"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
Do you think he could have sold as many books writing a book
about his auxiliary sailboat in which the first thing he talked
about was how he burned 363 gallons in what amounts to a
short hop from port to port?


Yup. It's done all the time these days. People buy - key word - what they
want, sometimes what they need even. While we all enjoy a good fantasy, the
closer-to-home version would be about sailing with some power or motor
boating, or some variation in the middle. The reality is that motor power
is a necessity these days, and if someone is going to really contemplate
boating, then a motor is going to be part of that mix. To deny it is not
only foolish, but downright ignorant. To proclaim "it can be done" is going
to be harmful to the readers, if not deadly.

You can sail without an anchor. After all, the act of sailing relegates the
anchor to dead weight off the bow. Just leave it behind. Real sailors
don't need no stinkin' anchor. That'd be anchoring, not sailing.


No harnessing the elements and living in harmony with the sea but
plenty of bull headed burning of fuel and polluting the air and water?

On a boat made by destroying the environment, if for no other reason than to
get the wood for the hull and mast. Power was used to create that boat, in
it's entirety or in part, for every component on it and in it. And unless
you compost yoru crap, you pollute the water, and unless you eat raw food,
you pollute the air while consumong fossle fuels in the cooking process.



Most certainly not!

I bet I can sell more books and magazines that is chock full of useful
information about how someone can realistically enjoy boating, and all that
goes along with it, than you can sell about a spartan lifestyle of "living
in harmony" that no one really wants to do.

Money talks.



People would be bored halfway to death as there is nothing interesting
about putting an engine in gear, turning on the autopilot and going below
to scratch one's ass for days at a time.


And safe boating is....not that.

"paulthomascpa" wrote in message
...
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
Do you think he could have sold as many books writing a book
about his auxiliary sailboat in which the first thing he talked
about was how he burned 363 gallons in what amounts to a
short hop from port to port?

Yup. It's done all the time these days. People buy - key word - what they
want, sometimes what they need even. While we all enjoy a good fantasy, the
closer-to-home version would be about sailing with some power or motor
boating, or some variation in the middle.

I disagree. People who mostly motor their boats around know it's boring so why
would they want to read about somebody else's boring motoring?

The reality is that motor power is a necessity these days, and if someone is
going to really contemplate boating, then a motor is going to be part of
that mix. To deny it is not only foolish, but downright ignorant. To
proclaim "it can be done" is going to be harmful to the readers, if not
deadly.

A motor is not a necessity theses days. A motor is not needed. A motor is a
convenience in a sailboat. Anybody who really knows how to sail and knows his
sailboat's perforamance can do anything under sail that he can do using a
motor. It is rare that there is no wind at all. On those rare occassions when
there is absolutely no wind one can drift deep water or anchor if necessary in
shallow water. Readers need to understand what auxilliary means. Readers need
to be weaned off the false notion that a motor is a necessity in a sailboat.

You can sail without an anchor. After all, the act of sailing relegates the
anchor to dead weight off the bow. Just leave it behind. Real sailors
don't need no stinkin' anchor. That'd be anchoring, not sailing.

An anchor is used to stop and stay put. A motor is used to move. BIG
difference. Sails are for moving, too so a motor is redundant. An anchor is
not redundant so you have, in effect, created a straw man argument here.


No harnessing the elements and living in harmony with the sea but
plenty of bull headed burning of fuel and polluting the air and water?

On a boat made by destroying the environment, if for no other reason than to
get the wood for the hull and mast.

So, by your reasoning, if some pollution is necessary to produce a boat then
more pollution running a diesel is then justified. LOL. That's not even
logical.


Power was used to create that boat, in it's entirety or in part, for every
component on it and in it. And unless you compost yoru crap, you pollute
the water, and unless you eat raw food, you pollute the air while consumong
fossle fuels in the cooking process.

So, one needs to stop breathing, food prep, eating, defecating? OMG. You dare
compare these NECESSARY things with burning diesel which pollutes both air and
water in huge amounts compared to the crew's bodily necessities? Bottom line
is your argument is a non sequitur.


Most certainly not!

I bet I can sell more books and magazines that is chock full of useful
information about how someone can realistically enjoy boating, and all that
goes along with it, than you can sell about a spartan lifestyle of "living
in harmony" that no one really wants to do.

Go buy a few sailing magazines and mostly all you will see regarding accounts
of voyages and cruising are what I call 'tales of woe'. These are compendiums
of how NOT to sail or cruise as they consist of a compendium of incompetent
ways and means resulting in mishaps and disasters in many cases exacerbated by
trying to use a motor to 'brute force' one's way to a destination instead of
'finessing' one's way under sail eschewing the deadlines and schedules that
motor heads get themselves in trouble with.

A good book describing harmonious voyaging and cruising under sail will
outsell those describing the disharmony of motoring. Motoring is for dullards
and lubbers who value destinations over time enjoyably, reasonably and
responsibly spent getting to a destination. For motor heads the cruise begins
at the arrival. For the sailor the cruise ends at the destination. Time spent
on the motor boat cruise is something to get over with as quickly as possible.
Time spent on a sailboat is something to enjoy and savor in and of itself.
That is perhaps the major difference between sailing and motoring. Sailing is
rejecting schedules, deadlines, brute force, pollution, noise, vibration,
fumes, maddening crowd, expensive marinas and all the other negatives motoring
entails. Sailing is living in harmony with the environment and motoring is
being at odds with and selfishly abusing the environment. Books about living
in harmony with the environment will sell better than books about being at
odds with and ultimately destroying the environment.

Wilbur Hubbard

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:19:18 -0400, "paulthomascpa"
wrote:


"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote
Do you think he could have sold as many books writing a book
about his auxiliary sailboat in which the first thing he talked
about was how he burned 363 gallons in what amounts to a
short hop from port to port?


Yup. It's done all the time these days. People buy - key word - what they
want, sometimes what they need even. While we all enjoy a good fantasy, the
closer-to-home version would be about sailing with some power or motor
boating, or some variation in the middle. The reality is that motor power
is a necessity these days, and if someone is going to really contemplate
boating, then a motor is going to be part of that mix. To deny it is not
only foolish, but downright ignorant. To proclaim "it can be done" is going
to be harmful to the readers, if not deadly.

You can sail without an anchor. After all, the act of sailing relegates the
anchor to dead weight off the bow. Just leave it behind. Real sailors
don't need no stinkin' anchor. That'd be anchoring, not sailing.


No harnessing the elements and living in harmony with the sea but
plenty of bull headed burning of fuel and polluting the air and water?

On a boat made by destroying the environment, if for no other reason than to
get the wood for the hull and mast. Power was used to create that boat, in
it's entirety or in part, for every component on it and in it. And unless
you compost yoru crap, you pollute the water, and unless you eat raw food,
you pollute the air while consumong fossle fuels in the cooking process.



Most certainly not!

I bet I can sell more books and magazines that is chock full of useful
information about how someone can realistically enjoy boating, and all that
goes along with it, than you can sell about a spartan lifestyle of "living
in harmony" that no one really wants to do.


Practical Boat Owner, an English publication is exactly that.
Advertised, I believe, as "Britain's best selling yachting magazine".

--
Cheers,
Bruce

On 15/10/12 21:09, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
Readers need
to be weaned off the false notion that a motor is a necessity in a sailboat.

It's not a necessity, but it can be jolly useful. Leisure sailing is
sailing for fun, and everyone has their own idea of fun.

Ian

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:09:05 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote this crap:

A motor is not a necessity theses days. A motor is not needed. A motor is a
convenience in a sailboat. Anybody who really knows how to sail and knows
his
sailboat's perforamance can do anything under sail that he can do using a
motor.

I've got a 35 foot sailboat. How do you propose getting in and out of
the dock without a motor?


Good GRIEF! What a silly attitude. A 35-foot sailboat can be
pushed out of a slip by hand for gosh sake. If wind and current
is against you, have you ever heard of warping it out? Duh!

Imagine if your lazy attitude was in place 200-250 years ago
in the age of sail where very large vessels plied the seas and
the ports without the hint of an engine on board. Did freight
and passengers not get delivered before the age of steam
boats?

Not to mention picking up a mooring ball.

OMG. I pick up my mooring float all the time with a boat hook
totally under sail. It's a matter of sailing up on it on a beat then
pinching up, then heading directly into the wind letting the
sails luff while the vessel fore reaches up to and comes to
a halt at the float. It's a matter of knowning how one's vessel
handles under sail. It's a matter of knowing how far she fore
reaches prior to coming to a standstill.

I can see me now, pulling into a busy harbor with very little wind on
a holiday weekend. It can be done, but it's a huge inconvenience to
all the other boats going in and out.

You should be able to sail your 35-footer in light winds. If you
can't then you should be practicing. I sail into harbors more
often than not. About the only time I don't sail into harbors is
if there is a narrow fairway into them and a headwind that
makes it difficult or impossible to beat into the harbor.

A real sailor works wind, current and traffic conditions with
aplomb. No fuss, no muss. Actually, my boat handles BETTER
under sail than under motor power. The power is more
balanced instead of being all at the prop which is aft. Can you
heave-to under motor power, for example?

Hell, I can sail into a harbor, heave-to and drift down into the
spot where I wish to anchor. Then I drop an anchor on the upwind
side, then I drift back with about 150 feet of rode cleated off. Just
before it snubs up hard I then I release the backed headsail and
quickly sheet it in on the opposite side. The vessel then sails off
on a beam reach which quickly tightens up into a close reach
and then a beat until the anchor line pulls the head into the wind.

Then I drop another anchor pay out about 100 feet of rode and
cleat it off. Then I drop the sails and drift back between the
two anchors. Then I pull in the rodes as needed to lie evenly
between the anchors, Bahamian style. All without a motor all
without having to worry about lines getting wound up on a prop
or prop shaft.

This is what sailing is all about.

--
Sir Gregory

"Rick Morel" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:48:16 +0100, The Real Doctor
wrote:

On 15/10/12 21:09, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
Readers need
to be weaned off the false notion that a motor is a necessity in a
sailboat.

It's not a necessity, but it can be jolly useful. Leisure sailing is
sailing for fun, and everyone has their own idea of fun.

Ian

Wilbur, I don't know why I'm jumping in here and feeding you, but...

Well, it IS supposed to be a discussion group, after all . . .


Actually, with the exception of very small sailboats, an engine is a
necessity in this day and age. There are many places now where it's
ilegal to proceed under sail, including going through bridges. You may
say those places are to be avoided, but in the real world that's
simply impossible or at least nearly so.

Some folks would call anything under about 30 feet a 'small sailboat' so small
is in the eye of the beholder. Any law that says it's illegal to go through a
bridge (I assume you mean a bridge that opens) under sail power is an
unconstitutional law and needs to be challenged.

There is also the safety factor to consider. I've run into situations
in my years of cruising where having an engine was actually a matter
of life or death, or at least losing the vessel and serious injury.

Transversely there are also a great many instances where the very reason folks
get into trouble in the first place is their over reliance on their engine.
Engines create a dependency upon their use because, in general, they are quite
reliable. So woe be to the individual who takes his engine for granted and
believes it will never fail him. Sails just don't break down unexpectedly and
often at the worst of times like engines do.

I have gone for months without cranking up the engine, except for
monthly runs only to "exercise" it. I used the engine when necessary,
never to make time or just because I could.

Atta boy for not being overly reliant on an engine. Always keep the auxiliary
in auxiliary.


Wilbur Hubbard

Just a small interjection here...

I once saw an on-line video of an instructor sailing a dinghy (that would be a small racing sailboat) BACKWARDS through a maze (pilings in a row, zig-zagging between them)...

You can do amazing things if you're one with your ship...

L8R

Skip

On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 07:15:48 -0500, Rick Morel
wrote this crap:

Disagree that sails just don't break down unexpectedly. Add in all the
rigging and there are failures. Regular inspection and maintenance
makes a big difference, but sail/rigging failures do happen. Perhaps
no more or no less than a maintained diesel?

Agreed. I've my sails rip much more often then having the engine
fail.

Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 07:15:48 -0500, Rick Morel
wrote this crap:

Disagree that sails just don't break down unexpectedly. Add in all the
rigging and there are failures. Regular inspection and maintenance
makes a big difference, but sail/rigging failures do happen. Perhaps
no more or no less than a maintained diesel?

Agreed. I've my sails rip much more often then having the engine
fail.


You just admitted:

1) you don't bother looking at, much less maintaining, your sails,

2) you are either too lazy or too ignorant to bend on or reef so
as to have the correct sail for the wind and sea conditions,

3) as sails don't last forever they must be replaced prior to
being in such a sad state that they expire on the job, you
are ignoring reality and acting irresponsibly.

I hope this helps.


Wilbur Hubbard

On 17/10/12 20:49, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
Any law that says it's illegal to go through a
bridge (I assume you mean a bridge that opens) under sail power is an
unconstitutional law and needs to be challenged.

Really? Which clause of whose constitution, precisely?

Ian