On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:29:55 +0100, BrianH wrote:

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
Log Entry:

1854 March 1
On the this day the Lightning sailed 436 miles, which is the longest
day's run recorded by a sailing ship.

March 1. ---
Wind S., strong gales; bore away for the
North Channel, carried away the foretopsail and lost jib;
hove the log several times, and found the ship going through
the water at the rate of 18 to 18½ knots per hour; lee rail
under water, and the rigging slack; saw the Irish land at 9:30
p.m. Distance run in the twenty-four hours, 436 miles.

Oh yes he would - he would pedantically correct the "knots
per hour", calling it ''lubberly' and the author a 'girly-man'.


I'm not sure what the common shipboard use of "knots" would have been
in 1854. I know that the log was cast the report made would have been
"X" knots and "Y" feet, or fathoms, so possibly it would have been
common to talk of knots per hour. I'm fairly sure that the Captain
knew what it meant though.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:29:55 +0100, BrianH wrote:


Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

Log Entry:

1854 March 1
On the this day the Lightning sailed 436 miles, which is the longest
day's run recorded by a sailing ship.

March 1. ---
Wind S., strong gales; bore away for the
North Channel, carried away the foretopsail and lost jib;
hove the log several times, and found the ship going through
the water at the rate of 18 to 18½ knots per hour; lee rail
under water, and the rigging slack; saw the Irish land at 9:30
p.m. Distance run in the twenty-four hours, 436 miles.

Oh yes he would - he would pedantically correct the "knots
per hour", calling it ''lubberly' and the author a 'girly-man'.



I'm not sure what the common shipboard use of "knots" would have been
in 1854. I know that the log was cast the report made would have been
"X" knots and "Y" feet, or fathoms, so possibly it would have been
common to talk of knots per hour. I'm fairly sure that the Captain
knew what it meant though.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)


Bruce?

I usually enjoy reading your stuff.
I often learn something as well as being entertained.

But...

Making fun of retarded kids isn't interesting, entertaining, or nice.

Just ignore him?

Please?

Respectfully,

Richard

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:05:05 -0600, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:29:55 +0100, BrianH wrote:


Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

Log Entry:

1854 March 1
On the this day the Lightning sailed 436 miles, which is the longest
day's run recorded by a sailing ship.

March 1. ---
Wind S., strong gales; bore away for the
North Channel, carried away the foretopsail and lost jib;
hove the log several times, and found the ship going through
the water at the rate of 18 to 18½ knots per hour; lee rail
under water, and the rigging slack; saw the Irish land at 9:30
p.m. Distance run in the twenty-four hours, 436 miles.

Oh yes he would - he would pedantically correct the "knots
per hour", calling it ''lubberly' and the author a 'girly-man'.



I'm not sure what the common shipboard use of "knots" would have been
in 1854. I know that the log was cast the report made would have been
"X" knots and "Y" feet, or fathoms, so possibly it would have been
common to talk of knots per hour. I'm fairly sure that the Captain
knew what it meant though.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)


Bruce?

I usually enjoy reading your stuff.
I often learn something as well as being entertained.

But...

Making fun of retarded kids isn't interesting, entertaining, or nice.

Just ignore him?

Please?

Respectfully,

Richard


I really do try and about the time I think I've overcome my addiction
to shooting him down here he comes again with another blooper and my
good resolve flies out the window.

But he did post a very rational message about bottom paint that I
answered in kind so maybe I'll cold turkey it this time.

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:05:05 -0600, cavelamb himself
wrote:


Bruce in Bangkok wrote:


On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:29:55 +0100, BrianH wrote:



Bruce in Bangkok wrote:


Log Entry:

1854 March 1
On the this day the Lightning sailed 436 miles, which is the longest
day's run recorded by a sailing ship.

March 1. ---
Wind S., strong gales; bore away for the
North Channel, carried away the foretopsail and lost jib;
hove the log several times, and found the ship going through
the water at the rate of 18 to 18½ knots per hour; lee rail
under water, and the rigging slack; saw the Irish land at 9:30
p.m. Distance run in the twenty-four hours, 436 miles.

Oh yes he would - he would pedantically correct the "knots
per hour", calling it ''lubberly' and the author a 'girly-man'.



I'm not sure what the common shipboard use of "knots" would have been
in 1854. I know that the log was cast the report made would have been
"X" knots and "Y" feet, or fathoms, so possibly it would have been
common to talk of knots per hour. I'm fairly sure that the Captain
knew what it meant though.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)


Bruce?

I usually enjoy reading your stuff.
I often learn something as well as being entertained.

But...

Making fun of retarded kids isn't interesting, entertaining, or nice.

Just ignore him?

Please?

Respectfully,

Richard



I really do try and about the time I think I've overcome my addiction
to shooting him down here he comes again with another blooper and my
good resolve flies out the window.

But he did post a very rational message about bottom paint that I
answered in kind so maybe I'll cold turkey it this time.

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)


Good Man!

I know it's hard.

Heck, I quit smoking six months ago and there is not a day goes by that
I doen't want to light one up.

But, temptation resisted is the true sign of character.

Stiff upper lip and all that rot?



Richard

"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
...

Bruce, please stop answering any and all posts by Wilbur Hubbard. I'm an
insecure, little fraidy cat and the things Wilbur writes often get my goat
because the things he says make me think I'm not as infallible as I fancy
myself to be. Therefore, I have a twinge or two of guilt because I hide
instead of allowing thoughts that make me uncomfortable to be given even
an iota of consideration. I like being ignorant. I like the comfort of MY
thoughts undisturbed by any outside influence. I derive even more comfort
if I can surround myself with similar closed-minded people. So, join me,
Bruce, in my comfortable ignorance.

Richard

Hmmmmmmmm!

Wilbur Hubbard

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:47:06 -0600, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Much snipped


Good Man!

I know it's hard.

Heck, I quit smoking six months ago and there is not a day goes by that
I doen't want to light one up.

But, temptation resisted is the true sign of character.

Stiff upper lip and all that rot?



Richard


I quit smoking about 20 years ago and for probably 10 years after I
quit I still felt the urge every once in a while to light up. But like
sex, the urge will diminish as the years go by.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:47:06 -0600, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Much snipped


Good Man!

I know it's hard.

Heck, I quit smoking six months ago and there is not a day goes by that
I doen't want to light one up.

But, temptation resisted is the true sign of character.

Stiff upper lip and all that rot?



Richard



I quit smoking about 20 years ago and for probably 10 years after I
quit I still felt the urge every once in a while to light up. But like
sex, the urge will diminish as the years go by.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)


Uhm, thanks, I think?

No, actually that's real depressing...

Richard

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:47:06 -0600, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Much snipped

Good Man!

I know it's hard.

Heck, I quit smoking six months ago and there is not a day goes by that
I doen't want to light one up.

But, temptation resisted is the true sign of character.

Stiff upper lip and all that rot?



Richard


I quit smoking about 20 years ago and for probably 10 years after I
quit I still felt the urge every once in a while to light up. But like
sex, the urge will diminish as the years go by.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)

Wilbur? You can't possibly let that slip by!
G

I was wondering about that, too. My first impression was that someone
must be impersonating him. Maybe Tomcat Wentworth Cannondale? He
sometimes is coherent, and asks all his practical questions under fake
names.



But he did post a very rational message about bottom paint ...

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 09:42:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:


I was wondering about that, too. My first impression was that someone
must be impersonating him. Maybe Tomcat Wentworth Cannondale? He
sometimes is coherent, and asks all his practical questions under fake
names.



But he did post a very rational message about bottom paint ...

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)


Well, his stories hang together, as he mentioned in a post some time
ago about still using TBT bottom paint and then his recent more
detailed post.

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(Note:remove underscores
from address for reply)