On Monday 20 September 2004 12:16 pm in rec.boats Bilgeman wrote:

tomf123 quips:

-Yep - it's Monday, sure as heck. :)-

Bilge-Yep, all freakin' day.

Say, chum, you seem to have an IQ above room temperature, and to know the
difference between a bow pulpit and a saloon urinal...

What the hell's the deal with this newsgroup...is there a computer
terminal in
the day room of some looney bin somewhere?

A lot of the posters in this group seem to sorely lacking in heavy meds
and
long term, probing bouts of intensive therapy.

It was those damned movies, right?

Too many booger-eaters saw "The Perfect Storm" and "Pirates of the
Carribean"
and decided to "run off to sea" and be Depp, Clooney, and Wahlberg, right?

I swear to Almighty, some of these drooling half-wits should have a mast
riveted to their foreheads and be flying 4 black balls from it.

I wouldn't trust some of these clowns to captain a rubber duck in a sitz
bath,
let alone a motor or sailing vessel on the high seas.

WTF?

You are (relatively) new around here.

The first thing to do is to plonk Jax into a nice padded
killfile. The second is to kill/ignore any thread
containing responses to him. Jax is a clueless boatless
troll who deliberately posts garbage in order to stir up
an argument. This is a form of attention seeking disorder.

Once you have our number one problem sorted you should take
similar action against all threads beginning OT and the
idiots who post political crap KNOWING that it is off topic.

--
My real address is crn (at) netunix (dot) com
WARNING all messages containing attachments or html will be silently
deleted. Send only plain text.

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 10:36:07 -0400, "Gene Kearns"
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:10:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

~~ much snippage ~~

I got it - I missed the link you posted the first go 'round.

Interesting discussion.

What's a kellet?


A kellet is "that weight" we've been talking about. If you don't
incorporate "the weight" in the anchor rode, via chain, it can be
artificially applied by using a kellet. Weight is what makes the
catenary functional. As the following link describes, once the
catenary is pulled tight enough to start lifting the shank of the
anchor, the holding ability of the anchor *rapidly* decays. The
greater the weight of the rode, the more holding power and (within
reason) the more shock absorbing power .

see:

http://www.anchorbuddy.co.nz/index.html

Got it. Thanks.

I knew what it was, but I couldn't recall.

Later,

Tom

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
**some** is a pedant use of the word. particularly in the context of
multi-G
shock loads. i.e. "reducing" by "some" measure from 4.898 G's to
4.89799983
G's.

A wave surge isn't causing multi-G shock loads, jackassby.

tomf123 and Chris Newport (not-me):

Gents:

Thanx for the skinny.
Boating is a high-dollar hobby and folks who "muck about with boats" have
something in common..they measure themselves, their crafts and their wits and
muscle, against the eternal sea...and she's not very forgiving in her "****ier"
moods...or of the prideful and ignorant who think they're "above all
that"...you do it right, or you don't come home...unless you're one lucky
s.o.b.

Silly freakin' me...I thought that with such minor trifles as lives and
fortunes at stake, there'd be something of a more serious discourse hereabouts.
I've "plowed the same furrow" on Usenet since 1995/6 or thereabouts, so I'm
passingly familiar with the netiquette...or lack thereof.

Anyway, y'all, thanks for the trouble to point out the local rocks n'
shoals...just proof of the adage that a good pilot is worth twice his weight in
gold, whilst a bad one makes a passable expedient chafing gear for your anchor
chain.

Tom, feel free to use my nasty-ass bon mots to clobber the Neanderthals
with...heck, if I didn't coin 'em then I stole 'em from some other poor
slob...and BTW, tyin' flies and fishin' don't exactly sound like a purgatorial
rehab regimen, y'know?

Hope yer "ticklin the ivories" again real soon, chum.

Regards;
Mutiny is a Management Tool
Select Your Tattoo while Sober

jaxashby quibbles:

-to those who don't know who the scum bag Bilge Rat is, he makes a living
--such as it is -- crawling around the lowest spots in a filthy cargo ships to
replace worn electrical wiring. this, of course, makes him an expert in
recreational boats and how they are used.-

Bilge- Never claimed any expertise in that area...unless someone else 'round
here has spent more time on Diego Garcia than I have, then I guess I'm the
local expert on "Dodge",(God help me).

Y'know, I love the kind of putrid little ****-lick who thinks that being a
seaman is somewhat akin to serving time for a felony conviction.

Ain't it strange that Christ could left his church in the care of any of his
apostles, among the ones we know of were tax collectors,farmers, tradesmen,
prostitutes(reformed), and fishermen.

And to whom did He hand the Keys?

So, yeah pallie, I play with some fairly dangerous crap in some fairly nasty
places, and the money isn't quite enough to innoculate me from that "Won the
Mega Millions Lotto" dream.

What of it? Care to try it? How many 40 and 50 year olds do you know who walk
the equivalent of a 15 story building every damned day?

Judging by your attitude, I'd say your maritime expertise is job-related
also...you must be the bozo who sucks farts outta the seats of the Staten
Island Ferry.

GFY;



Mutiny is a Management Tool
Select Your Tattoo while Sober

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:43:04 -0400, "Gene Kearns"
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 10:53:55 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:


The end points are not at the same elevation.

True, but then a hyperbolic curve does not necessarily have to have
equal level end points (in this case, height). It only has to have a
90º tangent at some point along the curve.

I think I'm getting one of my headaches again. I retired to get away
from all this stuff. :)


Snips


A catenary is not a hyperbolic curve.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Catenary.html

I won't argue.

You win. :)

Take care.

Tom

"The beatings will stop when morale improves."
E. Teach, 1717

On 20 Sep 2004 16:39:57 GMT, (Bilgeman) wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

and BTW, tyin' flies and fishin' don't exactly sound like a purgatorial
rehab regimen, y'know?

Ah, but it is. And watching the waves go by is even more calming.

And there are the tugs with their tows, ships and what not plying
their trades - it's very restfull.

Thanks for the good words.

Take care.

Tom

"The beatings will stop when morale improves."
E. Teach, 1717

Bilgeman wrote:
jaxashby quibbles:

-to those who don't know who the scum bag Bilge Rat is, he makes a living
--such as it is -- crawling around the lowest spots in a filthy cargo ships to
replace worn electrical wiring. this, of course, makes him an expert in
recreational boats and how they are used.-

Bilge- Never claimed any expertise in that area...unless someone else 'round
here has spent more time on Diego Garcia than I have, then I guess I'm the
local expert on "Dodge",(God help me).

Y'know, I love the kind of putrid little ****-lick who thinks that being a
seaman is somewhat akin to serving time for a felony conviction.

BG Doodles (jaxass) reminds me of my dear, departed, dingbat, aunt,
who was appalled that I would choose to go to sea in "filthy" Merchant
ships rather than in some nice clean Naval ship.
Like my aunt, Doodles, wouldn't know a Merchant ship from a "choo choo
twain".
Trust me Bilge ...... having laughed through many a "Doodles" rant on
subjects nautical, I still find it hard to imagine him holding down a
"BR" position.
On the one or two trips where he may have gotten out of sight of land,
he MAY have been onboard as ballast or "Norwegian Steam", but that's all.

otn

yo-yo bilge rat, there is no historical evidence whatsoever that that dude ever
existed.

but, then there is no historical evidence to show you have a brain, either.

Ain't it strange that Christ could left his church in the care of any of his
apostles, among the ones we know of were tax collectors,farmers, tradesmen,
prostitutes(reformed), and fishermen.

And to whom did He hand the Keys?

So, yeah pallie, I play with some fairly dangerous crap in some fairly nasty
places, and the money isn't quite enough to innoculate me from that "Won the
Mega Millions Lotto" dream.

What of it? Care to try it? How many 40 and 50 year olds do you know who
walk
the equivalent of a 15 story building every damned day?

Judging by your attitude, I'd say your maritime expertise is job-related
also...you must be the bozo who sucks farts outta the seats of the Staten
Island Ferry.

GFY;



Mutiny is a Management Tool
Select Your Tattoo while Sober

Y'know, I love the kind of putrid little ****-lick who thinks that being a
seaman is somewhat akin to serving time for a felony conviction.

then you love three quarters of the world's population.

A wave surge isn't causing multi-G shock loads, jackassby.

shows you know not a thing about shock loads and what causes them.

go stand in the corner, and keep quiet. adults are present.

genei, knock it off. you have no idea what the mathematical term catenary
means, nor any idea of the physics behind it, and sure as hell no understanding
just how ******************VERY***************** quickly the forces can become
HUGE.

go sleep it off.

"Gene Kearns"
Date: 9/20/2004 10:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:10:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 19:46:04 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On 18 Sep 2004 21:15:33 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

What happens during the interaction of forces on the rode would be
most fascinating.

a way to simplified look at it is to consider the chain/rode/line to have
zero
weight pulled between two points (say 100 feet apart), then hang a 1#
weight in
the center point and check how much strain it put on the end points when
the
weight hangs 20 feet, then 10 feet, then 5 feet, then 1 foot, then 1 inch,
then
1/10th inch. Just use trig to figure the forces.

So.... we just used intuitive trig to figure out why (1) we use scope
with an anchor and (2) why we don't tie boats to the dock with chain.
Now *that* is some real science......

And your "simplified look" does not apply.... an anchor rode does not
employ both ends at the same "Y" value.... therefore assumptions of
Y=Y'=0 do not obtain and is, therefore, the root cause of your lack
of understanding in this area. There isn't *anything* *attached* to
the middle.

But wouldn't the strain be equal at the arthimetical center and can be
equated to weight? It's really just another to figure energy
transfer, right?

I'm not totaly familiar with this so if I mess this up, it's an
electronic engineer with a math degree playing at mechanics, but
catenary defined means the shape of the line (or in this case rode) as
a curve. A funciton of strain would be weights at either end. Strain
can be defined as stored energy which is, I would think, distributed
evenly along the line to the end points. One way to define how much
strain is being applied would be to add weight to the middle and
measure the deflection.

At that point, it becomes a trig function - yes/no?


Yes. My point is that Jax keeps talking about this particular catenary
(and if properly applied, it isn't truly a catenary) as though both
ends are supported and hanging.... they aren't. The point of the
anchor rode is to fall from the boat at some small angle and end up at
the anchor at least parallel to the sea bed.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

*********************ANCHOR

Don't know if this "graphic" will work, but this is what one should
have, not a true catenary..... if this is expected to hold the
anchor.


the forces get out of hand ********VERY******** quickly. Even worse, is
that
the weight in the middle (or chain) has momentum as the boat rocks, so the
"natural" position of the weight overshoots and makes for seriously high
g-loads.


There is no weight "in the middle" (other than the weight of the rode)
.... so you put two anchors on the same rode? Odd.

Using that concept, most people use kellets and think it is a good and
useful idea.

What's a kellet?


A kellet is "that weight" we've been talking about. If you don't
incorporate "the weight" in the anchor rode, via chain, it can be
artificially applied by using a kellet. Weight is what makes the
catenary functional. As the following link describes, once the
catenary is pulled tight enough to start lifting the shank of the
anchor, the holding ability of the anchor *rapidly* decays. The
greater the weight of the rode, the more holding power and (within
reason) the more shock absorbing power .

see:

http://www.anchorbuddy.co.nz/index.html




Later,

Tom

--



Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Southport, NC.

http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/cavern/ Homepage
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.com/directions.asp Where Southport,NC
is located.
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.linksysnet.com Real Time
Pictures at My Marina
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats Rec.boats
at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide

JAXAshby wrote:
Y'know, I love the kind of putrid little ****-lick who thinks that being a
seaman is somewhat akin to serving time for a felony conviction.


then you love three quarters of the world's population.

LOL Ya know, Doodles, the more I read of your nonsense, the more I
realize how limited your education, how narrow your knowledge base, and
how pitiful your experience, on all subjects, especially, boating.
Hopefully, you'll never graduate to something larger than your Sunfish,
which will save the taxpayers immense sums, as now, only the various
"harbor patrols" need save your butt when the engine overheats or your
gps goes belly up whilst navigating in some harbor.
( I have this amusing picture of Doodles on a Sunfish with a "seagull"
outboard and large battery bank in the cockpit to run his laptop and
Gps, wandering around some LI harbor ..... lost and in irons)

otn

anyone care to explain just why you guys should not got to jail should you
injury someone with your negligent anchoring practises?

Look around after a squall and see which boats "dragged" anchor (i.e. pulled
their anchors loose by high G-load jerking) and which did not.

drunk drivers who used to "prove" they were not too drunk to drive by stating
that never before had they had an accident now find themselves with stiff jail
sentences for killing someone by driving drunk.

otnmbrd...

-Trust me Bilge ...... having laughed through many a "Doodles" rant on
subjects nautical, I still find it hard to imagine him holding down a "BR"
position.On the one or two trips where he may have gotten out of sight of land,
he MAY have been onboard as ballast or "Norwegian Steam", but that's all.-

Bilge- jaxashby as a "fart-chaser"? Hmmm, maybe that's what his Staten Island
ferry gig is leading up to...a promotion to inventorying other guys' "pecker
tracks".

Reading what passes for his posts, I think I know now what happens when guys
fall asleep in the paint locker.

- Doodles (jaxass) reminds me of my dear, departed, dingbat, aunt, who was
appalled that I would choose to go to sea in "filthy" Merchant ships rather
than in some nice clean Naval ship.
Like my aunt, Doodles, wouldn't know a Merchant ship from a "choo choo
twain".-otnmbrd

Bilge- "But Auntie...I have a toilet of me very own on that ship".

During the run up to Desert Storm, I was on the SS Wright, and for a while, we
were the only civilian ship on the Mina Sulman pier in Bahrein.(Saudi Las
Vegas).

As one would expect, everyone with grease under their fingernails started
"horse-trading". Occassionally we'd get Navy-type "guttersnipes",(I think
that's the term for 'em in Navy vernacular), drop in on our engine room.

There was ALWAYS two reactions you'd get:

1- God...this place is filthy!

and

2-Where the hell IS everybody?

This was especially the case if the swabbies were from the USS LaSalle,
(Persian Gulf Command Ship). One of 'em asked about it once, and after I had
explained the theory and practice of Overtime, and it's effect on Manning
Scale, they seemed to get the picture.

Regards;


Mutiny is a Management Tool
Select Your Tattoo while Sober

Then why are you here?

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
A wave surge isn't causing multi-G shock loads, jackassby.

shows you know not a thing about shock loads and what causes them.

go stand in the corner, and keep quiet. adults are present.

bilge rat, you need to introduce yourself to labomba. the two of you can
sling b/s stories way over the top.

won't be long until you are telling about the night you screwed six virgins,
including three of the five svenssen sisters, while you worked days as a
cropduster just before you became general of the mercenary strike force used in
a certain south american country, later putting out oil well fires.


(Bilgeman)
Date: 9/20/2004 11:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

otnmbrd...

-Trust me Bilge ...... having laughed through many a "Doodles" rant on
subjects nautical, I still find it hard to imagine him holding down a "BR"
position.On the one or two trips where he may have gotten out of sight of
land,
he MAY have been onboard as ballast or "Norwegian Steam", but that's all.-

Bilge- jaxashby as a "fart-chaser"? Hmmm, maybe that's what his Staten Island
ferry gig is leading up to...a promotion to inventorying other guys' "pecker
tracks".

Reading what passes for his posts, I think I know now what happens when guys
fall asleep in the paint locker.

- Doodles (jaxass) reminds me of my dear, departed, dingbat, aunt, who was
appalled that I would choose to go to sea in "filthy" Merchant ships rather
than in some nice clean Naval ship.
Like my aunt, Doodles, wouldn't know a Merchant ship from a "choo choo
twain".-otnmbrd

Bilge- "But Auntie...I have a toilet of me very own on that ship".

During the run up to Desert Storm, I was on the SS Wright, and for a while,
we
were the only civilian ship on the Mina Sulman pier in Bahrein.(Saudi Las
Vegas).

As one would expect, everyone with grease under their fingernails started
"horse-trading". Occassionally we'd get Navy-type "guttersnipes",(I think
that's the term for 'em in Navy vernacular), drop in on our engine room.

There was ALWAYS two reactions you'd get:

1- God...this place is filthy!

and

2-Where the hell IS everybody?

This was especially the case if the swabbies were from the USS LaSalle,
(Persian Gulf Command Ship). One of 'em asked about it once, and after I had
explained the theory and practice of Overtime, and it's effect on Manning
Scale, they seemed to get the picture.

Regards;


Mutiny is a Management Tool
Select Your Tattoo while Sober

jaxashby whines:

-bilge rat, you need to introduce yourself to labomba. the two of you can
sling b/s stories way over the top.-

Bilge- Huh...two seamen + 1 coffeepot = sea stories. For all your supposed
expertise, you don't know one of the most fundamental tenets of Yankee
seamanship?


-won't be long until you are telling about the night you screwed six
virgins,including three of the five svenssen sisters, while you worked days as
a cropduster just before you became general of the mercenary strike force used
in a certain south american country, later putting out oil well
fires.-jaxashby


Bilge-You sound jealous. Did your old lady give some sailor a roll in the hay?
That's a shame, but don't take it out on me...I didn't touch the skank.

GFY


Mutiny is a Management Tool
Select Your Tattoo while Sober

JAXAshby wrote:
yo-yo bilge rat, there is no historical evidence whatsoever that that dude ever
existed.

but, then there is no historical evidence to show you have a brain, either.

Ain't it strange that Christ could left his church in the care of any of his
apostles, among the ones we know of were tax collectors,farmers, tradesmen,
prostitutes(reformed), and fishermen.

There's no need to argue about the existence of Jesus. There's no way to
prove he existed or didn't exist It's sort of like George W. Bush's
"completion" of duties in the National Guard - he either didn't or did,
but there's no way to prove it: you have to accept or deny it on faith
alone.






--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

Catenary is a mathematical "term"? Term?

Yes.

I thought a mathematical
term was any distinct quantity contained in a polynomial.......

you were wrong. again. and again. and again. and again. and again.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JAXAshby wrote:
yo-yo bilge rat, there is no historical evidence whatsoever that that
dude ever
existed.

but, then there is no historical evidence to show you have a brain,
either.

Ain't it strange that Christ could left his church in the care of any
of his
apostles, among the ones we know of were tax collectors,farmers,
tradesmen,
prostitutes(reformed), and fishermen.

There's no need to argue about the existence of Jesus. There's no way to
prove he existed or didn't exist It's sort of like George W. Bush's
"completion" of duties in the National Guard - he either didn't or did,
but there's no way to prove it: you have to accept or deny it on faith
alone.






--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a
pariah.

What, me worry?

There is lots of evidence he existed. The question is was he the Son of God
as the Western Religions claim, or just another Prophet like Mohammed as the
Muslim claim. Or was he just a leader of a cult.

There is lots of evidence he existed

none.

"NOYB" wrote in message ...
"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...


How much is 2 G's? it is stopping short in 4 inches when moving 8 feet per
second. Think of the wave action needed to make a boat move 8 feet in a
second. On a 20,000# pound boat that would be a 40,000# strain on the
chain,
anchor, deck chocks.

Your math is wrong.

Starting with boat travelling at 8 ft/sec, a 2 g force will require 6
inches to stop the boat, and the boat will come to a stop in 1/8th of
a second.

To stop a boat travelling at 8 ft/sec within 1 second, the force
required is 1/4 g and the distance to stop is 4 feet.

To move a boat starting from standstill to 8 feet away within 1
second, the accelleration needed is 1/2 g and the speed attained at
the end of that 1 second of accelleration would be 16 ft/sec.

v(t)=at, d(t)=(1/2)at^2 and all that.

%mod%

the accelleration needed is 1/2 g

1/2 G (note the capitization) means a 11,000# strain on a 22,000 # boat. you
got 11,000# chain/chocks/anchor on your boat.

btw, yo-yo, the G-loads can be one hell of a lot higher than 1/2.

Starting with boat travelling at 8 ft/sec, a 2 g force will require 6
inches to stop the boat, and the boat will come to a stop in 1/8th of
a second.

1/4 second, not 1/8th. one hell of a difference.

but thanks for googling for hours trying to make an unproveable point.

genie, knock it off. you spend a year on www.HookedOnPhonics.com and then come
back here.

"Gene Kearns"
Date: 9/23/2004 11:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:09:25 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
**some** is a pedant use of the word. particularly in the context of
multi-G
shock loads. i.e. "reducing" by "some" measure from 4.898 G's to
4.89799983
G's.

A wave surge isn't causing multi-G shock loads, jackassby.


Ok, let's see where we are. Jax admits that chain has shock absorbing
ability as long as it is a catenary... that it hasn't been pulled
straight.

Jax avers that all "rope" rode is "better" because it has shock
absorbing capability.

So, they both have shock absorbing ability until they are pulled
straight. Well, duh! The last thing we want to do in either scenario
is pull all the slack out of the rode... to do that would destroy the
ability of the anchor to hold, anyway.

Assumption that an anchor is some sort of immovable object isn't very
bright... even for Jax. Most all chain rodes won't support the kind
of tensions that Jax imagines take place, either. (But, then, this is
the sort of silly argument that Jax raged concerning sailors being
snatched into with safety gear... ah, but I digress.)

Jax has adopted some figures that 2G's will be developed in moving a
boat 4 inches at 8 feet per second.... yielding a 40,000# pull on a
20,000# boat.... obviously flawed, because no standard rode (chain or
line) or anchor is going to hold.... let alone standard deck hardware
and attachments... and boats *do* anchor. Thus, we can conclude that
Jax's figures and position are flawed and must be reconsidered. If
this scenario were anywhere near accurate, anchoring, per se, would be
operationally impossible. I suggest that Jax post his equations and
sources for numerical evidence, in the future, if he cares to make
such observably irrational conclusions and sway anybody to his
understanding of nature.

The point that seems to be overlooked is that what makes an anchor
*hold* is securing the anchor to the bottom while maintaining the
shank of the anchor parallel to the bottom. This is the whole
argument for sufficient scope. The material forming the rode can
either enhance or aggravate this situation. As I have previously
posted... and provided links to ...... scientific studies have shown
that when the shank of an anchor is pulled above the horizontal to 10
degrees the maximum holding power has been reduced to 60%, at 15
degrees it is down to 40% .. 10 degrees of yaw can increase pull by
60%.


Thus, one limiting factor in all of this is the ability of the anchor
to hold the bottom. A large anchor may only have a holding power of
3500#. Using an all line rode, this may decay to about #2100 or even
1400# depending on scope or rode angle. A 5:1 scope yields about an
11.3 degree angle and a 7:1 scope yields about 8 degrees... and thus,
has a tendency to raise the anchor shack to this angle.

The line/chain splice may further reduce rode strength from 12%-25%.

A kellet, line/chain, or all chain rode serves to solve the root
cause of anchor pull out.... the lifting of the shank. This is best
done by properly sized chain or a kellet.... if maximum holding power
is sought. Obviously, an all line rode will suffice in most instances
and often, a line/chain rode is employed simply for the purpose of
abrasion resistance.

To date,

Jax has posted no documentary evidence that any statement he has made
is either correct or germane,

Jax has posted no formulae or germane mathematical support of his
argument (straw men of 20,000# boats being jerked by a 40,000# load
notwithstanding),

I see no support for Jax's immovable object (anchor) theory,

I see no evidence that any ground tackle found on any boat other that
something bordering a ship will support anything remotely close to
40,000#

nobody has posted any documented evidence of deck hardware being
damaged solely by using an all chain rode,

nobody has posted anything documented or observable that would suggest
that an all chain rode has less holding power than an all line rode
nor that a properly sized all chain rode subjects a boat to any more
or less shock absorption than all line rode.


Rather than merely strike a pose as Jax has done, here are my:

===========References=============
http://www.anchorbuddy.co.nz/royalnavy.html
http://www.ussailing.org/safety/anchor/results_13.htm
http://www.noteco.com/bulwagga/multi...pdf_Jan_01.pdf
http://www.ussailing.org/safety/Stud...hainsplice.htm
http://www1.iwvisp.com/download/pub/...eet/anchor.xls
http://cruisenews.net/db/pagetemplate.php?cat_id=17
http://www.dnv.com/binaries/req%20on..._tcm4-9375.pdf
--



Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Southport, NC.

http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/cavern/ Homepage
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.com/directions.asp Where Southport,NC
is located.
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.linksysnet.com Real Time
Pictures at My Marina
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats Rec.boats
at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide

Assumption that an anchor is some sort of immovable object isn't very
bright.

genie, who taught you that anchors are supposed to move?

yielding a 40,000# pull on a
20,000# boat.... obviously flawed, because no standard rode (chain or
line) or anchor is going to hold....

yup, but the nylon places the load of considerable time and distance.
therefore the shock load is several orders of magnitude lower.

let alone standard deck hardware
and attachments.

If
this scenario were anywhere near accurate, anchoring, per se, would be
operationally impossible

you, perhaps, have noticed that all the boats which drag -- due to an Act of
God -- in a storm are on all chain, or mostly chain with a few feet of nylon?

Of course you haven't. you have never seen a storm, except hidden in the back
of the closet in your bedroom at home.

I suggest that Jax post his equations

D = 16 T^2

S = T * A

A (one G) = 32 ft/sec^2

you can find these equations in a junior high school science class for advanced
students.

As I have previously
posted...

because *you* have posted something -- anything -- proves nothing at all.

what a self-centered turd you are for even suggesting such.

I see no evidence that any ground tackle found on any boat other that
something bordering a ship will support anything remotely close to
40,000#

therefore, genei clown, if *you* anchor on all chain and drag down on someone
injuring them you deserve to go to jail.

you need stretch, yo-yo. don't use all chain. unless of course you like you
sex with a 300 pound drug dealer locked in a 8' x 10' cell.

nobody has posted any documented evidence of deck hardware being
damaged solely by using an all chain rode,


they most certainly have. not here among the junior high school set, but it
has be documented far and wide, and with specific pictures.

this ain't rocket science, little boy. just ordinary knowlege for those with
an upper two digit or low three digit IQ.

JAXAshby wrote:
I see no support for Jax's immovable object (anchor) theory,


there you go, genei. you WANT an anchor to move. It is called "dragging" and
it is NOT an Act of God. It is criminal negilgence if you injure someone with
your deliberate attempts to hit them by anchoring in an obviously irresponsible
way.

jail time, dood, for you.

but, genie, you don't ever anchor longer than a short to time fish, do you? In
other words, you zero point zero experience anchoring.



Doodles, the odds of YOU having any great degree of experience anchoring
in bad weather, with ANY particular set up, are in the realm of "slim to
none".

otn

Gene Kearns wrote:
On 24 Sep 2004 03:04:19 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

nobody has posted any documented evidence of deck hardware being
damaged solely by using an all chain rode,


they most certainly have. not here among the junior high school set, but it
has be documented far and wide, and with specific pictures.


You know you have 'Ole Jax by the Speedos when he posts to himself no
less than 9 times and still hasn't provided proof... or any link to
proof.....



Uh...I'll leave having Jax by the Speedos to you, thankyewverymuch.

--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

On 27 Sep 2004 09:54:28 -0700,
(modervador) wrote:

(JAXAshby) wrote in message ...
Starting with boat travelling at 8 ft/sec, a 2 g force will require 6
inches to stop the boat, and the boat will come to a stop in 1/8th of
a second.

1/4 second, not 1/8th. one hell of a difference.

but thanks for googling for hours trying to make an unproveable point.

Oh, quite provable indeed. I'm not aware of any specific links on
Google which would lead one to the equations involving accelleration,
velocity, distance and time, but it seems like you're interested
enough to research it for yourself. I remember them from high school
physics class many years ago, so there was no need.

The relevant relations here are v=at and d=(1/2)at^2. In this case,
we're specifying a=2g and solving to get an 8 ft/sec change in
velocity. Plugging in 32 ft/sec^2 for g and my (correct) answer of
1/8th second for t, we get

v= 2*32 ft/s^2 *1/8 sec = 64/8 ft/sec = 8 ft/sec, which was the
velocity given as the starting condition.

d= (1/2)*2*32 ft/sec^2 *(1/8 sec)^2 = 32/64 ft = 1/2 ft = 6 inches.

You had originally stated that for 2 g and 8 ft/sec, stopping distance
would be 4 inches; that math was questioned. I have provided not only
the correct stopping distance but the correct time. I stand by my
math.

Not that you need my support, but you are correctomundo.

Later,

Tom
-----------
"Angling may be said to be so
like the mathematics that it
can never be fully learnt..."

Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653

in other words, odor vader, you contributed not a thing to the discussion about
dangerously lazy sailors trying to injury other sailors.

not surprising, for you have never posted anything remotely related to sailing
in the past.

(modervador)
Date: 9/27/2004 12:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

(JAXAshby) wrote in message
...
Starting with boat travelling at 8 ft/sec, a 2 g force will require 6
inches to stop the boat, and the boat will come to a stop in 1/8th of
a second.

1/4 second, not 1/8th. one hell of a difference.

but thanks for googling for hours trying to make an unproveable point.

Oh, quite provable indeed. I'm not aware of any specific links on
Google which would lead one to the equations involving accelleration,
velocity, distance and time, but it seems like you're interested
enough to research it for yourself. I remember them from high school
physics class many years ago, so there was no need.

The relevant relations here are v=at and d=(1/2)at^2. In this case,
we're specifying a=2g and solving to get an 8 ft/sec change in
velocity. Plugging in 32 ft/sec^2 for g and my (correct) answer of
1/8th second for t, we get

v= 2*32 ft/s^2 *1/8 sec = 64/8 ft/sec = 8 ft/sec, which was the
velocity given as the starting condition.

d= (1/2)*2*32 ft/sec^2 *(1/8 sec)^2 = 32/64 ft = 1/2 ft = 6 inches.

You had originally stated that for 2 g and 8 ft/sec, stopping distance
would be 4 inches; that math was questioned. I have provided not only
the correct stopping distance but the correct time. I stand by my
math.

%mod%