On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:30:46 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote:


For either the slow, stupid, or stunned, it's called the boom boom.

We had a regatta in my club in 2001 during which a fellow was killed
via "boom boom". A storm front went through creating 50 knot winds
that...unusually...stayed at 30-35 knots most of the day even as the
sun came out. During the races, a poor ******* got clipped in the
head...hard...during a crash jib (no preventers or concept of "duck",
I assume). He failed to fall down and got smashed on the opposite side
of the head a couple of seconds later.

They pulled the plug on him after a week in a flatline coma.

Even though I recall the boat was a C&C 29, the motion was so fast and
hard that even that boat's 10 foot boom had enough velocity to crunch
a skull.

So use preventers and watch sea-state roll in downwind situations.

R.

Poor fellow! The man lost his life primarily because
of poor design by the naval architect.

Those C&Cs are a death trap in more than one way it seems.

But, to design a cruising boat with a boom so low that it
can smack you up side the head is criminal. I should think
a nice little lawsuit would straighten out C&C and the
negligent designer.

You won't find a Wm. Tripp Jr. designed cruiser with such
flaws.

CN



"rhys" wrote in message ...
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:30:46 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote:


For either the slow, stupid, or stunned, it's called the boom boom.

We had a regatta in my club in 2001 during which a fellow was killed
via "boom boom". A storm front went through creating 50 knot winds
that...unusually...stayed at 30-35 knots most of the day even as the
sun came out. During the races, a poor ******* got clipped in the
head...hard...during a crash jib (no preventers or concept of "duck",
I assume). He failed to fall down and got smashed on the opposite side
of the head a couple of seconds later.

They pulled the plug on him after a week in a flatline coma.

Even though I recall the boat was a C&C 29, the motion was so fast and
hard that even that boat's 10 foot boom had enough velocity to crunch
a skull.

So use preventers and watch sea-state roll in downwind situations.

R.

Just ignore crapton.

That sounds rough... Sounds like a combination of bad judgement on the part
of the skipper and the guy who got hit. We typically sail in 25+ kts, and
rarely use a preventer unless we're going to have a long downwind run. We
don't race though.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"rhys" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:30:46 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote:


For either the slow, stupid, or stunned, it's called the boom boom.

We had a regatta in my club in 2001 during which a fellow was killed
via "boom boom". A storm front went through creating 50 knot winds
that...unusually...stayed at 30-35 knots most of the day even as the
sun came out. During the races, a poor ******* got clipped in the
head...hard...during a crash jib (no preventers or concept of "duck",
I assume). He failed to fall down and got smashed on the opposite side
of the head a couple of seconds later.

They pulled the plug on him after a week in a flatline coma.

Even though I recall the boat was a C&C 29, the motion was so fast and
hard that even that boat's 10 foot boom had enough velocity to crunch
a skull.

So use preventers and watch sea-state roll in downwind situations.

R.

Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name, BTW.

What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded-
out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are
somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no
reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less
than head height.

To make things safer for yourself either raise the boom to specs or
install a sit-under bimini which makes it impossible for you to get
your head smacked by the boom. You may even have the wrong
mainsail on that boat. Check the specs on the original and measure
yours against it. It could be the leech is longer which some racers
do to lower the end of the boom.

Check out my website for a few pictures of a bimini which is made
to sit under. However, even with the bimini laid down the boom is high
enough not to smack someone upside the head. If you have a boat with
such obvious dangers it is smart to get rid of them one way or the
other before they do you in.

Listen to a man with impeccable credentials and years of experience.

Capt. Neal
USCG Master, Near Shore, 25GT also
Operator Uninspected Passenger Vessels, Near Shore
http://captneal.homestead.com/index.html



wrote in message ...

Capt. Neal® writes:

Poor fellow! The man lost his life primarily because
of poor design by the naval architect.

Those C&Cs are a death trap in more than one way it seems.

But, to design a cruising boat with a boom so low that it
can smack you up side the head is criminal. I should think
a nice little lawsuit would straighten out C&C and the
negligent designer.

You won't find a Wm. Tripp Jr. designed cruiser with such
flaws.

CN

R.



Actually, you will.

I have a Columbia 32, designed by none other than William Tripp Jr,
and the boom sweeps over the cockpit definitely below head-height. At
least if I have the 'flattening reef' in the main out (I think there
is a fancier name for it but I forgot it). If I have inexperienced
crew, I sometimes put the flattening reef in even in light airs so
that the boom is a half-foot higher and less dangerous.

--Ernst

Columbia 32 #25 'Tavernier'

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...
Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name,
BTW.

What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded-
out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are
somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no
reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less
than head height.


I thought you had walked the plank somewhere!
Anyway, the Mirage 33 I crewed on for 4 years had a boom that was about 6'
1" off the cockpit sole. When I got hit, it was because I was standing on
the seat trying to stow away excess halyard line and I made the mistake of
letting the skipper control the ship's wheel.

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:56:43 -0500, Capt. Neal®
wrote:

Poor fellow! The man lost his life primarily because
of poor design by the naval architect.

Actually, probably poor instruction from the skipper, but it was rough
enough that he might simply have been "thrown upright" to catch his
balance and got clipped. I don't know the fine details, only that he
got "boomed" on both sides of his head, with the second one basically
mushing his brain.

Those C&Cs are a death trap in more than one way it seems.

I own a C&C design and I find them quite safe. I will cop to the
crappy cored decks, however...but they can be remedied.

But, to design a cruising boat with a boom so low that it
can smack you up side the head is criminal. I should think
a nice little lawsuit would straighten out C&C and the
negligent designer.
Too late. Company was sold 15 years ago although the trademark
lingers.

You won't find a Wm. Tripp Jr. designed cruiser with such
flaws.

If you say so...

R.

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:30:55 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote:

Just ignore crapton.

That sounds rough...

It was. A couple were drowned when their catamaran flipped down by
Windsor in the same wind front. Several boats were damaged (it was a
C&C regatta) and I saw a 41 footer attempt to get inside our basin at
the height of it...the water was pouring OUT of the basin so fast they
had to come about and run out into the lake.

Sounds like a combination of bad judgement on the part
of the skipper and the guy who got hit.

Or he was 6' 2". The seas were high and got higher all day as the wind
swung west. Even at dock it was reading 35 knots...we stayed in due to
traffic and my wife's advanced state of pregnancy.

We typically sail in 25+ kts, and
rarely use a preventer unless we're going to have a long downwind run. We
don't race though.

I rig preventers frequently but leave them slack unless conditions
warrant it. But then I sail my 33 footer solo a lot and I am about one
inch taller than the boom end if the mainsheet is taut.

R.

"Don White" writes:

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...
Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name,
BTW.

What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded-
out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are
somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no
reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less
than head height.



looks like I'll have to do some usenet archaeology. I presume that the
first part of this posting is a reply to my own posting. Only I never
saw that reply even though I have read usenet at least twice a day
since I posted.

Anyway, I did not choose the name of my boat ('Tavernier') but I do
like it, too. And yes, I know that there is a community called
Tavernier in the Fla. Keys. I know very little of my boat's history
(bought her when she was 25 years old to the month) but there are some
indications that she spent a lot of time in Florida. If you really
want to know mo the island of Tavernier was probably named after
Bertrand Tavernier, a quite famous French guy who explored much of
Florida in the 1400s or 1500s. Literally, it translates to
'bartender' (someone who has a taverne).

Anyway, that's an interesting thought, that someone lowered the boom
to increase sail area. The PO was very much into racing and I could
see him doing this. Next time at the boat (this weekend, probably), I
will definitively look for a 'faded black line' or any other
indication that the boom was lowered. But wouldn't lowering the boom
leave a lot more physical evidence than a faded black line; like holes
in the mast where the gooseneck fitting was attached previously etc?

--Ernst

wrote in message ...

"Don White" writes:

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...
Love the name of your boat. There is a town in the Keys with that name,
BTW.

What's your boom doing so low? Check the mast and look for an old, faded-
out black line. This should be where the boom is located. Chances are
somebody lowered the boom and increased the mainsail size. There is no
reason on that 32-footer why the boom is sweeping the cockpit at less
than head height.



looks like I'll have to do some usenet archaeology. I presume that the
first part of this posting is a reply to my own posting. Only I never
saw that reply even though I have read usenet at least twice a day
since I posted.

Anyway, I did not choose the name of my boat ('Tavernier') but I do
like it, too. And yes, I know that there is a community called
Tavernier in the Fla. Keys. I know very little of my boat's history
(bought her when she was 25 years old to the month) but there are some
indications that she spent a lot of time in Florida. If you really
want to know mo the island of Tavernier was probably named after
Bertrand Tavernier, a quite famous French guy who explored much of
Florida in the 1400s or 1500s. Literally, it translates to
'bartender' (someone who has a taverne).

Anyway, that's an interesting thought, that someone lowered the boom
to increase sail area. The PO was very much into racing and I could
see him doing this. Next time at the boat (this weekend, probably), I
will definitively look for a 'faded black line' or any other
indication that the boom was lowered. But wouldn't lowering the boom
leave a lot more physical evidence than a faded black line; like holes
in the mast where the gooseneck fitting was attached previously etc?

--Ernst


Depends on the gooseneck fitting. Mine is a sliding gooseneck that
can be raised or lowered at will. Oftentimes the gooseneck will
fit an internal track in the mast and although it may have been
riveted on to begin with it is a simple matter to drill out the rivets
and change the location while adding new rivets. This would leave
holes in the mast to show that it was done, however.

More likely is a mainsail cut to lower the boom on the aft end
by increasing the length of the leech on the mainsail. This would
result in the aft end of the boom being lower than the forward
end. The original sail held the boom horizontal, I'm sure.

I heard a different story about Tavernier. At one time it was
a busy port for exporting pineapples, hardwood, and vegetables.
There were several taverns available for the workers. Word got
out that there was always a tavern near the port . Then the Frenchies
came along and changed the spelling. Your explanation sounds
more plausible.

CN

Capt. Neal® wrote:


Depends on the gooseneck fitting. Mine is a sliding gooseneck that
can be raised or lowered at will. Oftentimes the gooseneck will
fit an internal track in the mast and although it may have been
riveted on to begin with it is a simple matter to drill out the rivets
and change the location while adding new rivets. This would leave
holes in the mast to show that it was done, however.

I believe the gooseneck was riveted to the mast on this vessel when originally manufactured

More likely is a mainsail cut to lower the boom on the aft end
by increasing the length of the leech on the mainsail. This would
result in the aft end of the boom being lower than the forward
end. The original sail held the boom horizontal, I'm sure.

What sort of racing allows modifcation of the main so as to increase area beyond the manufactures specifications?

Cheers
Marty