head on your shoulders (for a
girl, LOL!) Often overlooked is the fact that the longer the voyage takes
the greater the chances of experiencing storm conditions. If you have
already arrived and are safe and secure in port while a slower boat is still
two or three days from arriving that boat could get hit by severe weather in
an exposed environment while the faster boat will not be exposed.

That fact alone does not bode well for unnecessarily slow boats like the old
Colin Archer heavy-displacement slowcoaches (Westsail 32, for example). The
only thing that antique design has going for it is it's slow primarily
because it was built in such a way as to be heavy and deep draft and
short-sticked which allows it to better survive heavy weather. But, it's
really kind of stupid in that the very slowness that allows it to survive
heavy weather makes it that much more likely that it will be caught in heavy
weather.


Wilbur Hubbard

And Willie the dummy is heard from again.

You really aren't much of a cruiser are you? Worrying about your slow
boat exposing you to a storm? Oh Vey, and such a brave sailor; you
better stay home and read a book..... but of course that is what you
do.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Bruce it seems like it would make it more difficult to get places if
you have to go slowly. If there was a big storm coming in and it'll
arrive in 10 days, you could still go if you know you can make it in
7, but if it's close to the limit on how long it'll take, then you'd
have to sit and wait.

I don't know how tight a schedule you can make, but I think I'd want
more time vs less time.


You really don't know much about sailing, do you.

If you 'knew' that there was a big storm coming in ten days it would
have to be something pretty special as a depression which was called a
'storm' would have either worsened or decreased considerably in ten
days and if it were severe enough to be called a storm then I suspect
that any prudent sailor would wait it out.

Secondly if one were cruising any distance, say San Diego - Hawaii
one has little chance to out run any weather pattern. Of course if
one's "cruising' is a day trip down the bay it is a different story,
isn't it.

Just as a matter of idle interest a 10 ft. LWL boat has a hull speed
of 4.24 K, 20 ft. = 5.99, 30 = 7.34 and 40=8.47 and given that most
boats will be somewhat longer, on deck, then their water line, the
speeds that you are envisaging to out run your storm are simply not
there.

Assuming a 40 ft. (LOD) boat probably has a LWL of about 30 ft. then
it's probable maximum speed under sail is about 7.34. and 7.34 X 24
hours is abut 170 miles per day under perfect sailing conditions, a
highly unlikely enough condition that, as I've said, makes a good brag
in the pub.
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Mar 6, 8:52*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
OK, I have not hauled my anchor in the last 6 months but then it was
not too hard (28' 8000lb boat). *Am I missing something? *Does hauling
the anchor (slowly) get that much harder as one gets older (I am 55).
Generally, I haul her in slowly allowing the boats momentum to do most
of the work until the rode is vertical. *That is when it requires a
bit of pull. *I also use 1/2" nylon rode with 30' of chain so I am not
hauling all chain.
Does it get that much harder with a larger boat?
In place of a windlass, why not mount an old manual winch on the bow
and use it to help haul it in?

There is an excelletn book by Earl R. Hinz I cant remember the title
that will tieach you everything needed to design your own ground
tackle. He also published a book titled, Heavy Weather Tactics Using
Sea Anchors & Drogues. THis is also the only book you shoudl read
regarding that topic.

Youre asking the wrong question. Its not how big a windless or How big
an anchor you need? The quesion you need to anser FIRST is
1) How much does your boat weigh: 29,000 lbs
2) How much wind (drag) + bottom type+ depth are you going to want to
anchor.

Those factors above will determ
rode type
rode lenght
anchor type/size
windless needed to pick up your location specific designed ground
tackle. If its too much to pull up by hand Id say size the windless to
your needs.

Just to run off my mouth Id say 1/2 nylon + 30 feet chain is EXTREALY
undersized for a 29K boat... that is unless youre at the dock and will
never opreate in an area where winds over 20K exist.

Read Hinz anchoring book and let me know what you decide.
Bob

On Mar 14, 6:51*pm, Bob wrote:
On Mar 6, 8:52*pm, Frogwatch wrote:

OK, I have not hauled my anchor in the last 6 months but then it was
not too hard (28' 8000lb boat). *Am I missing something? *Does hauling
the anchor (slowly) get that much harder as one gets older (I am 55).
Generally, I haul her in slowly allowing the boats momentum to do most
of the work until the rode is vertical. *That is when it requires a
bit of pull. *I also use 1/2" nylon rode with 30' of chain so I am not
hauling all chain.
Does it get that much harder with a larger boat?
In place of a windlass, why not mount an old manual winch on the bow
and use it to help haul it in?

There is an excelletn book by Earl R. Hinz I cant remember the title
that will tieach you everything needed to design your own ground
tackle. He also published a book titled, Heavy Weather Tactics Using
Sea Anchors & Drogues. THis is also the only book you shoudl read
regarding that topic.

Youre asking the wrong question. Its not how big a windless or How big
an anchor you need? The quesion you need to anser FIRST is
1) How much does your boat weigh: 29,000 lbs
2) How much wind (drag) + bottom type+ depth are you going to want to
anchor.

Those factors above will determ
rode type
rode lenght
anchor type/size
windless needed to pick up your location specific designed ground
tackle. If its too much to pull up by hand Id say size the windless to
your needs.

Just to run off my mouth Id say 1/2 nylon + 30 feet chain is EXTREALY
undersized for a 29K boat... that is unless youre at the dock and will
never opreate in an area where winds over 20K exist.

Read Hinz anchoring book and let me know what you decide.
Bob



Upsss Its a 28 FOOT boat that weighs 8 thousand pounds...... !
In that case putit back on yuor trailor and go home....

On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 06:05:28 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 17:10:35 -0800, Jessica B
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 05:36:23 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:39:11 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Jessica B" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:39:40 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article s.com,
says...

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:18:02 -0500, Gogarty
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 16:37:19 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
m...
snip


Willie-boy, I keep telling you and telling you that you exhibit
your
lack of knowledge every time you open your mouth. My mate, the
Australian, is 76 years old and sails a 55 ft Ferro boat with a
mechanical anchor windless and gets along quite well single
handing
it.

Of course, he IS a sailor, not a wantabe.
Cheers,




Nothing looks quite a silly as an old man with skinny arms off of
which
the
skin hangs in folds standing on the bow of an overly large and
cumbersome
yacht pulling on the lever of a creaky old mechanical windlass,
slowly
stroking away with one inch of chain coming in at a pull.

If that isn't a good enough argument for downsizing then nothing
will
convince you.


Just goes to show you how little some people know about boats. People
who sail 50' ferro boats don't have an expensive lever operated
Simpson Lawrence winch. they have a geared two speed, local made,
fisherman windlass. the one with the exposed gears. See
http://motivationdocksupply.com/winc...nd-winches.php for an
example.

Wow! I will recommend those windlasses to my freind with the Endeavour
42.


Well... an Endeavour 42 IS a bit more upmarket then a ferrocement
boat, usually :-)


Those things are so S-L-O-W! (and ugly)

S-L-O-W and ugly are relative. Are you in such a big hurry that the
difference between 4Kt and 6Kt makea a big difference?

Mark Borgerson


I just did a simple calculation... say you wanted to go 1000 miles,
1000m/6mph = 7 days vs. 1000m/4mph = 10 days. This seems like a big
difference to me, but what do I know.


Right you are, Jessica. You sure have a good head on your shoulders (for a
girl, LOL!) Often overlooked is the fact that the longer the voyage takes
the greater the chances of experiencing storm conditions. If you have
already arrived and are safe and secure in port while a slower boat is still
two or three days from arriving that boat could get hit by severe weather in
an exposed environment while the faster boat will not be exposed.

That fact alone does not bode well for unnecessarily slow boats like the old
Colin Archer heavy-displacement slowcoaches (Westsail 32, for example). The
only thing that antique design has going for it is it's slow primarily
because it was built in such a way as to be heavy and deep draft and
short-sticked which allows it to better survive heavy weather. But, it's
really kind of stupid in that the very slowness that allows it to survive
heavy weather makes it that much more likely that it will be caught in heavy
weather.


Wilbur Hubbard

And Willie the dummy is heard from again.

You really aren't much of a cruiser are you? Worrying about your slow
boat exposing you to a storm? Oh Vey, and such a brave sailor; you
better stay home and read a book..... but of course that is what you
do.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Bruce it seems like it would make it more difficult to get places if
you have to go slowly. If there was a big storm coming in and it'll
arrive in 10 days, you could still go if you know you can make it in
7, but if it's close to the limit on how long it'll take, then you'd
have to sit and wait.

I don't know how tight a schedule you can make, but I think I'd want
more time vs less time.


You really don't know much about sailing, do you.

I thought I was Capt. Wil?


If you 'knew' that there was a big storm coming in ten days it would
have to be something pretty special as a depression which was called a
'storm' would have either worsened or decreased considerably in ten
days and if it were severe enough to be called a storm then I suspect
that any prudent sailor would wait it out.

I'm going by what I see on accuweather.com. They predict out to 15
days. Obviously it's not totally accurate, but it seems like it would
give you a good idea what's coming.

Secondly if one were cruising any distance, say San Diego - Hawaii
one has little chance to out run any weather pattern. Of course if
one's "cruising' is a day trip down the bay it is a different story,
isn't it.

What about something shorter? How about a 6-day trip? Wouldn't you
want to be able to get there and back without worrying so much?

Just as a matter of idle interest a 10 ft. LWL boat has a hull speed
of 4.24 K, 20 ft. = 5.99, 30 = 7.34 and 40=8.47 and given that most
boats will be somewhat longer, on deck, then their water line, the
speeds that you are envisaging to out run your storm are simply not
there.

Assuming a 40 ft. (LOD) boat probably has a LWL of about 30 ft. then
it's probable maximum speed under sail is about 7.34. and 7.34 X 24
hours is abut 170 miles per day under perfect sailing conditions, a
highly unlikely enough condition that, as I've said, makes a good brag
in the pub.
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Ok, but that wasn't what was being talked about. It was a comparison
between two different speeds.

I never said I don't think about out-running any storms.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:17:47 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article , jessicab47
says...

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:28:09 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article , jessicab47
says...

On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:39:40 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article s.com,
says...

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:18:02 -0500, Gogarty
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 16:37:19 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
m...
snip


Willie-boy, I keep telling you and telling you that you exhibit your
lack of knowledge every time you open your mouth. My mate, the
Australian, is 76 years old and sails a 55 ft Ferro boat with a
mechanical anchor windless and gets along quite well single handing
it.

Of course, he IS a sailor, not a wantabe.
Cheers,




Nothing looks quite a silly as an old man with skinny arms off of which
the
skin hangs in folds standing on the bow of an overly large and
cumbersome
yacht pulling on the lever of a creaky old mechanical windlass, slowly
stroking away with one inch of chain coming in at a pull.

If that isn't a good enough argument for downsizing then nothing will
convince you.


Just goes to show you how little some people know about boats. People
who sail 50' ferro boats don't have an expensive lever operated
Simpson Lawrence winch. they have a geared two speed, local made,
fisherman windlass. the one with the exposed gears. See
http://motivationdocksupply.com/winc...nd-winches.php for an
example.

Wow! I will recommend those windlasses to my freind with the Endeavour 42.


Well... an Endeavour 42 IS a bit more upmarket then a ferrocement
boat, usually :-)


Those things are so S-L-O-W! (and ugly)

S-L-O-W and ugly are relative. Are you in such a big hurry that the
difference between 4Kt and 6Kt makea a big difference?

Mark Borgerson


I just did a simple calculation... say you wanted to go 1000 miles,
1000m/6mph = 7 days vs. 1000m/4mph = 10 days. This seems like a big
difference to me, but what do I know.

I guess I agree that ugly is relative.

That's a valid point for open ocean cruising. The faster voyage will
also reduce the supplies you have to carry. Of course, you can take
the speed thing a bit too far and end up with a boat that will be
dangerous in moderately heavy weather---particularly if operated
with a small crew.

Ok, but I don't understand the taking it too far comment. Are you
talking about pushing the limits of speed the boat can take and still
be safe?

I was thinking more of the ultra-light boats with the big rigs.
They're very fast, but can be dangerous in heavy weather with
a small crew.

OIC... well, I guess a really small boat going fast or slow wouldn't
be as safe as a bigger boat in bad weather?


I was think more of coastal cruising, particularly in trawler
yachts. In those boats, I often cruise at about 3 to 5 knots
as opposed to the 8 to 9 that the boat will do at full cruise.
The result is that I spend 5 hours a day between anchorages
instead of 2.5 and use less than half the fuel I would if traveling
the same distance at the faster speed. The scenery looks just
as nice and the boat is a lot quieter. I get twice the time to
react to floating logs and other hazards.

OIC. Even then, if you're trying to make it someplace for dinner, it
would still make sense to be able to go a bit faster. I guess then you
can just go ahead and waste fuel. I thought the discussion was about
sailing not using an engine.

In the Pacific Northwest, even the sailboats use their engines a
lot of the time.

I believe you. I just thought this was about sailing not using an
engine. What about on a slightly longer trip.. wouldn't you want to
use sail power as much as you can, so you don't run out?

snip

On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:58:29 -0700, Jessica B
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 06:05:28 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 17:10:35 -0800, Jessica B
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 05:36:23 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:39:11 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Jessica B" wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:39:40 -0800, Mark Borgerson
wrote:

In article s.com,
says...

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:18:02 -0500, Gogarty
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 16:37:19 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
m...
snip


Willie-boy, I keep telling you and telling you that you exhibit
your
lack of knowledge every time you open your mouth. My mate, the
Australian, is 76 years old and sails a 55 ft Ferro boat with a
mechanical anchor windless and gets along quite well single
handing
it.

Of course, he IS a sailor, not a wantabe.
Cheers,




Nothing looks quite a silly as an old man with skinny arms off of
which
the
skin hangs in folds standing on the bow of an overly large and
cumbersome
yacht pulling on the lever of a creaky old mechanical windlass,
slowly
stroking away with one inch of chain coming in at a pull.

If that isn't a good enough argument for downsizing then nothing
will
convince you.


Just goes to show you how little some people know about boats. People
who sail 50' ferro boats don't have an expensive lever operated
Simpson Lawrence winch. they have a geared two speed, local made,
fisherman windlass. the one with the exposed gears. See
http://motivationdocksupply.com/winc...nd-winches.php for an
example.

Wow! I will recommend those windlasses to my freind with the Endeavour
42.


Well... an Endeavour 42 IS a bit more upmarket then a ferrocement
boat, usually :-)


Those things are so S-L-O-W! (and ugly)

S-L-O-W and ugly are relative. Are you in such a big hurry that the
difference between 4Kt and 6Kt makea a big difference?

Mark Borgerson


I just did a simple calculation... say you wanted to go 1000 miles,
1000m/6mph = 7 days vs. 1000m/4mph = 10 days. This seems like a big
difference to me, but what do I know.


Right you are, Jessica. You sure have a good head on your shoulders (for a
girl, LOL!) Often overlooked is the fact that the longer the voyage takes
the greater the chances of experiencing storm conditions. If you have
already arrived and are safe and secure in port while a slower boat is still
two or three days from arriving that boat could get hit by severe weather in
an exposed environment while the faster boat will not be exposed.

That fact alone does not bode well for unnecessarily slow boats like the old
Colin Archer heavy-displacement slowcoaches (Westsail 32, for example). The
only thing that antique design has going for it is it's slow primarily
because it was built in such a way as to be heavy and deep draft and
short-sticked which allows it to better survive heavy weather. But, it's
really kind of stupid in that the very slowness that allows it to survive
heavy weather makes it that much more likely that it will be caught in heavy
weather.


Wilbur Hubbard

And Willie the dummy is heard from again.

You really aren't much of a cruiser are you? Worrying about your slow
boat exposing you to a storm? Oh Vey, and such a brave sailor; you
better stay home and read a book..... but of course that is what you
do.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Bruce it seems like it would make it more difficult to get places if
you have to go slowly. If there was a big storm coming in and it'll
arrive in 10 days, you could still go if you know you can make it in
7, but if it's close to the limit on how long it'll take, then you'd
have to sit and wait.

I don't know how tight a schedule you can make, but I think I'd want
more time vs less time.


You really don't know much about sailing, do you.

I thought I was Capt. Wil?


If you 'knew' that there was a big storm coming in ten days it would
have to be something pretty special as a depression which was called a
'storm' would have either worsened or decreased considerably in ten
days and if it were severe enough to be called a storm then I suspect
that any prudent sailor would wait it out.

I'm going by what I see on accuweather.com. They predict out to 15
days. Obviously it's not totally accurate, but it seems like it would
give you a good idea what's coming.

Fine, if you are out for the day, but what about a cruise, say from
San Diego to the Hawaiian Islands; or Singapore to India? A proper
voyage, one might say.

Secondly if one were cruising any distance, say San Diego - Hawaii
one has little chance to out run any weather pattern. Of course if
one's "cruising' is a day trip down the bay it is a different story,
isn't it.

What about something shorter? How about a 6-day trip? Wouldn't you
want to be able to get there and back without worrying so much?

A six day trip to where? If it was a week "cruise" that I'm doing as
my annual holiday then I'd want to laze along and take my time. If I
have to lay over for weather then that's just the way it goes. If it
were a six day cruise to get somewhere I really want to get to then it
would depend on what was being forecast. But trying to sail in weather
windows and never seeing a "storm" is pretty much wishful thinking.

Just as a matter of idle interest a 10 ft. LWL boat has a hull speed
of 4.24 K, 20 ft. = 5.99, 30 = 7.34 and 40=8.47 and given that most
boats will be somewhat longer, on deck, then their water line, the
speeds that you are envisaging to out run your storm are simply not
there.

Assuming a 40 ft. (LOD) boat probably has a LWL of about 30 ft. then
it's probable maximum speed under sail is about 7.34. and 7.34 X 24
hours is abut 170 miles per day under perfect sailing conditions, a
highly unlikely enough condition that, as I've said, makes a good brag
in the pub.
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Ok, but that wasn't what was being talked about. It was a comparison
between two different speeds.

I never said I don't think about out-running any storms.

"Two different speeds" on a small sailing yacht may be the difference
between 1 knot forward and two knots backward, depending on the tide.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)