|
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
Well, we left you in a state of suspense over the potentially severe weather, torrential rains, and other unknowns. The "break" part here is still the surgeries for broken bones entailing our return to the US, as nothing broke aboard Flying Pig in these few days. As I write this, our schedule is still flexible, but we've not gotten anywhere near the Gulf Stream, one of the potential terrors after our last. However, both the wind and rain turned out to be much less than originally forecast, due to the disintegration of the low expected to provide all the excitement. The wind was moderate, and so was the rain. However, there were a few heavy periods over the 6 hours or so (compared to the 24 forecasted hours) it came down. I got out the deck brush to do final touchups; Lydia had already cleaned before, particularly in the anchor chain area up front; it stains due to the chain's galvanizing starting to go on the section we use all the time. Likely sometime soon, we'll end-for-end it to give the currently untouched end a chance at some work. In the Bahamas, we are usually anchored in 8-15' of water. However, our bow is 5' over the water, so when we calculate how much chain to put out, we have to go from there. As our comfort level in general is at 7-1 scope (7 times the distance from the bottom to the bow roller), it means that the 100-150' section gets all the work. We replaced this 300' chain in our refit, so when we turn it around, that end will be new. But I digress... With a clean deck in the pouring rain, I waited 15 minutes for a thorough rinse, and opened the aft tank fill and put out our chamois-type cloth material bunched to make a dam which guided the water into the tank. We originally thought that the density and duration of the rain probably meant that we didn't get very much, but removing the cap when it was over showed that our tank was only an inch or so from the top. Once again, Mother Nature has blessed us with her abundance. We're still working on the forward tank, but there is no possibility that we'll run out of water before reaching Vero Beach. So, fully laden, the next day I said my goodbyes to the Cruisers' Net, where I'd been the anchor for the last many days, and headed northward in the Sea of Abaco. As mentioned, I try to meet the folks who advertised on that segment of the net, so we stopped, first, in Settlement Harbour near the top of Great Abaco. We wanted to visit Nippers, a world-famous location atop the hill down the center of the Cay, drop in on a prior advertiser, Grabbers, and say hi to Troy at Dive Guana, my weatherman on the weekends, and a regular advertiser. Anchoring just outside the marina in Settlement Harbour, the next morning Troy pulled up to our boat before the net started (I was a listener by that time) and told us of a large green turtle just off our bow; it had been killed, apparently the prior night, either by being hit by a power boat, or, perhaps, as the rumor went, bitten by what would have been a very large shark, as the shell was easily 2' across, and had totally split from flipper to flipper. It was a beautiful animal. We gave Troy a boat card, thanked him for his service to the Cruisers' Net, and finished our coffee before we went in to shore. Nippers was the usual treat. We walked the beach for a couple of miles, then had one of their signature drinks, the "Frozen Nippers"- a rum punch which is kept chilled to the level of slush - as we looked out over the ocean and the two pools below the elevated gazebo where we were served. The owner has been in poor condition for the last few weeks, and we asked after him and gave the staff our boat cards. Down the hill, we walked over to Grabbers, a hostelry and open bar/restaurant, next to their pool. The manager wasn't in, but we had an extensive discussion with the bartender/waitress, and later, with another bartender/waiter. They obviously hire good help there; the woman commuted on the ferry from Marsh Harbour on the weekends, and worked a full time job during the week. Their burgers were massive, and handmade from very lean beef, to the degree that they somewhat collapsed/broke out the sides of the already oversized bun. The fries overflowed the ample plate, so by the time we'd left, after THEIR version of a frozen rum drink (the Frozen Grabber), we were stuffed. Back to the boat, where the ferry came immediately across our bow every couple of hours, we had another restful night at anchor. We've laughed at the occasional times where there has been no wind to kick up the water, or a passing boat to lift us, that we're very much happier in a bed that moves. Coming up to Settlement Harbour was a windless ride, as was our departure out through the Whale Cay Cut, source of much angst among cruisers, as it can be very nasty in the right conditions. However, it was merely a roll from the swells off the Atlantic, as we motored northwest. We've motored more in the last few weeks than we normally do in months, as usually we wait for the right wind before moving. Our apparent wind in this trip was 0 knots at 120° on our port side; our forward motion meant that there was probably about a 5 knot breeze had we been trying to sail. However, the schedule imposes, as we have to be in Vero Beach by the 9th, to move Lydia's mother from the skilled nursing facility, where she's been recovering from her shoulder and wrist surgeries, back to her independent-living cottage, so we motored on. We bypassed Green Turtle Cay for the island north of it, and actually bypassed Manjack Cay, as well, parking behind Fiddle Cay, the island between it and Powell Cay, for a brief visit ashore to do the beach thing. We wandered around in the grassy bottom near shore, finding abundant sea biscuits, a filter-feeder which, when it dies, leaves a behind beautiful shell, about the size of a very large puffy sandwich roll. We also found an immature conch shell which had its resident die a natural death, leaving behind a work of art. As we were heading back to the boat in Flying Piglet (the dinghy), we saw what we thought was a nurse shark. As we altered course to get a closer look, the shark swam on in a leisurely fashion, and we eventually pulled up right beside him as he swam a couple of feet down. Imagine our surprise to see that this was actually a tiger shark, with his vertical stripes. We had the pleasure of accompanying him for several minutes before he reached the grassy dropoff, where he descended out of sight. Back at the boat, we put the sea biscuits in heavily chlorinated water to soak. Our previous experience showed that this got rid of all the accumulated growth, leaving behind a pristine, odorless treasure. We'd clean them up the next day, rinsing them in fresh water, and put them out to dry in the brilliant sun. The day was yet young, so, as we had to skirt the sand bars, anyway, getting close to Cooperstown across the bay, we decided to stop briefly, throwing the hook very close to the municipal dock at 11:15. Inshore we went, to check out the various differences we'd seen in our chart book compared to the last time we were here in October 2009. You meet the nicest people when you are a cruiser, and take the time to engage the locals. The first was a grandmother with two very small kids, sitting on a porch. We waved, and then got to talking, and walked across the lawn to chat. The story shortened was that soon we were enveloped in more locals, including two young men who were certain that they were among the little crowd of boys whose bikes I fixed on the last time through. What a small world! Other family members appeared, and other discussions revealed that Sophia was the owner of the take-away shop on the property, which is another story altogether; shortly: Their family owns the entire block - like a plot - on which all of their homes, stretching between the two main roads in town, and on 4-5 lots frontage on the main roads, are sited. Anyway, we got to talking about fishing, and she offered to make us a conch salad to take back to the boat... So, we left to do our tour while she did the preparation. This area was completely wiped out, other than the two churches on both ends of town, during hurricane Floyd, in 1999. We learned from Everett Bootle that it was just now that the vegetation was recovering from the salt water which reached far inland. We also learned that he is a 7-th generation Bootle; his umpty-grandfather was the first settler there, in 1847, and is who the highway which runs the length of Great Abaco is named after - the S.C. Bootle Highway! A trip around town reveals that there are many more references to him, including the local school. We also visited the 1-year new library which has both books and a computer lab, staffed by a knowledgeable lady in a municipal uniform. This is a major community in Great Abaco, having 500 children in the school system, which graduates high school. Most communities have to send their high-schoolers away, as there aren't enough of them to warrant full time teachers. We made our way back, and had the kids there promise to send us an email so we could send them the pictures of the bike repair party from our previous time, using our boat card's addresses. Sophia came out with a carry-out foam container, with a plastic spoon in it. I asked her how much I owed her, and she said that it was a gift, in thanks for our visit. Opening it, I saw that it was absolutely crammed with conch, along with all the usual accompaniments. Lunch was GREAT! On that high note, I'll leave you, again. What happens when we again cross the bay? Until next time, you'll have to Stay Tuned! L8R Skip Morgan 461 #2 SV Flying Pig KI4MPC See our galleries at www.justpickone.org/skip/gallery ! Follow us at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheFlyingPigLog and/or http://groups.google.com/group/flyingpiglog When a man comes to like a sea life, he is not fit to live on land. - Dr. Samuel Johnson |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:01:46 -0400, "Flying Pig"
wrote: Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015 Well, we left you in a state of suspense over the potentially severe weather, torrential rains, and other unknowns. The "break" part here is still the surgeries for broken bones entailing our return to the US, as nothing broke aboard Flying Pig in these few days. As I write this, our schedule is still flexible, but we've not gotten anywhere near the Gulf Stream, one of the potential terrors after our last. However, both the wind and rain turned out to be much less than originally forecast, due to the disintegration of the low expected to provide all the excitement. The wind was moderate, and so was the rain. However, there were a few heavy periods over the 6 hours or so (compared to the 24 forecasted hours) it came down. I got out the deck brush to do final touchups; Lydia had already cleaned before, particularly in the anchor chain area up front; it stains due to the chain's galvanizing starting to go on the section we use all the time. Likely sometime soon, we'll end-for-end it to give the currently untouched end a chance at some work. In the Bahamas, we are usually anchored in 8-15' of water. However, our bow is 5' over the water, so when we calculate how much chain to put out, we have to go from there. As our comfort level in general is at 7-1 scope (7 times the distance from the bottom to the bow roller), it means that the 100-150' section gets all the work. We replaced this 300' chain in our refit, so when we turn it around, that end will be new. But I digress... End for ending an anchor chain is common practice and in many countries/places a chain can be re-galvanized rather than replacing if not worn excessively. -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
Bruce in Bangkok wrote in message
... End for ending an anchor chain is common practice and in many countries/places a chain can be re-galvanized rather than replacing if not worn excessively. -- Cheers, Bruce We looked at that the last time in the yard, and the cost of getting it to someplace which could do it - and the application, of course, was close to new chain. As there are issues about coverage, and sticking together, perhaps, at any of the places I discovered relative to Vero Beach FL, I elected to go with new chain, and got $200 for the best 140' of the old, mitigating the cost of new. I wish it weren't so, but perhaps by the time we get to shore again, things will have changed. L8R Skip Morgan 461 #2 SV Flying Pig KI4MPC See our galleries at www.justpickone.org/skip/gallery ! Follow us at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheFlyingPigLog and/or http://groups.google.com/group/flyingpiglog When a man comes to like a sea life, he is not fit to live on land. - Dr. Samuel Johnson |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:38:03 -0400, "Flying Pig" wrote:
Bruce in Bangkok wrote in message .. . End for ending an anchor chain is common practice and in many countries/places a chain can be re-galvanized rather than replacing if not worn excessively. Nylon rode is superior in every way. Lose the chain. -- Sir Gregory |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:55:01 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:38:03 -0400, "Flying Pig" wrote: Bruce in Bangkok wrote in message . .. End for ending an anchor chain is common practice and in many countries/places a chain can be re-galvanized rather than replacing if not worn excessively. Nylon rode is superior in every way. Lose the chain. === Maybe for a small boat anchored in a smooth bottom and calm conditions. Elsewhere, not so much. Chain is nearly universal these days on 40+ boats doing serious cruising in varied conditions. There are lots of good reason for that: Chafe resistance. UV resistance. Resistance to cyclical loading failure. Chain catenary reduces swing radius in calm conditions. Resistant to accidental cutting by passing props. Long term durability. |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:55:01 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:38:03 -0400, "Flying Pig" wrote: Bruce in Bangkok wrote in message . .. End for ending an anchor chain is common practice and in many countries/places a chain can be re-galvanized rather than replacing if not worn excessively. Nylon rode is superior in every way. Lose the chain. And thus speaks a man who is in total ignorance of what he says. You might want to read up on just how an anchoring system functions. For example, how much does the "catenary effect", for want of a better word, effect anchoring system effectiveness. Or perhaps the effect of underwater conditions on anchoring components, for ocean floor consisting of Mud, Grass or Seaweed, rocks or coral growth. And before you fly off on a tangent it might be well to state that chain anchor rode has been considered a safety factor since at least the 1700's and that considerable investigation has gone into determining its effectiveness. For example I find research such as: 2012 - Engineering Thesis from MIT entitled "Simulation of the catenary effect under wind disturbances in anchoring of small boats". Have you read that? Or, From an Australian maritime regulation, "Where a rope and chain anchor line is used, it is recommended that the length of chain be at least equivalent to the length of the vessel." Or, From the U.K.: "The Merchant Shipping (Cargo Ship Construction) Regulations 1997 and The Merchant Shipping (Passenger Ship Construction) Regulations 1998 provide that: (1) every ship must be provided with anchor handling equipment together with such anchors and chain cables as are sufficient in number, weight and strength having regard to the size of the ship; and (2) this equipment must be tested and certified by the Certifying Authority." And your authority is what? Your imagination? Or perhaps "investigation" from a company such as Rocna, which is so obvious in their frantic attempt to justify their product as to be almost a joke? Rather than the false address of "greghall@yacht_master" one suspects that it be far more accurate descriptive to write, "biggestFool@the_dummy_convention". -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On 8/17/2015 11:55 AM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:38:03 -0400, "Flying Pig" wrote: Nylon rode is superior in every way. Lose the chain. The catenary of the chain rode acts the same as the shock cushioning of the nylon but in rocky or worse, coral / oyster areas, the chain is abrasion resistant where the nylon isn't. If you aren't happy relying on the catenary, then get a snubber. IMO, Skippy's 7:1 all chain rode is over the top but if he has the room, harms nothing. -paul --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On 8/17/2015 10:38 AM, Flying Pig wrote:
We looked at that the last time in the yard, and the cost of getting it to someplace which could do it - and the application, of course, was close to new chain. As there are issues about coverage, and sticking together, perhaps, at any of the places I discovered relative to Vero Beach FL, I elected to go with new chain, and got $200 for the best 140' of the old, mitigating the cost of new. I wish it weren't so, but perhaps by the time we get to shore again, things will have changed. Where did you find a taker for your old chain - Sailorman at Lauderdale? --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
"Paul Cassel" wrote in message ...
On 8/17/2015 10:38 AM, Flying Pig wrote: We looked at that the last time in the yard, and the cost of getting it to someplace which could do it - and the application, of course, was close to new chain. As there are issues about coverage, and sticking together, perhaps, at any of the places I discovered relative to Vero Beach FL, I elected to go with new chain, and got $200 for the best 140' of the old, mitigating the cost of new. I wish it weren't so, but perhaps by the time we get to shore again, things will have changed. Where did you find a taker for your old chain - Sailorman at Lauderdale? No, forum and craigslist ads; someone came up to me in the boatyard the day before he was going to leave - he dragged the chain over to his dock (we were close to the docks); I expect it was a boating forum. Sailorman is too far for 150+ pounds of shipping to make worthwhile, even if they offered enough to warrant going through the process. L8R Skip Morgan 461 #2 SV Flying Pig KI4MPC See our galleries at www.justpickone.org/skip/gallery ! Follow us at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheFlyingPigLog and/or http://groups.google.com/group/flyingpiglog When a man comes to like a sea life, he is not fit to live on land. - Dr. Samuel Johnson |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 07:18:01 -0600, Paul Cassel
wrote: On 8/17/2015 11:55 AM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:38:03 -0400, "Flying Pig" wrote: Nylon rode is superior in every way. Lose the chain. The catenary of the chain rode acts the same as the shock cushioning of the nylon but in rocky or worse, coral / oyster areas, the chain is abrasion resistant where the nylon isn't. If you aren't happy relying on the catenary, then get a snubber. More than shock absorbing the catenary actually decreases the angle above horizontal that force is applied to the anchor stock and thus effectively increasing the holding power of the anchor. IMO, Skippy's 7:1 all chain rode is over the top but if he has the room, harms nothing. -paul --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
|
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 09:18:33 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:36:14 +0700, wrote: On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 07:18:01 -0600, Paul Cassel wrote: On 8/17/2015 11:55 AM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:38:03 -0400, "Flying Pig" wrote: Nylon rode is superior in every way. Lose the chain. The catenary of the chain rode acts the same as the shock cushioning of the nylon but in rocky or worse, coral / oyster areas, the chain is abrasion resistant where the nylon isn't. If you aren't happy relying on the catenary, then get a snubber. More than shock absorbing the catenary actually decreases the angle above horizontal that force is applied to the anchor stock and thus effectively increasing the holding power of the anchor. When it comes to basic concepts of physics you folks are demonstrably woefully ignorant. Your claim of a more *horizontal* pull on the anchor stock is unsubstantiated and erroneous. Force on the stock is comprised of vectors and not a single, one-way, one-time force as you seem to be suggesting. What tends to break out an anchor is more due to shock forces rather than some variation in vertical forces. Those shock forces are greater when using chain as chain does not have the ability to stretch and mitigate those shock forces. The cantenary argument is bogus as there will come a time when there is enough wind and wave action to pull the cantenary into straight line forces which forces are unmitigated. Nylon rode transmits far less force to the anchor as the stretch itself absorbs those forces. Get a clue already, people. My response would be "prove it!" You see, there innumerable anchor tests, by reputable testing bodies, that prove, yet again, that you simply do not know what you are talking about. Example: From BoatUS "Chain, used alone or in combination with nylon line, offers great benefits: It decreases the angle of pull on the anchor allowing it to set and hold more effectively, it's unaffected by chafe from rocks or sharp surfaces on the bottom, it helps to keep the boat from sailing about in winds, its weight forms a curve that, because of the catenary effect, helps to absorb shock loads in heavy weather, and, in the case of all-chain rode, it may require less scope for the same holding power as rope" Example: From Boating "Regardless of boat style, all anchoring systems should have a boat length of stainless-steel or galvanized chain separating the rope and the anchor. The chain prevents chafing and abrasion. Its weight also keeps the anchor shank horizontal, allowing the flukes to better bite the bottom." Example: From Peter Smith, "Catenary & Scope In Anchor Rode: Anchor Systems For Small Boats" "This catenary has the convenient effect of lowering the effective angle of pull on the anchor, which is the positive result we are striving for. Clearly, the heavier the rode, the better this effect, and the greater the pull will need to be to negate it (i.e. to pull the rode straight). Hence, the lore is to use heavy chain behind the anchor. This way of doing things has been reinforced over thousands of years, mostly with relatively large vessels, and has built a strong tradition. " Example: U.S. Navy "Washington DC Technical Note No. CEL N-1581 July 1980) it was found that the chain rode could produce up to two-thirds of the total holding power of the Anchor System. " Your problem seems to be that you either glory in your ability to provide ridicules information as fact, or that you somehow feel that if you say it, than it simply must be the truth. Either assertion is false. It might be noted that all of the above data is available free, if you just look. You don't have to be a dumb ass. -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 21:22:43 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:05:21 +0700, wrote: On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 09:18:33 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." wrote: On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:36:14 +0700, wrote: On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 07:18:01 -0600, Paul Cassel wrote: On 8/17/2015 11:55 AM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote: On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:38:03 -0400, "Flying Pig" wrote: Nylon rode is superior in every way. Lose the chain. The catenary of the chain rode acts the same as the shock cushioning of the nylon but in rocky or worse, coral / oyster areas, the chain is abrasion resistant where the nylon isn't. If you aren't happy relying on the catenary, then get a snubber. More than shock absorbing the catenary actually decreases the angle above horizontal that force is applied to the anchor stock and thus effectively increasing the holding power of the anchor. When it comes to basic concepts of physics you folks are demonstrably woefully ignorant. Your claim of a more *horizontal* pull on the anchor stock is unsubstantiated and erroneous. Force on the stock is comprised of vectors and not a single, one-way, one-time force as you seem to be suggesting. What tends to break out an anchor is more due to shock forces rather than some variation in vertical forces. Those shock forces are greater when using chain as chain does not have the ability to stretch and mitigate those shock forces. The cantenary argument is bogus as there will come a time when there is enough wind and wave action to pull the cantenary into straight line forces which forces are unmitigated. Nylon rode transmits far less force to the anchor as the stretch itself absorbs those forces. Get a clue already, people. My response would be "prove it!" You see, there innumerable anchor tests, by reputable testing bodies, that prove, yet again, that you simply do not know what you are talking about. And each and every one of them contains a fallacy or two . . . Example: From BoatUS "Chain, used alone or in combination with nylon line, offers great benefits: It decreases the angle of pull on the anchor allowing it to set and hold more effectively, it's unaffected by chafe from rocks or sharp surfaces on the bottom, it helps to keep the boat from sailing about in winds, its weight forms a curve that, because of the catenary effect, helps to absorb shock loads in heavy weather, and, in the case of all-chain rode, it may require less scope for the same holding power as rope" No mention of the not so great liabilities such as excessive weight, rust, damage to the sea bottom and the life that dwells there. As for a boat sailing about in a wind, this will not be the case if one uses two anchors on nylon rodes combined with a short length of SS chain (six feet is plenty). The weight causing a curve or cantenary is not a benefit. It is simply a function of that excess weight mentioned prior. Over reliance on all chain and one anchor is stupid as two anchors are always more secure than one. Example: From Boating "Regardless of boat style, all anchoring systems should have a boat length of stainless-steel or galvanized chain separating the rope and the anchor. The chain prevents chafing and abrasion. Its weight also keeps the anchor shank horizontal, allowing the flukes to better bite the bottom." A boat length is overkill. Six to eight feet is plenty enough weight and it keeps the scraping and damage to bottom and bottom life to a minimum. Flukes? Flukes? OMG. What about modern patent anchors that have no flues. Can you day dated information? Example: From Peter Smith, "Catenary & Scope In Anchor Rode: Anchor Systems For Small Boats" "This catenary has the convenient effect of lowering the effective angle of pull on the anchor, which is the positive result we are striving for. Clearly, the heavier the rode, the better this effect, and the greater the pull will need to be to negate it (i.e. to pull the rode straight). Hence, the lore is to use heavy chain behind the anchor. This way of doing things has been reinforced over thousands of years, mostly with relatively large vessels, and has built a strong tradition. " Thousands of years ago they used rocks. Should be go back to using rocks? If the heavier the rode the better, they why not use four-inch chain? Example: U.S. Navy "Washington DC Technical Note No. CEL N-1581 July 1980) it was found that the chain rode could produce up to two-thirds of the total holding power of the Anchor System. " There is no such thing as a patent anchor in the Navy. They use old fashioned, tons of weight anchors. The only way to weigh them is using chain as they are so heavy it would soon break nylon rodes.. The holding power of patent anchors comes from their design and most of them are relatively light weight. Some are even made of aluminum. Their holding power comes from penetration and not from a heavy slug of weight lying on the bottom. Your problem seems to be that you either glory in your ability to provide ridicules information as fact, or that you somehow feel that if you say it, than it simply must be the truth. Either assertion is false. It might be noted that all of the above data is available free, if you just look. You don't have to be a dumb ass. Your problem is you view a small recreational yacht as a giant ship. You and many others seem to think if a little is good, more is better and too much is just right. So you pile on the systems to cope with the too much. You pile on heavy windlasses, heavy battery banks heavy motors and generators, heavy fuel tanks, ad nausea. Ah yes, the voice of experience one supposes. Given that you mention no authority for your arguments one can only assume that your utterances are based on your many years of experience. Perhaps you might entertain us with a history of your sailing experiences which provided you with all this knowledge? Perhaps a Whitbread or two? The transatlantic? Maybe an America's Cup? Or even a Volvo? I have a friend that participated in two of those. But certainly if not the racing world it must have been the cruising mode, say an Atlantic crossing or two, maybe even a circumnavigations; both capes one would expect. No reason to be modest. Tell us, let us in on your vast breadth of sailing experience. -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
|
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:11:38 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 18:25:47 +0700, wrote: trim Ah yes, the voice of experience one supposes. Given that you mention no authority for your arguments one can only assume that your utterances are based on your many years of experience. Perhaps you might entertain us with a history of your sailing experiences which provided you with all this knowledge? Perhaps a Whitbread or two? The transatlantic? Maybe an America's Cup? Or even a Volvo? I have a friend that participated in two of those. But certainly if not the racing world it must have been the cruising mode, say an Atlantic crossing or two, maybe even a circumnavigations; both capes one would expect. No reason to be modest. Tell us, let us in on your vast breadth of sailing experience. Um, in case you never noticed, anchoring is rarely needed when crossing oceans. It's only around the edges where anchors become necessary. The more time one spends crossing oceans, the less one has any use for anchors. It's coastal cruisers like myself who are the experts at anchoring. We do those edges. We do it day in and day out and we don't get a good night's sleep unless we learn how to do it right. Like I said, two anchors suitable for the conditions on the bottom. Lay them out Bahamas-style which means a 90 to 120 degree angle described by the two nylon rodes off the bow. The only chain that is needed is a short length of stainless steel of six to eight feet shackled to the anchor stock. HTH I see... very limited experience, note that the only voyage described by the writer is his valiant cruse down the bay and return the next morning to escape the sound of music, results in a very great knowledge. It is astonishing how such limited experience can lead to so much experience. One can only assume the substitution of a fevered imagination for actual experience. It might be interesting to consider that in more than ten years of active cruising among a group of sailors who, to a great extent, sailed at least 500 miles, and more frequently further, just to get here, I have never, let me repeat that NEVER, seen anyone use the so called "Bahamas-style" of two anchors. Never! And, I might add, that in 20 years of observing the Bugis sailors, perhaps the last group to have used commercial sailing ships, I never saw them using a two anchor mooring. -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
|
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:11:38 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: It's coastal cruisers like myself who are the experts at anchoring. We do those edges. We do it day in and day out and we don't get a good night's sleep unless we learn how to do it right. === I know experts and you are not among their midst. |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
|
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:51:23 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 07:06:09 +0700, wrote: It might be interesting to consider that in more than ten years of active cruising among a group of sailors who, to a great extent, sailed at least 500 miles, and more frequently further, just to get here, I have never, let me repeat that NEVER, seen anyone use the so called "Bahamas-style" of two anchors. Never! And, I might add, that in 20 years of observing the Bugis sailors, perhaps the last group to have used commercial sailing ships, I never saw them using a two anchor mooring. === There's an old saying that two anchors are no substitute for a single good one. There are lots of old sayings that are little more than another anachronism. The fact is if you don't want your boat tacking around at anchor the best way to keep it from doing so is to cause it to lie to two anchors. One anchor in simply inadequate as the vessel will continue to tack around even on a chain rode. Personally, I'd rather lie with the bow directly to the wind. There are several reasons: 1) halyards don't slap during the extremes of the swing, 2) windscoops work perfectly and don't flutter or collapse, 3) bow stays pointed directly into wind-generated waves and ventilation through the house is facilitated and available each and every minute. 4) chaffing is minimized 5) directional antennas stay directed 6) scrunching, grunching, jerking and snatching are non existent and that most ridiculous and unseamanlike of all devices - the anchor *snubber* - is eliminated. So, you wannabes just go ahead and continue to use your all-chain rodes as you will be the only ones suffering the adverse consequences (ignorance penalty). -- Sir Gregory |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:49:01 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:11:38 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." wrote: It's coastal cruisers like myself who are the experts at anchoring. We do those edges. We do it day in and day out and we don't get a good night's sleep unless we learn how to do it right. === I know experts and you are not among their midst. There are two kinds of people - those who teach or pretend to teach and those who DO. I'm afraid you have been brainwashed into believing those who teach are the experts when nothing could be further from the truth. -- Sir Gregory |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:47:44 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 18:25:47 +0700, wrote: But certainly if not the racing world it must have been the cruising mode, say an Atlantic crossing or two, maybe even a circumnavigations; both capes one would expect. No reason to be modest. Tell us, let us in on your vast breadth of sailing experience. === Even more relevant would be a couple of winters in the Caribbean Islands where serious cruisers from all over the world hang out. I've done it twice and can't recall seeing a single boat anchored on anything but chain. The charter boats are all picking up moorings these days, and under every mooring is nothing but chain. They were losing too many boats previously. Serious cruisers? Gimme a BREAK! Call them what they are *faddish* cruisers. IOW, dumbasses whose boats are too large or encumbered to take off the beaten path. Idiots who think mooring fields and docks are the cat's meows. Fools who crave the company of like fools. Morons who anchor in crowded, smelly, noisy, wake-filled harbors where the only thing poorer than the holding is the company. All jammed together feeling so proud of themselves and actually believing they are rugged individuals. How ****ing droll! -- Sir Gregory |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 14:13:07 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:47:44 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 18:25:47 +0700, wrote: But certainly if not the racing world it must have been the cruising mode, say an Atlantic crossing or two, maybe even a circumnavigations; both capes one would expect. No reason to be modest. Tell us, let us in on your vast breadth of sailing experience. === Even more relevant would be a couple of winters in the Caribbean Islands where serious cruisers from all over the world hang out. I've done it twice and can't recall seeing a single boat anchored on anything but chain. The charter boats are all picking up moorings these days, and under every mooring is nothing but chain. They were losing too many boats previously. Serious cruisers? Gimme a BREAK! Call them what they are *faddish* cruisers. IOW, dumbasses whose boats are too large or encumbered to take off the beaten path. Idiots who think mooring fields and docks are the cat's meows. Fools who crave the company of like fools. Morons who anchor in crowded, smelly, noisy, wake-filled harbors where the only thing poorer than the holding is the company. All jammed together feeling so proud of themselves and actually believing they are rugged individuals. How ****ing droll! === You're a legend in your own mind. FYI, the best use of two anchors is to keep the bow into the swell. Deep in the Caribbean there are very few truly protected anchorages and dealing with the ever present swells without rolling too much is one of the biggest challenges. The other fairly common use of two anchors is in a "med moor" situation which is common in European ports. With a med moor you are docked stern to the seawall/dock between other boats, while hanging from either one or two bow anchors (sometimes mooring balls). The use of a second anchor helps to keep you centered up and also offers a bit of extra security if the wind comes up. |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 14:06:05 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:51:23 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 07:06:09 +0700, wrote: It might be interesting to consider that in more than ten years of active cruising among a group of sailors who, to a great extent, sailed at least 500 miles, and more frequently further, just to get here, I have never, let me repeat that NEVER, seen anyone use the so called "Bahamas-style" of two anchors. Never! And, I might add, that in 20 years of observing the Bugis sailors, perhaps the last group to have used commercial sailing ships, I never saw them using a two anchor mooring. === There's an old saying that two anchors are no substitute for a single good one. There are lots of old sayings that are little more than another anachronism. The fact is if you don't want your boat tacking around at anchor the best way to keep it from doing so is to cause it to lie to two anchors. One anchor in simply inadequate as the vessel will continue to tack around even on a chain rode. Personally, I'd rather lie with the bow directly to the wind. There are several reasons: 1) halyards don't slap during the extremes of the swing, 2) windscoops work perfectly and don't flutter or collapse, 3) bow stays pointed directly into wind-generated waves and ventilation through the house is facilitated and available each and every minute. 4) chaffing is minimized 5) directional antennas stay directed 6) scrunching, grunching, jerking and snatching are non existent and that most ridiculous and unseamanlike of all devices - the anchor *snubber* - is eliminated. So, you wannabes just go ahead and continue to use your all-chain rodes as you will be the only ones suffering the adverse consequences (ignorance penalty). And however would you know? Has there been a recent article in one of the sailing magazines? ( I understand that in the U.S. you can get magazines free after a certain date. I heard that once the next edition arrives that the news vender will rip the front page off and give them to folks. Is that true?) -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 14:07:25 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:49:01 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:11:38 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." wrote: It's coastal cruisers like myself who are the experts at anchoring. We do those edges. We do it day in and day out and we don't get a good night's sleep unless we learn how to do it right. === I know experts and you are not among their midst. There are two kinds of people - those who teach or pretend to teach and those who DO. I'm afraid you have been brainwashed into believing those who teach are the experts when nothing could be further from the truth. Ah yes. But what about those who DO not DO and still pretend to be teachers? -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 14:13:07 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:47:44 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 18:25:47 +0700, wrote: But certainly if not the racing world it must have been the cruising mode, say an Atlantic crossing or two, maybe even a circumnavigations; both capes one would expect. No reason to be modest. Tell us, let us in on your vast breadth of sailing experience. === Even more relevant would be a couple of winters in the Caribbean Islands where serious cruisers from all over the world hang out. I've done it twice and can't recall seeing a single boat anchored on anything but chain. The charter boats are all picking up moorings these days, and under every mooring is nothing but chain. They were losing too many boats previously. Serious cruisers? Gimme a BREAK! Call them what they are *faddish* cruisers. IOW, dumbasses whose boats are too large or encumbered to take off the beaten path. Idiots who think mooring fields and docks are the cat's meows. Fools who crave the company of like fools. Morons who anchor in crowded, smelly, noisy, wake-filled harbors where the only thing poorer than the holding is the company. All jammed together feeling so proud of themselves and actually believing they are rugged individuals. How ****ing droll! And even more droll is the dodo that doesn't do it attempting to tell those that do do it how to do it. -- Cheers, Bruce |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On 8/22/2015 9:55 PM, wrote:
( I understand that in the U.S. you can get magazines free after a certain date. I heard that once the next edition arrives that the news vender will rip the front page off and give them to folks. Is that true?) -- Yes and no. The vendor is supposed to rip the cover off & return just that to get credit w/o shipping the entire book / magazine back to the publisher. But he's supposed to destroy the rest. To give it away would violate his agreement with the publisher / distributor. It's a form of theft. -paul --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Shake and Break Part 11 - June 2, 2015
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 08:48:03 -0600, Paul Cassel
wrote: On 8/22/2015 9:55 PM, wrote: ( I understand that in the U.S. you can get magazines free after a certain date. I heard that once the next edition arrives that the news vender will rip the front page off and give them to folks. Is that true?) -- Yes and no. The vendor is supposed to rip the cover off & return just that to get credit w/o shipping the entire book / magazine back to the publisher. But he's supposed to destroy the rest. To give it away would violate his agreement with the publisher / distributor. It's a form of theft. -paul Well then, if they won't give the old ones away, I guess that poor old Sir whats-his-name-this-week will have to steal a new copy. -- Cheers, Bruce |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:57 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com