I decided
 

"Capt. JG" wrote:
I have a friend who has one of the older Macs. He reinforced a lot of stuff
and sails in the bay. Does fine... knowing the limitations of his boat.


Well, the limits of the boat are still beyond the limits of the
sailor, in most cases.

The MacGregor / Venture line was never high-end, not after the "blue-
water cruiser" market or the "America's Cup" market. But there are a
heck of a lot of them out there and many are still sailing after all
these years. The decks flex sure, but the only time I have known one
to suffer major structural failure was while trailering... hit by
another car...

A lot of the MacGregor boats sail quite well, probably the older swing-
keel Mac 25 was the best (before the water ballast craze).
Unfortunately the 26X/M nonsense has ruined what reputation the older
models had.

DSK

I decided
 

On 2008-04-15 08:20:21 -0400, Brian Whatcott said:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:55:37 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:


Are you stating specifically that a sailing boat that loses its mast
is in more danger of capsizing then when the rig was in place?? I
would appreciate it if you could elaborate on this as it was always my
understanding that once the rig was either cut away or retrieved and
lashed on deck the boat rode no worse then it had with the rig in
place.

It was always my thought that once the rig was gone that stability of
the ballasted hull would become slightly better with no weight above
the deck line.

I emphasize that I have no interest in this discussion other then this
single point which is probably of interest to most cruising sailors.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

There are conflicting factors (as usual): the pro-stability factor is
the considerable mass far from the roll center (called moment of
iniertia) which slows the rate of roll in adverse seas.
The con-stab factor is the increased windage and weight above the
water line.

Brian W

As I read this thread, the mast *might* slow wave-induced roll enough
to prevent a roll-over. Anyone who's taken their boat out without a
mast up can attest that the boat is a lot less "stable".

But such waves don't come without wind trying to roll the boat all on its own.

I can only believe that having the mast and remains of sails "up" once
the boat is inverted would be a distinct disadvantage to coming back up
in a timely manner. Dinghy sailors know how much drag a little bit of
cloth can create.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-à-Deux -- Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

I decided
 

"Jere Lull" wrote in message
news:2008041519282516807-jerelull@maccom...
On 2008-04-15 08:20:21 -0400, Brian Whatcott said:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:55:37 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:


Are you stating specifically that a sailing boat that loses its mast
is in more danger of capsizing then when the rig was in place?? I
would appreciate it if you could elaborate on this as it was always my
understanding that once the rig was either cut away or retrieved and
lashed on deck the boat rode no worse then it had with the rig in
place.

It was always my thought that once the rig was gone that stability of
the ballasted hull would become slightly better with no weight above
the deck line.

I emphasize that I have no interest in this discussion other then this
single point which is probably of interest to most cruising sailors.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

There are conflicting factors (as usual): the pro-stability factor is
the considerable mass far from the roll center (called moment of
iniertia) which slows the rate of roll in adverse seas.
The con-stab factor is the increased windage and weight above the
water line.

Brian W

As I read this thread, the mast *might* slow wave-induced roll enough to
prevent a roll-over. Anyone who's taken their boat out without a mast up
can attest that the boat is a lot less "stable".

But such waves don't come without wind trying to roll the boat all on its
own.

I can only believe that having the mast and remains of sails "up" once the
boat is inverted would be a distinct disadvantage to coming back up in a
timely manner. Dinghy sailors know how much drag a little bit of cloth can
create.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-à-Deux -- Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/



Likely true. For catamarans, if inverted, they're more stable upside down.
Of course, this comment might open up a religious war about which one is
better offshore. :-)


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

I decided
 

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:59:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
However discussing the ability of any boat to withstand the sea is a
highly subjective subject as in a serious storm any boat can be
overwhelmed.


And don't overlook or underestimate the knockdown. I've seen this
happen on small & medium sized
keelboats: the a heavy gust blows the boat over far enough to put the
boom in the water, at which point the keel has lost effectiveness as a
foil & the boat is being shoved sideways... putting increasing
pressure from water flow on the mainsail & boom, dragging the rig
under... boat inverts and may have a pretty strong tendency to stay
that way. No wave action necessary.


I had exactly this experience. Carrying a full main and 150% genoa
sailing along off a fairly long island in light air. We came to a cut,
or valley in the hills on the island and Wham the spreaders were in
the water.

As the boat heeled the rudder lost effectiveness and the boat rounded
up and nearly before I could realize what was happening we were
upright headed nearly into the wind.

Just to add insult to injury, after I got the boat moving (and the
pulse rate down) we proceeded along the coast still in light air.
Well, about 45 minutes later we came to another notch in the hills and
the same thing happened again.

So, in my limited experience, in a heavy displacement medium length
keel boat the ballast will pull the boat back upright with the mast
horizontal and at least some off the sails in the water.



Heaving to, for example is a good tactic... until the waves get high
enough that they are breaking and you may well be rolled. On the other
hand, running off is a good tactic until the waves become steep enough
that your drogues cannot slow you sufficiently and you bury the bow in
the trough of the wave and pitch pole.


And if the drogue *does* slow you sufficiently, then you are being
pulled through a breaking crest and being hammered by truckloads of
water at 60+. There is no bulletproof "right answer."

Furthermore, the sea can be destructive beyond belief. I've seen one
of those V-shaped depression gales generate sea conditions that ripped
welded steel fittings off a US Navy vessel. IMHO there is *no*
cruising sailboat... or racer either, for that matter... which could
have survived those local conditions, no matter what her equipment or
tactics. The only answer is to be elsewhere when it gets that bad.

DSK


You are correct - we take out life in out hands every time we go
sailing; ride in airplanes; drive a car. Hell! some people die
shoveling the snow off the driveway. Life is just a dangerous business
to be in.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

I decided
 

"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:59:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
However discussing the ability of any boat to withstand the sea is a
highly subjective subject as in a serious storm any boat can be
overwhelmed.


And don't overlook or underestimate the knockdown. I've seen this
happen on small & medium sized
keelboats: the a heavy gust blows the boat over far enough to put the
boom in the water, at which point the keel has lost effectiveness as a
foil & the boat is being shoved sideways... putting increasing
pressure from water flow on the mainsail & boom, dragging the rig
under... boat inverts and may have a pretty strong tendency to stay
that way. No wave action necessary.


I had exactly this experience. Carrying a full main and 150% genoa
sailing along off a fairly long island in light air. We came to a cut,
or valley in the hills on the island and Wham the spreaders were in
the water.

As the boat heeled the rudder lost effectiveness and the boat rounded
up and nearly before I could realize what was happening we were
upright headed nearly into the wind.

Just to add insult to injury, after I got the boat moving (and the
pulse rate down) we proceeded along the coast still in light air.
Well, about 45 minutes later we came to another notch in the hills and
the same thing happened again.

So, in my limited experience, in a heavy displacement medium length
keel boat the ballast will pull the boat back upright with the mast
horizontal and at least some off the sails in the water.


I had an interesting experience with a Merit (25?) years ago. I was sailing
in the south bay, where there are occasional small tornado-like whirlwinds
coming from the marsh land. They're packing 40kts or so (total guess on my
part), but are very small. They are very unpredictable, as we found out. We
saw one quite a way off, and it was moving away from us. We were looking
elsewhere, when it basically knocked us down while we were close hauled. The
main touched the water before we could do anything, then the boat popped
right back and we continued sailing. Now that was a thrill ride.

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

I decided
 

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:07:00 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Jere Lull" wrote in message
news:2008041519282516807-jerelull@maccom...
On 2008-04-15 08:20:21 -0400, Brian Whatcott said:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:55:37 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:


Are you stating specifically that a sailing boat that loses its mast
is in more danger of capsizing then when the rig was in place?? I
would appreciate it if you could elaborate on this as it was always my
understanding that once the rig was either cut away or retrieved and
lashed on deck the boat rode no worse then it had with the rig in
place.

It was always my thought that once the rig was gone that stability of
the ballasted hull would become slightly better with no weight above
the deck line.

I emphasize that I have no interest in this discussion other then this
single point which is probably of interest to most cruising sailors.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

There are conflicting factors (as usual): the pro-stability factor is
the considerable mass far from the roll center (called moment of
iniertia) which slows the rate of roll in adverse seas.
The con-stab factor is the increased windage and weight above the
water line.

Brian W

As I read this thread, the mast *might* slow wave-induced roll enough to
prevent a roll-over. Anyone who's taken their boat out without a mast up
can attest that the boat is a lot less "stable".

But such waves don't come without wind trying to roll the boat all on its
own.

I can only believe that having the mast and remains of sails "up" once the
boat is inverted would be a distinct disadvantage to coming back up in a
timely manner. Dinghy sailors know how much drag a little bit of cloth can
create.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-à-Deux -- Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/



Likely true. For catamarans, if inverted, they're more stable upside down.
Of course, this comment might open up a religious war about which one is
better offshore. :-)

Being a bit bored this afternoon - the glue is hardening. My car is
broke and I don't have anything pending for an hour or I'd like to
forward the proposition that Catamarans are the safest type of vessel
to sail. Think about it for a moment.

1. They are stable in either the upright or inverted position

2. Modern Cats have a hatch in the bottom of the hull so it doesn't
make any difference which side up you are you can get in and out.

3. If inverted the strongest part of the boat - the hull - is the
portion exposed to the waves.

4. The rig is pretty simple with only one shroud a side and a head
stay.

5. Cats don't rock so bad so you don't need a gimbel stove, and your
significant other seldom barfs in the mashed potatoes.

6. Cats have big windows so you don't need so many lights.

7. Cats have two separate bedrooms so when you really have a bruhaha
with She Who Must be Obeyed you can go off to the other hull to lick
your wounds.

8. Cats usually have a BIG cockpit which allows you to sit out in the
summer's breezes in the evening and enjoy a cool beverage. It also
allows you to feed the mosquitoes but what the Ha, mosquitoes got to
live too. Living in tune with nature. That's the ticket. Participating
in the Malaria Fever Research Project if also a worthy undertaking.

No, there is no question but what Catamarans are safe, congenial and
in tune with nature. The only way the thinking man will sail.

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

I decided
 

And they require two berths in the marina.
Gordon

No, there is no question but what Catamarans are safe, congenial and
in tune with nature. The only way the thinking man will sail.

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

I decided
 

"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:07:00 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Jere Lull" wrote in message
news:2008041519282516807-jerelull@maccom...
On 2008-04-15 08:20:21 -0400, Brian Whatcott
said:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:55:37 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:


Are you stating specifically that a sailing boat that loses its mast
is in more danger of capsizing then when the rig was in place?? I
would appreciate it if you could elaborate on this as it was always my
understanding that once the rig was either cut away or retrieved and
lashed on deck the boat rode no worse then it had with the rig in
place.

It was always my thought that once the rig was gone that stability of
the ballasted hull would become slightly better with no weight above
the deck line.

I emphasize that I have no interest in this discussion other then this
single point which is probably of interest to most cruising sailors.


Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

There are conflicting factors (as usual): the pro-stability factor is
the considerable mass far from the roll center (called moment of
iniertia) which slows the rate of roll in adverse seas.
The con-stab factor is the increased windage and weight above the
water line.

Brian W

As I read this thread, the mast *might* slow wave-induced roll enough to
prevent a roll-over. Anyone who's taken their boat out without a mast up
can attest that the boat is a lot less "stable".

But such waves don't come without wind trying to roll the boat all on
its
own.

I can only believe that having the mast and remains of sails "up" once
the
boat is inverted would be a distinct disadvantage to coming back up in a
timely manner. Dinghy sailors know how much drag a little bit of cloth
can
create.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-à-Deux -- Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/



Likely true. For catamarans, if inverted, they're more stable upside down.
Of course, this comment might open up a religious war about which one is
better offshore. :-)

Being a bit bored this afternoon - the glue is hardening. My car is
broke and I don't have anything pending for an hour or I'd like to
forward the proposition that Catamarans are the safest type of vessel
to sail. Think about it for a moment.

1. They are stable in either the upright or inverted position

2. Modern Cats have a hatch in the bottom of the hull so it doesn't
make any difference which side up you are you can get in and out.

3. If inverted the strongest part of the boat - the hull - is the
portion exposed to the waves.

4. The rig is pretty simple with only one shroud a side and a head
stay.

5. Cats don't rock so bad so you don't need a gimbel stove, and your
significant other seldom barfs in the mashed potatoes.

6. Cats have big windows so you don't need so many lights.

7. Cats have two separate bedrooms so when you really have a bruhaha
with She Who Must be Obeyed you can go off to the other hull to lick
your wounds.

8. Cats usually have a BIG cockpit which allows you to sit out in the
summer's breezes in the evening and enjoy a cool beverage. It also
allows you to feed the mosquitoes but what the Ha, mosquitoes got to
live too. Living in tune with nature. That's the ticket. Participating
in the Malaria Fever Research Project if also a worthy undertaking.

No, there is no question but what Catamarans are safe, congenial and
in tune with nature. The only way the thinking man will sail.

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)


Hard for me to disagree... probably the only major negatives are stowage and
cost, the former of which you have to watch or it'll get out of control and
really slow down the boat. Crew fatigue is a *big* factor for long-distance.
I saw a cat that had screens up around the cockpit, so screw the mosquitos.

When we charter in various locations, we always rent a catamaran... makes
for a much pleasant vacation.

Disclaimer: I own a mono. :-)

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

I decided
 

"Gordon" wrote in message
...
And they require two berths in the marina.
Gordon

No, there is no question but what Catamarans are safe, congenial and
in tune with nature. The only way the thinking man will sail.
Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)


Ah... yes, the other negative. This relates to expense.

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

I decided
 

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:07:00 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

Dinghy sailors know how much drag a little bit of cloth can
create.

This is true of 38 foot planing hull daysailers [ A scows]. If you
want to call them dinghies. I have never sailed a dinghy, but I have
had the sails in the water many times, as much as twenty, or so, times
in one day [ Sunfish ]. Burying the mast in the mud will also make a
boat hard to right. The Iowa lake I sailed on as a kid is everywhere
20 feet deep, and mast groundings were common. Never was any damage.

Casady