Cruising and reality
 

"Larry" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Apr 17, 8:05 am, "Peter (Yes, that
wrote:

In ,
says...






wrote in message
...

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 21:01:09 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


.. wouldn't a newer boat in the
size I mentioned from a reputable US manufacturer be powered
properly?


This is what Froggy is saying "properly" depends on which side of the
compromise you want to come down on. You can have a fast power boat
with sails or a fast sailboat with a motor but both at the same time
is hard to do.


My understanding is that the engine on a cruising type boat would be
able to
bring the boat to "hull" speed. You can't really go faster than that,
so
I
suppose the appropriate engine would be one that could do that (or
nearly
so)? 1.34 x sq. rt of water line? So, assuming there's overhang on a
42'
boat, say the water line is 40' the max speed would be about 8.5. Of
course,
if it were not pushing all the water, skimming, then you could go
faster.

They call "skimming" "planing" here.
And you are correct. But many hull types are incapable of planing.

Peter

Displacement hull sailboats cannot plane which is why they need so
little power. Manufacturers generally use an engine just big enough
to get to hull speed. I do not think that is enough for a real
cruising boat because a real cruising boat will spend far more of its
time under power than people realize AND because sometimes it will be
used in conditions when a lot of power is needed for safety. For the
size boat Nom is considering, a 4 cylinder diesel would be good and
they normally have sufficient power. The problems come in with
smaller boats when it is a compromise between a 1 or 2 cylinder or a
slighter larger boat betwen a 2 and 3 cylinder. She prob does not
need to worry about the engine.


Reply: I would never worry about the engine. That's someone else's area.


Yet you are dwelling on it here.


You're a troll. You're not too bright. Did I mention you're stupid?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Cruising and reality
 

"Larry" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 21:01:09 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


.. wouldn't a newer boat in the
size I mentioned from a reputable US manufacturer be powered properly?

This is what Froggy is saying "properly" depends on which side of the
compromise you want to come down on. You can have a fast power boat
with sails or a fast sailboat with a motor but both at the same time
is hard to do.


My understanding is that the engine on a cruising type boat would be able
to
bring the boat to "hull" speed. You can't really go faster than that, so
I
suppose the appropriate engine would be one that could do that (or nearly
so)? 1.34 x sq. rt of water line? So, assuming there's overhang on a 42'
boat, say the water line is 40' the max speed would be about 8.5. Of
course,
if it were not pushing all the water, skimming, then you could go faster.


It's not that simple. Size is one thing. Then there is displacement,
hull design, load distribution, etc. Even those factors don't limit
speed.

I really hope this isn't a troll or I'm wasting my time...

Imagine a cruise ship. They have displacement hulls. They don't "skim"
or plane (the correct term). Their speed is not limited solely by hull
design. If they add more HP, the ship will move faster.

You are looking at a sailboat, right? Why all of this interest in speed
from the diesel?


Max hull speed is not changeable unless you change some feature of the hull
or it's orientation in the water. Even I know that. If you increase the
water line, the boat can theoretically go faster. Displacement is
displacement. You're pushing water out of the way. You call yourself a
sailor??

Dummy.... dummy.... I was responding to someone else's post. If you don't
understand that, then you and Canuck are in the running for dumbest of the
dumb.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Cruising and reality
 

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"Larry" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 21:01:09 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


.. wouldn't a newer boat in the
size I mentioned from a reputable US manufacturer be powered properly?

This is what Froggy is saying "properly" depends on which side of the
compromise you want to come down on. You can have a fast power boat
with sails or a fast sailboat with a motor but both at the same time
is hard to do.


My understanding is that the engine on a cruising type boat would be
able to
bring the boat to "hull" speed. You can't really go faster than that, so
I
suppose the appropriate engine would be one that could do that (or
nearly
so)? 1.34 x sq. rt of water line? So, assuming there's overhang on a 42'
boat, say the water line is 40' the max speed would be about 8.5. Of
course,
if it were not pushing all the water, skimming, then you could go
faster.


It's not that simple. Size is one thing. Then there is displacement,
hull design, load distribution, etc. Even those factors don't limit
speed.

I really hope this isn't a troll or I'm wasting my time...

Imagine a cruise ship. They have displacement hulls. They don't "skim"
or plane (the correct term). Their speed is not limited solely by hull
design. If they add more HP, the ship will move faster.

You are looking at a sailboat, right? Why all of this interest in speed
from the diesel?

Cruise ships go slower than hull speed. But hull speed is pretty high on
a 1000' long ship.



Wasn't there one off Somalia that outran the pirates? I thought I read that
from a few years ago.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Cruising and reality
 

"Larry" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Apr 16, 6:59 pm, wrote:

nom=de=plume wrote:


But wouldn't a boat of the size I mentioned be powered with a decent
engine?
Seems like it would be, but I haven't really looked into it.

You have a _lot_ of homework ahead of you.


Getting the right prop is a major deal. Major controversy over fixed
2 blade fixed or 3 blade fixed because the 3 blade fixed hurts sailing
performance about 1/2 kt but the 3 blade gives better motoring
performance. There is a company that makes an oversize plastic
composite prop called PerfectPitch that makes up for this but they are
sorta unknown.
Then, there are the folding props..................


Larry is a jerk. In any case, I ask again... wouldn't a newer boat in the
size I mentioned from a reputable US manufacturer be powered properly?


I'm not a jerk. You are throwing around all of this information and
misinformation and you even have a budget attached to it. You are also
asking questions that are rather basic.

First it was a $2K Hobie and now it's a $300K sailing cruiser.

Yes, you have a lot of homework to do. That is a very fair statement.


Yes, you're a jerk and you don't know how to read. I defined a budget in my
first post on the subject of boat buying. Go read for yourself.

If you don't like basic questions (or more likely you're unable to answer
them), then kindly shut up and let other people answer them instead of
pushing your face into the discussion.

First, I owned a $2K Hobie a long time ago. More recently, I was considering
a Walker Bay for up here. I live 200 MILES from SF. I have relatives who
want to sail UP HERE. I'm also considering going in on a boat with my
friend, etc.

Yes, you're a jerk. That's is a very fair statement.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Cruising and reality
 

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 17/04/2010 6:06 PM, Larry wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Apr 16, 6:59 pm, wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote:

But wouldn't a boat of the size I mentioned be powered with a decent
engine?
Seems like it would be, but I haven't really looked into it.
You have a _lot_ of homework ahead of you.
Getting the right prop is a major deal. Major controversy over fixed
2 blade fixed or 3 blade fixed because the 3 blade fixed hurts sailing
performance about 1/2 kt but the 3 blade gives better motoring
performance. There is a company that makes an oversize plastic
composite prop called PerfectPitch that makes up for this but they are
sorta unknown.
Then, there are the folding props..................

Larry is a jerk. In any case, I ask again... wouldn't a newer boat in
the
size I mentioned from a reputable US manufacturer be powered properly?

I'm not a jerk. You are throwing around all of this information and
misinformation and you even have a budget attached to it. You are also
asking questions that are rather basic.

First it was a $2K Hobie and now it's a $300K sailing cruiser.

Yes, you have a lot of homework to do. That is a very fair statement.

Forgive de-fumer, she hasn't had it in awhile.

--
Time to ask ask, is our government serving us or are we serving the
government?


This from the pea brain who can't hold a job and who can't get into the US
for love or money.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Cruising and reality
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:15:47 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:18:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The smell of diesel, the most masculine cologne.


NOT blech.

--
You may be too young to remember the 70s when guys would spritz a
little gasoline behind their ear in hopes a girl would think you
worked in a gas station.


Good grief... did any of them live?


Gee whiz ... nothing? not even a mercy LOL?
You must be too young to remember gas lines. ;-)

I worked for the guvmint my sr year of high school, Monday to Friday, so
I was free on Saturday and Sunday to wait in gas lines while my friends
worked. It worked out well, I never had to buy beer.

Cruising and reality
 

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:15:47 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:18:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The smell of diesel, the most masculine cologne.


NOT blech.

--
You may be too young to remember the 70s when guys would spritz a
little gasoline behind their ear in hopes a girl would think you
worked in a gas station.


Good grief... did any of them live?


Gee whiz ... nothing? not even a mercy LOL?
You must be too young to remember gas lines. ;-)


There were people in line to spritz gas behind their ears?? :)

--
Nom=de=Plume

Cruising and reality
 

On Apr 18, 12:45*am, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:15:47 -0700, "nom=de=plume"





wrote:
wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:18:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The smell of diesel, the most masculine cologne.

NOT blech.

--
You may be too young to remember the 70s *when guys would spritz a
little gasoline behind their ear in hopes a girl would think you
worked in a gas station.

Good grief... did any of them live?

Gee whiz ... nothing? not even a mercy LOL?
You must be too young to remember gas lines. *;-)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I remember them. Wait in lne for a hour so you could get $5.00 of gas
and that was the limit. And if you were lucky you could get gas before
the station ran out. It was rationed to them too!

Cruising and reality
 

On 4/19/10 7:34 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 15:08:37 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Apr 18, 12:45 am, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:15:47 -0700, "nom=de=plume"





wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:18:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The smell of diesel, the most masculine cologne.

NOT blech.

--
You may be too young to remember the 70s when guys would spritz a
little gasoline behind their ear in hopes a girl would think you
worked in a gas station.

Good grief... did any of them live?

Gee whiz ... nothing? not even a mercy LOL?
You must be too young to remember gas lines. ;-)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I remember them. Wait in lne for a hour so you could get $5.00 of gas
and that was the limit. And if you were lucky you could get gas before
the station ran out. It was rationed to them too!

I am sure Plume would be flirting with the gas station guy to try to
get an extra few gallons.
I do remember parking in the gas station in the middle of the night so
I would be there when they opened. I also had a odd/even permit so I
could get gas on either day.



We were a two car family in those days and had license plates that ended
in even and odd numbers. I don't remember being limited to $5 worth more
than once.

When I first started buying gasoline for my little boat, way back in the
1950s, it was 19 cents a gallon, and in Connecticut, you could apply for
a refund of the "road tax" on the product.

My father ran his diesel over the road delivery truck and his marina
hoist off of the fuel oil he used to heat his stores. It was three or
four cents cheaper than gasoline. At least that's what I remember. The
boat store hoist was built on the framework of a Model A truck...and had
a gasoline engine. I learned to drive on that truck and on an old
jeep...at 10 or 11 years old...driving around the boatyards but never on
the public roads.

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

Cruising and reality
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 15:08:37 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 18, 12:45 am, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:15:47 -0700, "nom=de=plume"





wrote:
wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:18:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The smell of diesel, the most masculine cologne.

NOT blech.

--
You may be too young to remember the 70s when guys would spritz a
little gasoline behind their ear in hopes a girl would think you
worked in a gas station.

Good grief... did any of them live?

Gee whiz ... nothing? not even a mercy LOL?
You must be too young to remember gas lines. ;-)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I remember them. Wait in lne for a hour so you could get $5.00 of gas
and that was the limit. And if you were lucky you could get gas before
the station ran out. It was rationed to them too!

I am sure Plume would be flirting with the gas station guy to try to
get an extra few gallons.
I do remember parking in the gas station in the middle of the night so
I would be there when they opened. I also had a odd/even permit so I
could get gas on either day.



It would probably work. I'm a good flirter.

--
Nom=de=Plume