Mast wiring connectors.
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...


Rocket engines would be silly.

almost as silly as putting ballast in empty containers.

..

And with wind power, the sails will rip themselves to
shreds or the vessel
will be dismasted before the boat will exceed hull speed
by any significant
degree.


are you sailing a MacGregor?

SBV

Mast wiring connectors.
 

....
Hull speed is not an absolute, it's an approximate calculation and is not very
precise. ...

If it is to have any meaning at all 1.34*sqrt(L) is a decimal
approximation of the velocity at which a wave created by a single
point will have a length L. You can make it as precise as you want.
It doesn't take any particular magic for displacement vessels to
exceed hull speed. A good power to weight ratio is all it really
takes. In the sail boat world most modern racing multi-hulls exceed
hull speed under sail and virtually all of them are pure displacement
craft. Of course, low powered heavy boats like a typical auxiliary
sailing yacht may have top speed to length ratios much less than
1.34.

-- Tom.

Mast wiring connectors.
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:04:55 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:

This is one of those "Yes, but" things. Yes, you can go faster than hull
speed with enough power, but there is still a limit. And there's a point
at
which your rig simply can't stand up to that much power, and you are
dismasted. Surfing allows a boat to go much faster than hull speed, but
it's
also tricky and requires expert helmsmanship.

There are sail boats that will plane off at literally 2 and 3 times
theoretical hull speed, skimming along the top of the water. It's all
a function of weight, length, bottom shape, sail area, etc.

Sure there are -- but they aren't displacement hulls, either.

Mast wiring connectors.
 

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:16:33 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:



Rocket engines would be silly.

No argument


There is a point at which, regardless of how
much engine power you have, the propeller will be unable to do anything
but
cavitate and the hull will not go faster through the water because of
drag/resistance. We are talking about displacement vessels, of course.


Yes, we are

I did not say that surfing was necessary, I only offered that as an
example
where displacement vessels can easily exceed hull speed.


Personally, I define hull speed as a measurement of speed through water",
rather
than "Speed over ground" , so surfing isn't even really part of the
discussion


And with wind power, the sails will rip themselves to shreds or the vessel
will be dismasted before the boat will exceed hull speed by any
significant
degree.


Baloney. Complete baloney.

Can displacement vessels exceed hull speed? Yes, but...


You have given very strong evidence that you don't really understand the
terms
under discussion.

Hull speed is not "speed over ground", it is "speed through the water"

Hull speed is not the same thing as "Top Speed"

Hull speed is not an absolute, it's an approximate calculation and is not
very
precise.

Bottom line: Many sailboats exceed THEORETICAL hull speed all the time,
without
any tricks.



Yes, they do. But do they exceed that theoretical hull speed by a
significant degree? If hull speed is calculated to be 6 knots for a
displacement sailing vessel, can you make that hull move through the water
at 10 knots? 12?

Theoretical hull speed for Escapade is 6.29 knots at her 22' length
waterline. I've had her knotmeter up to 7.6 on several occasions, flirted
with 8 once and it was a true white-knuckle e-ticket ride. How much more
force would it take to get her up to 10 knots? More than can be provided by
her sails with her rig remaining attached to the boat, and more than could
be provided by any engine that could be installed.

Would she go 10 or 12 knots if she was being towed by an aircraft carrier?
Perhaps, but I suspect that she would be sucked under the water.

Mast wiring connectors.
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...

Theoretical hull speed for Escapade is 6.29 knots at her 22' length
waterline. I've had her knotmeter up to 7.6 on several occasions, flirted
with 8 once and it was a true white-knuckle e-ticket ride.

As an aside, I should mention that that regardless of the indicated speed on
the knotmeter, which I always view as highly optimistic when it gets over
6.5, our speed over ground as indicated by GPS has never exceeded 6.75.
Upriver, downriver, out in the bay, doesn't matter. I have made no downriver
speed runs to see how fast we can go with the current (varies, but is
usually less than 2 knots). Heading out, I just run the engine slower. We
have no appreciable currents here in Green Bay other than in rivers and at
river mouths when they're running strong. Which is virtually never during
sailing season.

I consider my paddlewheel knotmeter impeller to be highly fallible at high
speed.

Mast wiring connectors.
 

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:44:11 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:

Sure there are -- but they aren't displacement hulls, either.

That gets you into a new discussion about what is a displacement hull.

I used to race on a boat called a B-29 that had a conventional lead
keel and a conventional spinnaker, a displacement hull to all
appearances. Sail area was a bit on the high side however, and on a
windy broad reach it could get onto plane and do 18 kts, about 3x hull
speed.

Mast wiring connectors.
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:44:11 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:

Sure there are -- but they aren't displacement hulls, either.

That gets you into a new discussion about what is a displacement hull.

I used to race on a boat called a B-29 that had a conventional lead
keel and a conventional spinnaker, a displacement hull to all
appearances. Sail area was a bit on the high side however, and on a
windy broad reach it could get onto plane and do 18 kts, about 3x hull
speed.

It strikes me that a boat that can get onto plane isn't a displacement hull,
all appearances aside. :-)

Mast wiring connectors.
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in
et:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:04:55 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:

This is one of those "Yes, but" things. Yes, you can go faster than
hull speed with enough power, but there is still a limit. And there's
a point at
which your rig simply can't stand up to that much power, and you are
dismasted. Surfing allows a boat to go much faster than hull speed,
but it's
also tricky and requires expert helmsmanship.

There are sail boats that will plane off at literally 2 and 3 times
theoretical hull speed, skimming along the top of the water. It's
all a function of weight, length, bottom shape, sail area, etc.

Sure there are -- but they aren't displacement hulls, either.




Depends on how many wakeboarders you're towing...(c;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLMOdhce-Pk

Of course, you can make up for the wakeboarders by only having one
pontoon in the water..without all that drag from rudders and
centerboards.

And, who says a monohull can't keep up with a multihull, anyways?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWWf1...elated&search=
I think the monohull is passing them!

Larry
--

Mast wiring connectors.
 

terry wrote:

Westerly 1970s all fiberglass 26 footer. Previous owner replaced mast
and rigging but in the process installed deck mounted connectors (good
quality marine type) for the mast wiring that allowed water to get
into a substantial wooden block buried in the deck under the mast
step. That block is further supported by a stainless steel column
that goes down to the keel.

During winter storage the water soaked wood burst the f.glass deck
around the mast step. It's now all replaced.

Now wondering best way to connect the revamped mast wiring (Approx.
seven wires plus an RG58 coax. for the top of the mast VHF whip).**

Certainly resolved to have any wiring holes and/or mounting screws
well away from the wooden block. Also maybe prefer not to have any
connectors at all?

Thats fine if you never have to lower or remove the mast. I would go for
using connectors. My Westerly Cirrus (1971) came with deck connectors.
I have had to replace these a few times over the years, but I never had the
problems you encountered. If the connector is properly seated and sealed
as a thru hull installation, you should not have any problems.

Sherwin D.



That would mean poking the bunch of wires from the mast through
something (a caulked hole or gland or ???) in the deck to be, say,
connected individually once per season to a terminal strip in the
toilet ('Head') compartment below. Pondering various alternatives.

Any advice please would be most appreciated.

BTW ** We now have all the nav. lights on the mast rather than lower
down on the hull and cabin sides of the boat. The original (previously
replaced!) stern light for example was for ever getting stepped on and
damaged. The individual cabin side port/starboard lights had long ago
been replaced by a red/green bow pulpit one that also suffered damage
and or got tangled with jib sheets etc. Any comments/advice on this
also appreciated.

Mast wiring connectors.
 

"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
Thats fine if you never have to lower or remove the mast. I would go
for
using connectors. My Westerly Cirrus (1971) came with deck connectors.
I have had to replace these a few times over the years, but I never had
the
problems you encountered. If the connector is properly seated and
sealed
as a thru hull installation, you should not have any problems.

Sherwin D.


My Sabre has connectors hidden inside the mast under a plate. I'm really
glad I have them, since my steaming light was intermittent and I couldn't
find the problem until I replaced the connectors. Definitely easier than
restringing wire. :-)

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