sponsons really work! (BS)
 

.....oooh Timmy's back! Wheeeee! Just as fall set's in, the rat's try
getting back into the barn. Well good luck getting rid of the little
critter again.

Craig

PS. Glad to see you running the world's worst marketing campaign again
Tim! Your dad (Ralph Nader) really should have used a better quality
condom.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

Craig Smerda ) writes:
....oooh Timmy's back! Wheeeee! Just as fall set's in, the rat's try
getting back into the barn. Well good luck getting rid of the little
critter again.

Craig

PS. Glad to see you running the world's worst marketing campaign again
Tim! Your dad (Ralph Nader) really should have used a better quality
condom.



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
(William R. Watt) writes:

no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

You MUST be kidding. I could right a Sailfish on my own when I was
six years old. Okay, it took a little work, but...


Wow, impressive... But he did not say anything about righting a boat,
he said he wanted to re-enter the boat. Not everyone here is a olypmic
star or was raised in boats.. BTW, according to what I know, William
was... and although he may not be a 35 yo buff, X generation, global
jaunting, look at me, only the best equipment type guy, there is
actually a possibility he has spent more time in smallboats than even
you!

Sometimes you folks here need to remember, it is still a paddling
group and there are more than just WW paddlers posting here and some
of us just want to make things easier for ourselves so our fun, is not
so much work.
Scotty from SmallBoats.com

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Oci-One Kanubi wrote:

(William R. Watt) typed (perhaps without
thinking?):


no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

Craig Smerda ) writes:

....oooh Timmy's back! Wheeeee! Just as fall set's in, the rat's try
getting back into the barn. Well good luck getting rid of the little
critter again.



Ditto Mary's experience, sort of. I can remember, when I was in first
or second grade, my dad and me righting a capsized Penguin-class
dinghy (11'5").

It does depend a lot on the design of the boat. Boats like the Sunfish are
trivial to get back on since they hardly take on any water when capsized.
The small sailing dinghies I've used are only a little harder, but they all
had flotation installed under the seats on the sides of the cockpit which
acted as internal sponsons when swamped. OTOH, someone had converted an
old rowboat for sailing which only had a little flotation - mainly in the
bow and stern. When swamped it had barely enough stability to stay upright
by itself and promptly rolled over if anyone tried to get back in.
Additional sponsons would have been useful with that design.

'Course, my dad was a sailor; it's obvious that you
ain't. On the other hand, no-one in this forum, to my knowlege, has
ever said that it is unreasonable to choose sponsons as part of yer
emergency kit; we don't say sponsons are utterly worthless, we say
that mandating their usage is foolish and that the safety and rescue
programs that the lunatic rants against are a more effective way to
save lives. ...
Whereas, under a controlled training program, the degree of exposure
is increased only gradually, concomitantly with the increase in the
skill and experience needed to deal with the inevitable problems.

The first seakayaking self-rescue class I took involved training in the use
of both paddle-floats and inflatable sponsons. My impression is that
sponsons are included less frequently these days, probably largely as a
result of Tim's rather acerbic 'sales technique'. It's unfortunate since I
do believe there are situations in seakayaking where sponsons are a good
device to have available.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

On 26-Aug-2003, Peter wrote:

Additional sponsons would have been useful with that design.

A better design sounds like a solution. Patching a bad design with
sponsons is not a solution. Timmy's approach is to patch bad
combinations of inexperienced paddlers and the wrong conditions.
Proper education and experience with good equipment make more
sense.

I tackle tougher conditions than most of the paddlers I know. My kayak
has very low initial stability (high secondary). I have never flipped over
unless I wanted to. My rolls are about as bombproof as I can get. Even
if I lost my paddle and spare, a paddle float is faster to inflate and I could
easily roll up with it on my hand. What would I want sponsons for?

Mike

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Michael Daly wrote:

On 26-Aug-2003, Peter wrote:
The small sailing dinghies I've used are only a little harder,
but they all had flotation installed under the seats on the
sides of the cockpit which acted as internal sponsons when swamped.
OTOH, someone had converted an old rowboat for sailing which
only had a little flotation - mainly in the bow and stern. ...
Additional sponsons would have been useful with that design.


A better design sounds like a solution. Patching a bad design with
sponsons is not a solution.

As I pointed out before, the better design for sailing dinghies already
includes flotation that acts as sponsons when the cockpit is flooded.
Putting in those sponson-like flotation chambers was a solution.

Timmy's approach is to patch bad
combinations of inexperienced paddlers and the wrong conditions.
Proper education and experience with good equipment make more
sense.

I tackle tougher conditions than most of the paddlers I know. My kayak
has very low initial stability (high secondary). I have never flipped over
unless I wanted to. My rolls are about as bombproof as I can get. Even
if I lost my paddle and spare, a paddle float is faster to inflate and I could
easily roll up with it on my hand. What would I want sponsons for?

You, or someone with you, is incapacitated (i.e. incapable of balancing
and/or bracing for stability) and you're far from shore. Putting sponsons
on the boat with the incapacitated person would allow the other paddler to
tow them to safety. Without sponsons I'd juryrig a paddle with a pair of
paddle floats to act as outriggers, but I'd expect the result to be harder
to tow and not as secure as properly designed sponsons.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
(Backyard Renegade) writes:

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
(William R. Watt) writes:

no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

You MUST be kidding. I could right a Sailfish on my own when I was
six years old. Okay, it took a little work, but...


Wow, impressive...

Not really. It's not that hard -- that's kind of the point.

But he did not say anything about righting a boat,
he said he wanted to re-enter the boat.

And leave it upside down, hmm? They sail real good that way ;-)
If you, or he, knows a way to re-enter and roll a sailboat with the
sails still on it, I'm prepared to genuflect in awe.

Not everyone here is a olypmic
star or was raised in boats..

Add me to the "not everyone". Never an Olympic star or even an
Olympic jock-washer.

BTW, according to what I know, William
was... and although he may not be a 35 yo buff, X generation, global
jaunting, look at me, only the best equipment type guy, there is
actually a possibility he has spent more time in smallboats than even
you!

Sure it's a possibility. So who said otherwise?

Sometimes you folks here need to remember, it is still a paddling
group and there are more than just WW paddlers posting here and some
of us just want to make things easier for ourselves so our fun, is not
so much work.

And sometimes you folks that are listing strongly to one side need
to get yourselves a crane and remove that mountain-sized chip from
your shoulder.

Nothing personal Mary, have never doubted your abilities or avoided
your posts as I can learn from them. The only chip I have here is
brought on by the thrashing newbies with different ideas take when
trying to post or gain information from this group, I have watched
several get trashed over time for just asking a question. And the
thrashings always seem to come from the same camp...
Scotty


Buy all the sponsons you want, and festoon your car
with 'em if you choose. My comment was simply because I'm danged if
I can see why they'd be necessary to get back in a capsized 7.5 foot
sailboat. I still don't see why, and I don't think you've given me
any more information on that.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

On 26-Aug-2003, Peter wrote:

You, or someone with you, is incapacitated (i.e. incapable of balancing
and/or bracing for stability) and you're far from shore. Putting sponsons
on the boat with the incapacitated person would allow the other paddler to
tow them to safety.

Good in theory, but in practice, the sponsons don't provide enough stability.
Timmy's sponsons attached to an empty kayak increases the stability about
as much as the same kayak without sponsons but fully loaded with gear.
I wouldn't tow a paddler in an otherwise unsupported, fully loaded kayak.

In rough conditions. the sponsons can increase the likelyhood of a collapse,
since high initial stability on a steep wave means less stability overall.

In calm conditions, sponsons may be fine, but the best thing for a disabled
paddler is a contact tow. You can see them and deal with them more
quickly than with a tow. If there's a third person, use that person to stabilize
the incapacitated paddler and tow the duo. I've done that in a real emergency
and it's not so bad.
..
Without sponsons I'd juryrig a paddle with a pair of
paddle floats to act as outriggers, but I'd expect the result to be harder
to tow and not as secure as properly designed sponsons.

That's a good approach, but I don't think it would be so terrible to tow. Folks
I know who have tried it say it's reasonable to tow. YMMV.

If sponsons were _significantly_ better than competing approaches, I'd support
them. However, they are better in some ways and worse in others. The net is
six of one, half dozen of the other. If you prefer sponsons, that's fine - use
them but make sure you've practiced. They are no more or less likely to save
a life than other approaches.

Mike

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

On 26-Aug-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

so commenting
on it isn't exactly "thrashing newbies".

Dumping on the original poster isn't thrashing a newbie. He claims to
have paddled/sailed/whatever all his life without a lesson. It shows in
that he knows almost nothing of value and is more of a troll than someone
to take seriously. In this case, you're thrashing a self-proclaimed "expert"
who deserves it.

Mike

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Michael Daly wrote:

On 26-Aug-2003, Peter wrote:

Haven't used them in a real emergency, but the stability was more than
adequate with a person acting as a pretty limp body and moderate waves
including some whitecaps. The kayak was rather lightly loaded.
[...]
The only sponsons I own are built into the hull of my folder.


Are these the ones you did the test with?

Obviously not. I thought you might remember back a few posts where I
mentioned that the self-rescue class I attended had us practice a few
emergency scenarios with both sponsons and paddle floats. Based on the
experience there it appeared that the rescue sponsons (Sea Wings) had
advantages under some circumstances and I think they should still be
demonstrated. I don't remember exactly which model boat was used for the
'towing with sponsons' test, but it was probably about 16' x 23" and plastic.
I did not personally purchase them, so as I said above, the only sponsons I
own are the ones that came with my folder.

They aren't doing the same
thing as Timmy's sponsons, since they are inside the hull. Their main
purpose is to tighten up the skin over the frame and provide increased
bouyancy in the event of the kayak being flooded.

The internal sponsons on the folders I've seen are totally inadequate to
provide significant bouyancy if the kayak is flooded. Much more
substantial flotation bags and preferably also a seasock arrangement are
needed to ensure that the boat can be easily reentered and pumped out. But
although their volume is small, the location of the sponsons at the edge of
the hull does increase the stability of the boat if the cockpit is flooded

Most folders are high in stability due to hull shape, not because they
contain sponsons.

The two are not so easily separated. Sure stability is due to hull shape -
the water doesn't know what's inside the hull. But the external shape of
the hull is changed by the presence of the sponsons, making it bulge
outward above the waterline and making it more resistant to tipping past a
certain point when the sponsons are inflated. Whether that bulge is inside
or outside the nominal hull doesn't matter much from a stability standpoint
- in either case the bulge provides a righting moment if it is pushed below
the water on one side.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Peter typed:

[snip]

The small sailing dinghies I've used are only a little harder, but they all
had flotation installed under the seats on the sides of the cockpit which
acted as internal sponsons when swamped.

Whoa, please, Peter! You completely turn the discussion around, and
make it meaningless, when you use language this carelessly. There can
be NO SUCH THING as an "internal sponson". By definition, a sponson
is one of many kinds of *projections or protuberances from the hull*
of a vessel. By strict definition, it need not provide any floatation
at all, as the many small-gun sponsons that were hung off the edges of
the decks of older warships.

You are equating "sponsons" with "floatation chambers". And the value
you are ascribing to sponsons is the value derived from the feature
Timmy's *inflatable* sponsons' share with floatation chambers: they
hold air. It is realistic to say "sponsons act as external floatation
chambers"; it is meaningless to say "floatation chambers act as
internal sponsons."

Nearly no-one posting to this forum would argue against floatation
chambers in any kind of boat. Floating yer boat is crucial, and
floatation chambers ameliorate some of the problems inherent in
capsizing. You have turned the meaning of language around and are
fallaciously praising sponsons by saying the floatation chambers (very
good thing) acted as sponsons (a questionably good thing). Floatation
chambers have the salutory benefit of a *secondary* characteristic of
(Timmy's inflatable) sponsons, but floatation chambers do not
necessarily have the problematic *primary* characteristic of sponsons,
that they protrude beyond the hull and compromise the hull design.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll.
rhople[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters.
================================================== ====================

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
Peter typed:

[snip]

The small sailing dinghies I've used are only a little harder, but
they all had flotation installed under the seats on the sides of the
cockpit which acted as internal sponsons when swamped.


Whoa, please, Peter! You completely turn the discussion around, and
make it meaningless, when you use language this carelessly.

I don't think it's careless at all. My "Standard College Dictionary" gives
as the third definition of sponson "An air tank built into the sides of a
canoe to improve stability and prevent sinking." The air tanks under the
seats of the dinghies I sailed were "built into the sides of those boats to
improve stability and prevent sinking" and on that basis I asserted that
they acted as internal sponsons.

There can
be NO SUCH THING as an "internal sponson".

That doesn't seem to be the view of my dictionary, nor is it the view of
Klepper, Folbot, or Feathercraft, which all refer to the air chambers
located inside the hulls of their boats as sponsons.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Michael Daly wrote:

On 26-Aug-2003, Peter wrote:


The air tanks under the
seats of the dinghies I sailed were "built into the sides of those boats to
improve stability and prevent sinking"


How do they improve stability if they are inside the hull?

I was quoting the dictionary so I didn't modify their wording. I thought
it was clear that the authors meant that both the improved stability and
resistance to sinking applied under the condition that the boat was
flooded. Afterall that's the only time that flotation tanks become functional.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Mary Malmros ) writes:
(William R. Watt) writes:

no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

You MUST be kidding. I could right a Sailfish on my own when I was
six years old. Okay, it took a little work, but...

that's no boat, just a hunk of foam you balance on top of, ie one big
sponson, and hopefully you did not at the age of six weigh 155 lb and have
6 ft of body to drag over a gunwale

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

"Michael Daly" ) writes:
On 26-Aug-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

so commenting
on it isn't exactly "thrashing newbies".

Dumping on the original poster isn't thrashing a newbie. He claims to
have paddled/sailed/whatever all his life without a lesson. It shows in
that he knows almost nothing of value and is more of a troll than someone
to take seriously. In this case, you're thrashing a self-proclaimed "expert"
who deserves it.

funny how some people label anyone who disagrees with their limited
experience.

there are photos of the 7.5 ft sail boat with the sponsons on my website
(see below) click on "boats" then on "Loonie". When nto sialign it is
proelled by a home made feathered double bladed paddle which qualifies the
boat for discussion in a paddlign newsgroup, and doubles as a sterrign oar
when under sail. Its a neat little boat made from a single sheet of
plywood. I use and enjoy it often, sometimes in very strong winds on small
waters where there are no large waves.


Mike

who sees in his dreams trolls coming out of the woodwoork



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

"William R. Watt" wrote in message
...
"Michael Daly" ) writes:

BTW dictionaries are famous for getting definitions wrong - especially
in scientific
and technical terminology. My Webster's here says that oxygen is the
most
plentiful element in the universe.


I think you mean "atmosphere", not "universe". I'd check that dictionary
definitions again.

It's still wrong. Oxygen is only 20% of air---Nitrogen is far more
plentiful.




On this subject of getting back into capsized boats, I've done in in
canoes, sailing dingys, and once in a kayak. The problem in lightweight
narrow boats is getting one's hips over the gunwale. Most sailboats have
to be wide to carry sail. The one I built out of a single sheet of plywood
is narrow like a kayak. To carry sail and to re-enter after a capsize the
sponsons are needed. When you re-enter a kayak you normally pull yourself
up onto the rear deck and slide forward until you can straddle the boat
and drop your butt into the seat. On a boat with no rear deck, like my
small sailboat, and also I think on a kayak, you can enter from the side
by first sticking a floatation device under your hips to raise them to the
surface so you can slide them in over the gunwale. That's the way I have
re-enterd the sailboat. I sit on a floation cushion when using the boat
and shove the flotation cusion under my hips to re-enter the boat after a
capsize. However I only did that once as a test because the sponsons have
prevented any capsizes since they were installed.

The technique of using a floatation cushion would not work in any rough
water conditions that would have caused me to capsize in the first place.
What keeps the cushion from floating away? How do you hold the boat, your
paddle, and the cushion while you try to get it under your hips? Have you
ever tried this in 6 foot or higher breaking seas?

Then the technique of straddling a kayak is also not good for rough water
entries. If I put my butt in the boat first, my legs will not get into the
cockpit. Better techniques can be found in any of the many books and videos
on the market for kayak re-entires and recoveries.

I consider anything that interferes with my kayak being put up on edge as
unsafe. A boat that stays flat on the surface of the water cannot be
controlled. A breaking wave will cause it to capsize with or without
sponsons.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

William R. Watt wrote:
"Michael Daly" ) writes:


BTW dictionaries are famous for getting definitions wrong - especially in scientific
and technical terminology. My Webster's here says that oxygen is the most
plentiful element in the universe.



I think you mean "atmosphere", not "universe". I'd check that dictionary
definitions again.


- Nitrogen is the most abundant element in the atmosphere. O2 is ~21%.
- Hydrogen is [most likely] the most abundant element in the universe.

--Chris

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

On 27-Aug-2003, (William R. Watt) wrote:

I think you mean "atmosphere", not "universe". I'd check that dictionary
definitions again.

I've got the dictionary right here. You don't. Why do you assume _I'm_ wrong?
It says nothing about atmosphere. Even if it did, it'd still be wrong.

I'm getting the impression Mike is typing without thinking.

You post without knowing. Get a clue.

Mike

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

I found a dictionary which does say oxygen is "the most abundant element".
It's the Gage Canadian dictionary. I have it right here too. I'm not sure
what they mean by that. None of my other dictionaries make that claim.

One dictionary says oxygen is only 21% of the atmoshpere. Of course oxygen
occurs in other forms, as an element in water, for example.

"Michael Daly" ) writes:
On 27-Aug-2003, (William R. Watt) wrote:

I think you mean "atmosphere", not "universe". I'd check that dictionary
definitions again.

I've got the dictionary right here. You don't. Why do you assume _I'm_ wrong?
It says nothing about atmosphere. Even if it did, it'd still be wrong.

I'm getting the impression Mike is typing without thinking.

You post without knowing. Get a clue.

Mike


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

On 27-Aug-2003, (William R. Watt) wrote:

I found a dictionary which does say oxygen is "the most abundant element".
It's the Gage Canadian dictionary. I have it right here too. I'm not sure
what they mean by that. None of my other dictionaries make that claim.

One dictionary says oxygen is only 21% of the atmoshpere. Of course oxygen
occurs in other forms, as an element in water, for example.

So you proved yourself wrong. Instead of trying to dump on me - try looking up
your facts _before_ posting.

Mike

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
(Backyard Renegade) writes:

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
(William R. Watt) writes:

no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

You MUST be kidding. I could right a Sailfish on my own when I was
six years old. Okay, it took a little work, but...


Wow, impressive...

Not really. It's not that hard -- that's kind of the point.

But he did not say anything about righting a boat,
he said he wanted to re-enter the boat.

And leave it upside down, hmm? They sail real good that way ;-)
If you, or he, knows a way to re-enter and roll a sailboat with the
sails still on it, I'm prepared to genuflect in awe.

Not everyone here is a olypmic
star or was raised in boats..

Add me to the "not everyone". Never an Olympic star or even an
Olympic jock-washer.

BTW, according to what I know, William
was... and although he may not be a 35 yo buff, X generation, global
jaunting, look at me, only the best equipment type guy, there is
actually a possibility he has spent more time in smallboats than even
you!

Sure it's a possibility. So who said otherwise?

Sometimes you folks here need to remember, it is still a paddling
group and there are more than just WW paddlers posting here and some
of us just want to make things easier for ourselves so our fun, is not
so much work.

And sometimes you folks that are listing strongly to one side need
to get yourselves a crane and remove that mountain-sized chip from
your shoulder. Buy all the sponsons you want, and festoon your car
with 'em if you choose. My comment was simply because I'm danged if
I can see why they'd be necessary to get back in a capsized 7.5 foot
sailboat. I still don't see why, and I don't think you've given me
any more information on that.

I am listing to one side, just not the side you think... Personally I
still fall in the camp that if you need spondoms, you are probably in
the wrong boat or in conditions you should not be in **in most
cases**. I happen to be familiar with Wills boating habits and access
through his postings to other newsgroups and if Will says he needs
these spondoms to get back into his boat, he probably does. Personally
I would not use spondoms for anything more than waterbottles. they
might also make good pool toys for the kids... just not attached to
any boat!
Scotty

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
(Backyard Renegade) writes:

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
(William R. Watt) writes:

no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

You MUST be kidding. I could right a Sailfish on my own when I was
six years old. Okay, it took a little work, but...


Wow, impressive...

Not really. It's not that hard -- that's kind of the point.

But he did not say anything about righting a boat,
he said he wanted to re-enter the boat.

And leave it upside down, hmm? They sail real good that way ;-)
If you, or he, knows a way to re-enter and roll a sailboat with the
sails still on it, I'm prepared to genuflect in awe.

Not everyone here is a olypmic
star or was raised in boats..

Add me to the "not everyone". Never an Olympic star or even an
Olympic jock-washer.

BTW, according to what I know, William
was... and although he may not be a 35 yo buff, X generation, global
jaunting, look at me, only the best equipment type guy, there is
actually a possibility he has spent more time in smallboats than even
you!

Sure it's a possibility. So who said otherwise?

Sometimes you folks here need to remember, it is still a paddling
group and there are more than just WW paddlers posting here and some
of us just want to make things easier for ourselves so our fun, is not
so much work.

And sometimes you folks that are listing strongly to one side need
to get yourselves a crane and remove that mountain-sized chip from
your shoulder. Buy all the sponsons you want, and festoon your car
with 'em if you choose. My comment was simply because I'm danged if
I can see why they'd be necessary to get back in a capsized 7.5 foot
sailboat. I still don't see why, and I don't think you've given me
any more information on that.

I am listing to one side, just not the side you think... Personally I
still fall in the camp that if you need spondoms, you are probably in
the wrong boat or in conditions you should not be in **in most
cases**. I happen to be familiar with Wills boating habits and access
through his postings to other newsgroups and if Will says he needs
these spondoms to get back into his boat, he probably does. Personally
I would not use spondoms for anything more than waterbottles. they
might also make good pool toys for the kids... just not attached to
any boat!
Scotty

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
Peter typed:

I don't think it's careless at all. My "Standard College Dictionary" gives
as the third definition of sponson "An air tank built into the sides of a
canoe to improve stability and prevent sinking." The air tanks under the
seats of the dinghies I sailed were "built into the sides of those boats to
improve stability and prevent sinking" and on that basis I asserted that
they acted as internal sponsons.


There can
be NO SUCH THING as an "internal sponson".

That doesn't seem to be the view of my dictionary, nor is it the view of
Klepper, Folbot, or Feathercraft, which all refer to the air chambers
located inside the hulls of their boats as sponsons.


My apologies, Peter, but... The only references available to me right
now are online. However, the view of your dictionary seems to be
outvoted, six to one (either that, or, as I believe is more likely,
you are stretching "built into the sides" to mean "built from side to
side"). Three of the six references below show no reasonable
application to canoes or kayaks.

In that case we are either all incorrectly using the word "sponson" since
we are all talking about something related to kayaks/canoes, or those three
references are totally irrelevant to the discussion.

Of the three which mention canoes,
one says "on the gunwale", one says "along each side", and one says
"along a canoe". Although none specifically says so, I s'pose the air
chamber could be on the INSIDE of the hull, but "along", "along each
side", and "on the gunwhale" can in no way be stretched to mean "under
the thwart". Furthermore, two of these three references also mention
"stability", which can only be achieved by external sponsons.

Only if you assume that the stability referred to is when there is no water
inside the boat. But the whole point of the flotation chambers in most
boats is for support in the event the boat gets swamped and it is in that
circumstance that they can offer both improved stability and resistance to
sinking.

So as I see it, three of your references are irrelevant since they include
no definition that pertains to kayaks or similar boats, and the other three
are ambiguous as to whether the flotation is inside or outside the hull -
the important factor appears to be that it is located near the side of the
vessel rather than in the middle or at the bow or stern. This is the
important functional characteristic since flotation placed near the sides
will keep the swamped boat from rolling over much more effectively than
flotation in other locations. In this they agree with my Funk & Wagnall's
dictionary which used the phrase "built into the sides of the canoe."
So, in
these six definitions, we have:
3 making no reference to canoes or kayaks
2 expecting the sponson to provide stability to a canoe
1 expecting sponsons (along each side) to keep a canoe afloat

I disregard the usage of three porta-boat makers, two of which are not
from an English-speaking country, who may have distorted the meaning
of the word for their own purposes, and since you have not provided
links,

Porta-boat (they actually use "Porta-Bote" but trademark both terms) is a
totally different kind of craft which has never been brought up in this
discussion before - AFAIK it does not have any sponsons in its design. If
you are referring to the folding kayak manufacturers, then please explain
to the citizens of either Charleston or Vancouver that they do not speak
English (the citizens of Rosenheim would presumably be willing to agree
that it's not their primary language, but that company does have US
representatives who also refer to the boat's "sponsons"). I didn't provide
any links since they seemed too obvious to include, but I'll do so he
www.klepper.com, www.feathercraft.com, www.folbot.com. All have references
to the sponsons used on many of their models.

I'm dammed [sic] if I'm gonna go chasing them down to confirm yer [sic]
assertion.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

snip wild discussion about chemistry and cosmology

Please tell me you guys *aren't* arguing about which element is most
prevalent in the universe, on RBP, in a thread that originally concerned the
use of sponsons?!?!

Maybe this is worth posting to sci.chem? :-)

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Peter typed:

Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
Peter typed:

I don't think it's careless at all. My "Standard College Dictionary" gives
as the third definition of sponson "An air tank built into the sides of a
canoe to improve stability and prevent sinking." The air tanks under the
seats of the dinghies I sailed were "built into the sides of those boats to
improve stability and prevent sinking" and on that basis I asserted that
they acted as internal sponsons.


There can
be NO SUCH THING as an "internal sponson".

That doesn't seem to be the view of my dictionary, nor is it the view of
Klepper, Folbot, or Feathercraft, which all refer to the air chambers
located inside the hulls of their boats as sponsons.


My apologies, Peter, but... The only references available to me right
now are online. However, the view of your dictionary seems to be
outvoted, six to one (either that, or, as I believe is more likely,
you are stretching "built into the sides" to mean "built from side to
side"). Three of the six references below show no reasonable
application to canoes or kayaks.

In that case we are either all incorrectly using the word "sponson" since
we are all talking about something related to kayaks/canoes, or those three
references are totally irrelevant to the discussion.

Of the three which mention canoes,
one says "on the gunwale", one says "along each side", and one says
"along a canoe". Although none specifically says so, I s'pose the air
chamber could be on the INSIDE of the hull, but "along", "along each
side", and "on the gunwhale" can in no way be stretched to mean "under
the thwart". Furthermore, two of these three references also mention
"stability", which can only be achieved by external sponsons.

Only if you assume that the stability referred to is when there is no water
inside the boat. But the whole point of the flotation chambers in most
boats is for support in the event the boat gets swamped and it is in that
circumstance that they can offer both improved stability and resistance to
sinking.

So as I see it, three of your references are irrelevant since they include
no definition that pertains to kayaks or similar boats,

Huh? Suppose you find a definition of "hull" that refers to ships,
barges, dinghies, and canoes. Will you then conclude that the
definition is irrelevant to any discussion of *kayaks*? I mean, jeez,
Merriam-Webster's (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary) definition
of "tire" mentions an automobile wheel. Does the lack of mention of a
bicycle mean that the definition is irrelevant in the context of a
bicycle? The definitions say what the object IS; the examples of
where it might appear are merely *examples*. And what a sponson IS,
according to the definitions, is a protuberance from a hull. And if
it protrudes, it is not internal, which was my original point.

and the other three
are ambiguous as to whether the flotation is inside or outside the hull -
the important factor appears to be that it is located near the side of the
vessel rather than in the middle or at the bow or stern. This is the
important functional characteristic since flotation placed near the sides
will keep the swamped boat from rolling over much more effectively than
flotation in other locations. In this they agree with my Funk & Wagnall's
dictionary which used the phrase "built into the sides of the canoe."

This is starting to get a bit silly, but look: EVERY definition of
"sponson" has, as primary definition, "a protuberance from the hull".
EVERY one. Tim Ingram's sponsons lash to the outside of the hull.
Thus they are removble protuberances. Thus they fit the primary
definition, by (Funk & Wagnall's brings us up to 8) all dictionaries
consulted. And every definition that mentions canoes says, in some
way, "along" the hull (not athwart the vessel like yer underseat
floatation chambers). Look at
http://www.castlecraft.com/sportspal_double-end.htm and you will see a
photograph of "sponsons" that are clearly attached to the OUTSIDE of
the hull, along the length of the hull.

Yet you continue, in the paragraph above, to go on at great length
about "floatation". Yes. YES. YES! YESSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!! You are
absolutely correct! "Floatation" is all the good things you say it
is. But this discussion is not about "floatation", per se; it is
about "sponsons", in general, and about detachable inflatable
"sponsons", in particular. When you write a long paragraph, as the
one above, truly and correctly extolling the virtues of "floatation",
I can only agree, but when you use this paean to floatation as a
defense of "sponsons", it is incorrect, and confuses the issue.

I'm baffled, Peter, utterly baffled. Why do you persist in trying to
distort the meaning of this word? Just look at an illustration of a
seaplane hull (the example cited in the secondary meaning, in most
definitions), and you will see how the circular cross-section of the
hull is squared off in the chines just above the waterline. These are
sponsons, "along the hull", on the outside of the hull, to provide
stability.

The folding-boat manufacturers have evidently misappropriated this
word (in the whitewater canoe and kayak world, we refer to these
internal things as either "air bags" or as "floatation"). But because
folding-boat manufacturers misuse nautical terminology in their narrow
context is no reason for us to misuse it in any wider context. I
mean, in none of the eight definitions thus far adduced has there been
a single reference to any ***internal*** floatation chamber or bag.

All I am trying to do is get you to understand that you ruin any
attempt to honestly debate the utility of sponsons (Ingram's
inflatable ones or any others) when you use the word "sponson" to
describe something else. You even admit that "...it is located near
the side of the vessel rather than in the middle or at the bow or
stern. This is the important functional characteristic...", which
clearly precludes the inclusion of yer underseat floatation chambers,
which is all I was trying to say in the first place.

[snip] If
you are referring to the folding kayak manufacturers, then please explain
to the citizens of either Charleston or Vancouver that they do not speak
English (the citizens of Rosenheim would presumably be willing to agree
that it's not their primary language,
[snip]

My mistake. I thought two of 'em were German. Charleston (SC?) and
Vancouver (BC?) are two seaport towns, so one would have hoped that
their residents would get nautical terminology right.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll.
rhople[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters.
================================================== ====================

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

Oci-One Kanubi wrote:

Peter typed:


Oci-One Kanubi wrote:

Peter typed:

I don't think it's careless at all. My "Standard College Dictionary" gives
as the third definition of sponson "An air tank built into the sides of a
canoe to improve stability and prevent sinking." The air tanks under the
seats of the dinghies I sailed were "built into the sides of those boats to
improve stability and prevent sinking" and on that basis I asserted that
they acted as internal sponsons.

There can
be NO SUCH THING as an "internal sponson".

That doesn't seem to be the view of my dictionary, nor is it the view of
Klepper, Folbot, or Feathercraft, which all refer to the air chambers
located inside the hulls of their boats as sponsons.
....

All I am trying to do is get you to understand that you ruin any
attempt to honestly debate the utility of sponsons (Ingram's
inflatable ones or any others) when you use the word "sponson" to
describe something else. You even admit that "...it is located near
the side of the vessel rather than in the middle or at the bow or
stern. This is the important functional characteristic...", which
clearly precludes the inclusion of yer underseat floatation chambers,
which is all I was trying to say in the first place.

No, the seats in typical sailing dinghies are built into the sides of the
hull. One generally sits on the windward side facing the lee side of the
boat. The main flotation chambers in these craft are under the seats and
therefore also right along the side of the hull where they provide
considerable stability when the boat is swamped. Their placement is
entirely consistent with the dictionary definition stating "An air tank
built into the sides of a [canoe] to improve stability and prevent
sinking." Functionally this placement of the flotation chambers in sailing
dinghies provides sufficient stability of the swamped boat so that the user
is able to reenter it fairly easily, bail it out, and then continue on.
That was also the primary function of the external sponsons demonstrated in
the kayak self-rescue class that I attended.

All you seem to want to do is to debate the etymology of the word, which
seems to have originated in connection with gun platforms mounted at the
sides of boats, then applied to flotation placed in a similar position on
the outside of the hull, and is now used by many, including kayak
manufacturers, to include flotation in a similar position but inside the
hull. You clearly vehemently object to this last migration in usage.
Frankly I have no desire to further debate the etymology.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

"Seakayaker" ) writes:

The technique of using a floatation cushion would not work in any rough
water conditions that would have caused me to capsize in the first place.

you offer no proof of that claim. I dare you to prove it. Don't give up
after a couple half hearted atempts. Keep trying until you get desperate
and are near death. If you still can't manage it and die in the attmept,
them maybe I'll believe you but I'd more likely put it down to lack of
competence. I'd prefer to see the test replicated a few times by other
obnoxious kayak paddlers before accepting the claim. However I'd easily
refute the claim by accomplishing the re-entry a single time.

What keeps the cushion from floating away?

two things, hands and handles. sometimes maybe three, teeth.

How do you hold the boat, your
paddle, and the cushion while you try to get it under your hips?

are you sure you've been in a boat before, or is this one of those "toll"
questions? ever tried lowering a sail on a capsized boat in rough
conditions? sailors do it.

Have you
ever tried this in 6 foot or higher breaking seas?

there's *nothing* I haven't tried in 6 foot or higher waves. what millponds
do you paddle in? 6 foot waves are for children. we get wakes on the canal
higher than that.


Then the technique of straddling a kayak is also not good for rough water
entries. If I put my butt in the boat first, my legs will not get into the
cockpit.

that's what you get of buying a kayak with a tiny cockpit. why do some
kayak fanatics choose speed over comfort and safety? and then diss
sponsons? bloody irresponsible.

.. Better techniques can be found in any of the many books and videos
on the market for kayak re-entires and recoveries.

oh yeah, Hand of God. I love that one. Like God gives a **** about kayakers.


I consider anything that interferes with my kayak being put up on edge as
unsafe. A boat that stays flat on the surface of the water cannot be
controlled. A breaking wave will cause it to capsize with or without
sponsons.

anthing that interfers with putting you on edge where you cannot be
controlled. sure.

you should get a boat with a round bottom cross section. I don't know why
some kayakers go out in waves in long narrow hard chined boats, V-bottoms,
or those ridiculous hollow ends. nothing rides waves like round bottoms.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

spondoms really work! (BS)
 

whew...... lot's of big words and hot air blowing around in here!...
which by the way might be heavier than CO2 or NO2?.... and certainly
seems more prevalent. See you at the Gauley... spondom free!

Craig


http://community.webtv.net/juskanuit/juskanuit
"just canoe it"

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

I really hate to be picky, BUT that little button labeled SPELLING is meant
to correct your spelling in the post.

Or do we have a Welsh sailboarder who spells like he talks?

Jon Adams

"William R. Watt" wrote in message
...
"Michael Daly" ) writes:
On 26-Aug-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

so commenting
on it isn't exactly "thrashing newbies".

Dumping on the original poster isn't thrashing a newbie. He claims to
have paddled/sailed/whatever all his life without a lesson. It shows in
that he knows almost nothing of value and is more of a troll than
someone
to take seriously. In this case, you're thrashing a self-proclaimed
"expert"
who deserves it.

funny how some people label anyone who disagrees with their limited
experience.

there are photos of the 7.5 ft sail boat with the sponsons on my website
(see below) click on "boats" then on "Loonie". When nto sialign it is
proelled by a home made feathered double bladed paddle which qualifies the
boat for discussion in a paddlign newsgroup, and doubles as a sterrign oar
when under sail. Its a neat little boat made from a single sheet of
plywood. I use and enjoy it often, sometimes in very strong winds on small
waters where there are no large waves.


Mike

who sees in his dreams trolls coming out of the woodwoork



--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community
network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

"William R. Watt" wrote in message
...
"Michael Daly" ) writes:

BTW dictionaries are famous for getting definitions wrong - especially
in scientific
and technical terminology. My Webster's here says that oxygen is the
most
plentiful element in the universe.


I think you mean "atmosphere", not "universe". I'd check that dictionary
definitions again.

I'm getting the impression Mike is typing without thinking. I believe
that's called a "rant".

On this subject of getting back into capsized boats, I've done in in
canoes, sailing dingys, and once in a kayak. The problem in lightweight
narrow boats is getting one's hips over the gunwale. Most sailboats have
to be wide to carry sail. The one I built out of a single sheet of plywood
is narrow like a kayak. To carry sail and to re-enter after a capsize the
sponsons are needed. When you re-enter a kayak you normally pull yourself
up onto the rear deck and slide forward until you can straddle the boat
and drop your butt into the seat. On a boat with no rear deck, like my
small sailboat, and also I think on a kayak, you can enter from the side
by first sticking a floatation device under your hips to raise them to the
surface so you can slide them in over the gunwale. That's the way I have
re-enterd the sailboat. I sit on a floation cushion when using the boat
and shove the flotation cusion under my hips to re-enter the boat after a
capsize. However I only did that once as a test because the sponsons have
prevented any capsizes since they were installed.


Mike



Usually I reentered my kayak feet first under water, rolled up, and then
pumped the water out with the battery operated electric pump mounted behind
the seat. Then I reinstalled the cockpit cover and paddled off. Isn't that
how you do it, Mary.

John Adams

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

"Backyard Renegade" wrote in message
om...
Mary Malmros wrote in message
...
(Backyard Renegade) writes:

Mary Malmros wrote in message
...
(William R. Watt) writes:

no BS. I put sponsons on a 7.5 ft sailboat. Keep them above the
waterline
where they don't add to hull resistance through the water. Without
teh
sponsons I'd never get back into the boat after a cpasize.

You MUST be kidding. I could right a Sailfish on my own when I was
six years old. Okay, it took a little work, but...


Wow, impressive...

Not really. It's not that hard -- that's kind of the point.

But he did not say anything about righting a boat,
he said he wanted to re-enter the boat.

And leave it upside down, hmm? They sail real good that way ;-)
If you, or he, knows a way to re-enter and roll a sailboat with the
sails still on it, I'm prepared to genuflect in awe.

Not everyone here is a olypmic
star or was raised in boats..

Add me to the "not everyone". Never an Olympic star or even an
Olympic jock-washer.

BTW, according to what I know, William
was... and although he may not be a 35 yo buff, X generation, global
jaunting, look at me, only the best equipment type guy, there is
actually a possibility he has spent more time in smallboats than even
you!

Sure it's a possibility. So who said otherwise?

Sometimes you folks here need to remember, it is still a paddling
group and there are more than just WW paddlers posting here and some
of us just want to make things easier for ourselves so our fun, is not
so much work.

And sometimes you folks that are listing strongly to one side need
to get yourselves a crane and remove that mountain-sized chip from
your shoulder. Buy all the sponsons you want, and festoon your car
with 'em if you choose. My comment was simply because I'm danged if
I can see why they'd be necessary to get back in a capsized 7.5 foot
sailboat. I still don't see why, and I don't think you've given me
any more information on that.

I am listing to one side, just not the side you think... Personally I
still fall in the camp that if you need spondoms, you are probably in
the wrong boat or in conditions you should not be in **in most
cases**. I happen to be familiar with Wills boating habits and access
through his postings to other newsgroups and if Will says he needs
these spondoms to get back into his boat, he probably does. Personally
I would not use spondoms for anything more than waterbottles. they
might also make good pool toys for the kids... just not attached to
any boat!
Scotty

Is a spondom something a sponson wears while procreating little sponsons.

Inquiring minds want to know!!!

John Adams

spondoms really work! (BS)
 

Thank God! A short post to reply to.

If you plan to avoid procreating new sponsons, you blame well better wear a
spondom. Otherwise we'll be up to here in sponsons.

Better safe than sorry!

"Craig Smerda" wrote in message
...
whew...... lot's of big words and hot air blowing around in here!...
which by the way might be heavier than CO2 or NO2?.... and certainly
seems more prevalent. See you at the Gauley... spondom free!

Craig


http://community.webtv.net/juskanuit/juskanuit
"just canoe it"

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

" John Q Adams" writes:

"William R. Watt" wrote in message
...
"Michael Daly" ) writes:

BTW dictionaries are famous for getting definitions wrong - especially
in scientific
and technical terminology. My Webster's here says that oxygen is the
most
plentiful element in the universe.


I think you mean "atmosphere", not "universe". I'd check that dictionary
definitions again.

I'm getting the impression Mike is typing without thinking. I believe
that's called a "rant".

On this subject of getting back into capsized boats, I've done in in
canoes, sailing dingys, and once in a kayak. The problem in lightweight
narrow boats is getting one's hips over the gunwale. Most sailboats have
to be wide to carry sail. The one I built out of a single sheet of plywood
is narrow like a kayak. To carry sail and to re-enter after a capsize the
sponsons are needed. When you re-enter a kayak you normally pull yourself
up onto the rear deck and slide forward until you can straddle the boat
and drop your butt into the seat. On a boat with no rear deck, like my
small sailboat, and also I think on a kayak, you can enter from the side
by first sticking a floatation device under your hips to raise them to the
surface so you can slide them in over the gunwale. That's the way I have
re-enterd the sailboat. I sit on a floation cushion when using the boat
and shove the flotation cusion under my hips to re-enter the boat after a
capsize. However I only did that once as a test because the sponsons have
prevented any capsizes since they were installed.


Mike



Usually I reentered my kayak feet first under water, rolled up, and then
pumped the water out with the battery operated electric pump mounted behind
the seat. Then I reinstalled the cockpit cover and paddled off. Isn't that
how you do it, Mary.

That's a neat trick, but one I never learned, actually. If I spent
more time in a touring boat, I might give it a try, but I'm not sure
how well it would work for me -- I like a very tightly outfitted boat.

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

" John Q Adams" wrote in message ...
I really hate to be picky, BUT that little button labeled SPELLING is meant
to correct your spelling in the post.

Well then don't be picky. My manner of posting does not have a spell
checker unless I cut and paste into another program check and then cut
and paste back... I don't think that is necessary for posting to a
NG...
Scotty

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

"William R. Watt" wrote in message
...
are you sure you've been in a boat before, or is this one of those
"toll"
questions? ever tried lowering a sail on a capsized boat in rough
conditions? sailors do it.

Capsized sail boats that are dragging a sail in the water won't blow away
faster than a person can swim. Kayaks can and do.

Have you
ever tried this in 6 foot or higher breaking seas?

there's *nothing* I haven't tried in 6 foot or higher waves. what
millponds
do you paddle in? 6 foot waves are for children. we get wakes on the canal
higher than that.

Achoo!! Pardon me, I'm alergic to BS



that's what you get of buying a kayak with a tiny cockpit. why do some
kayak fanatics choose speed over comfort and safety? and then diss
sponsons? bloody irresponsible.

Bloody unknowing on your part. A small cockpit, scoops much less water than
a large one.

.. Better techniques can be found in any of the many books and videos
on the market for kayak re-entires and recoveries.

oh yeah, Hand of God. I love that one. Like God gives a **** about
kayakers.

No---but if you were unconscious, you'd certainly appreciate another kayaker
performing this rescue. It works


you should get a boat with a round bottom cross section. I don't know why
some kayakers go out in waves in long narrow hard chined boats, V-bottoms,
or those ridiculous hollow ends. nothing rides waves like round bottoms.

You have no idea what kind of hull shape my boat has, so how can you
possibly be making comments about it.


This whole conversation is becoming boring------plunk

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

sponsons really work! (BS)
 

" John Q Adams" ) writes:
I really hate to be picky, BUT that little button labeled SPELLING is meant
to correct your spelling in the post.

Or do we have a Welsh sailboarder who spells like he talks?

Jon Adams

I type like I paddle. Is there a problem with that?

I'm on a 1990 era 16 MHz 80386SX machine with 2400 baud modem and VT100
terminal emulation connected to a FreePort interface on a UNIX (SunOS)
machine. There are still some of these beautifully virus-free access
points to the Internet around which provide simple cheap access to mail,
newsgroups, and text web browsers. The simple text editor (Pico) on
FreePort has a simple spell checker which I don't use because it only
points out likely spelling errors, it doesn't offer to correct them,
making a trip to the dictionary necessary. And that slows me down. If you
can't understand something I type you can always ask for clarification. I
have a copy of Wordperfect with a decent Oxford (not the Webster ones they
use in the US) on this machine which I use when I'm composing email to the
Prime Minister or one of his underlings.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned