HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: legacy@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (wayne.m.simpson)
Subject: Re: Wheel steering on small boats
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:53:30 GMT
Summary: Titanic's wheel operated backwards

In article <1993Jan27.193322.26059@leland.Stanford.EDU> stefan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stefan Michalowski) writes:
>In article <30887@castle.ed.ac.uk> wex@castle.ed.ac.uk (John Wexler) writes:
>>In article <1jsgbqINN592@morrow.stanford.edu>,
>>francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
>>|>                                           ...are there not boats
>>|> where the wheel turns agianst the direction? Wasn't this the "old-
>>|> fashioned" way? ...
>>
>>The convention has been for a very long time that wheels turn the way
>>that we all expect.  ...
>
>I'm still not sure. I was looking at "The Lore of Ships" (by the Swedish
>Nordbok group). There are two explicit drawings of 19th century steering
>gear: one for a smallish wooden ship, and one for a big steel carrier.
>After looking at the page every which-way (including backwards against
>the light, in a mirror, with hypercharge and baryon number exchanged, etc.),
>it looks to me like the two wheel polarities are different. I'll call
>the San Francisco Maritime Museum later on. There is a guy there who
>sailed on the "Omega" ("last of the barques") in the Peruvian guano 
>trade. He will know.

   The Titanic, and presumably other White Star liners of the period,
had wheels that operated backwards, ie, turn the wheel clockwise and the
ship goes to port.
   In the bridge officers report of the collision, the first officer
says he "Hard a starboarded to try and port around it" or something
to that effect.
   So it evidently was common practise as late as 1910 to have wheels
on ships whose sense followed the convention of tillers.

Wayne Simpson (no fancy .sig this time)
From: jeffh@nonsuch.EBay.Sun.COM (Jeff Huntington)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Wheel steering on small boats
Date: 25 Jan 1993 17:44:27 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: jeffh@nonsuch.EBay.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: nonsuch.ebay.sun.com

In article 30102@oasys.dt.navy.mil, hanners@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Robert Hanners) writes:
> In rec.boats, francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
> 
> But *STILL* after all this time, if I'm *forward* of the wheel I will
> instinctively throw the wheel bass-ackwards.  Damnedest thing...
> sailing smoothly along, then suddenly find yourself rounding up at an
> ever increasing rate (as you apply "correction").  I just can't break
> that habit!
> 


I know what Bob is saying.  I have sailed exclusively with a tiller for over
2o years, and have just recently bought a boat with a wheel.  I do OK as long
as I am right behind the wheel.  But, get me off to one side and concentrating 
on the sails and the wind, and back I go to turning the wheel in the wrong
direction.  I thought I would get over it in time.  Based upon Bob's experience,
looks like that is unlikely.

Jeff Huntington
From: brady@osiapps.aero.org (John Brady)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Cal 40 as blue water cruiser
Followup-To: rec.boats
Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:37:40 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: jbrady.aero.org

A friend of mine would like to buy a bigger boat (he now has a
Newport 28) for liveaboard with some Pacific Ocean passages in
the future (1 to 2 years from now).

Some cost concious sailors have recommended the Cal 40 as fitting
the bill.  Are there any owners, previous owners, or others with
Cal 40 experience out there?

Specific questions are:

1 -- Is it a good choice for blue-water cruising?
     -- Does it track well in rough conditions?

2 -- Are good examples of the breed available?
     -- What is the typical price range?
     -- What are the common design/build weaknesses?

3 -- Do you know of any available on the West coast?

Thanks for any help.

(e-mail is preferred)


John Brady                  **  brady@osiapps.aero.org
Network Engineer            **
The Aerospace Corporation   **  (310) 336-2220 (work)
P.O. Box 92957              **  (310) 336-7505 (fax @ work)
Los Angeles, CA 90009-2957  **  (310) 372-6793 (home)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: sailcover-topping lift
From: kroin@mcvax4.d48.lilly.com
Date: 22 Jan 93 11:23:39 EST
Distribution: world,local

I own a 1977 Boston Whaler 5.2 Harpoon that has lots of equipment,
 including a spinnaker
(which I have never flown-I usually sail alone), but I don't own a sail cover.
I currently (in the spring and summer) dry dock the boat near the reservoir
where I sail and trailer the boat-to the water each time. It would save time to
leave the main on the boom. Is there any trick to making a sail cover
(they sell for about $80 here -you give them the measurements) and can you
leave the battens in when the sail is wrapped under the cover. Also, would a
topping lift work on this boat so the boom won't have to fall to the deck when
I lower the main? I wasn't born to
this but I'm learning slowly. Stan " My wife gave me a guitar for X-mas zee
possibilities are endless" the sailor man. Thanks- 
      +--------------------------------------------------------------+
      J.S.K@Lilly.Com is really Julian Kroin,late of Indpls. IN.
      +--------------------------------------------------------------+
From: torsten@unisql.UUCP (Torsten Weirich)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Radio licenses
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:28:36 GMT
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <1993Jan19.233921.29517@mprgate.mpr.ca> kell@mprgate.mpr.ca (Dave Kell) writes:

   I'm curious why the licensing people want to know about receive-only
   devices like Loran.  Radar I can understand, but why license users of
   receiver equipment?

Just in case they run out of money and are looking for things to tax.

Torsten Weirich
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| UniSQL                      Cursed by a fortune cookie:       |
| 9380 Research Blvd.         "Your principles mean more to you |
| Kaleido II, Ste. 200         than any money or success."      |
| Austin, TX 78759               ^                              |
| Tel: (512) 343-7297            |                              |
| Fax: (512) 343-7383            +-the story of my life... ;-(  |
| Email: unisql!weirich@cs.utexas.edu                           |
| Disclaimer:  something about "plausible deniability"...       |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
From: davea@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Dave Angelini)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Opinion Sought Liferaft/SSB
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:14:59 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA



   Has anyone heard of an Italian company named Eurovinil that makes
liferafts. I have a chance to purchase a two year old 6-man offshore
and I was wondering if there was any opinion on this make. It can be
recertified locally!

  Also, any opinion on the Seas model 222 SSB transciever?
From: abm@mbunix.mitre.org (Murphy)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: FL Keys trip Ideas?
Date: 22 Jan 93 22:24:38 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA


I'm planning a trip to the keys for this February school vaction.  We have ten days with the boat from Miami.  

I'd be interested to hear suggestions of places to go while there.  

Any special gunk holes ?
How about Elliot Key?
Bahia Honda?
Is Bimini worth a day over and back ?
Inside versus outside?
Snorkelling places?

The boat is a F27 trimaran

Thanks in advance

alex
abm@mitre.org

-- 
Alex Murphy

abm@mbunix.mitre.org
(617) 271-2284
From: nall@ibm12.scri.fsu.edu (John Nall)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Sail salvage w/power (brainstorm)
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:37:48 GMT
Reply-To: nall@ibm12.scri.fsu.edu (John Nall)
Distribution: usa
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University

In article <1993Jan25.183818.14843@sequent.com> caf@sequent.com (Frank Collom) writes:
>I'm hoping that this will generate some interesting discussions.

  ...

>The boat is in 4' to 6.5' of water depending on tides,  the keel is
>toward shore and now pretty much burried into the sand and muck. She's
>on her side (mast toward river, bow upstream) at about 30 degrees.
>
>We attempted to turn and drag her into deeper water where she could be
>righted using my 29' Criss with twin 350's but couldn' budge her. 

  ...

>HOW WOULD YOU GO ABOUT SAVING THIS BOAT?


    Contact your local Scuba club.  They'll know where you can beg/borrow/rent
    some airbags.  Put them around the hull at dead low tide.  At full tide, you
    should have enough lift to be able to pull it with twin 350's

    
John

-- 
John W. Nall              | Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
nall@mailer.scri.fsu.edu  | Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
  "Why yes, as a matter of fact, I DID vote for Hillary!!" - me
From: laughlin@ship.wimsey.bc.ca (Laughlin Hughes)
Sender: UUCP@ship.wimsey.bc.ca
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: Re: Batten thickness/stiffnes
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:44:13 GMT

In article <727634316.AA00293@ship.wimsey.bc.ca> laughlin@ship.wimsey.bc.ca (Laughlin Hughes) writes:

>JCT/For fully battened sail, do battens taper (thinner at the
>   /the leading edge, close to mast) to promote camber?

>        Mine are (Tornado catamaran)... They're a foam-sandwich
>construction, and the width decreases towards the luff.  I've also
>seen glass battens that had a rib running the length of the batten
>on their face.  By sanding or planing the rib in the right area
>(fore and aft), some draft control was supposed to result.

Thinner at the front is the usual way they are made.  In fact if you
install them backwards, they tend to make the sail _EXTREMELY_ flat.
A good trick for those unbelieveable survival days...

>        *Really*, I believe that most of the shape is cut into the
>sail itself, and the battens control very little of the shape of
>the draft.  My battens are bolted in (bookbinders bolts) at the
>leech.

I'm surprised this is so.  If you look at any catamaran asscessory
retailer's catalog, you'll find about a _dozen_ different ways to
control batten tension for draft control.  I know that on Hobie 16s
you can achieve between 6% and 18% camber (actually, you can get more,
but it doesn't do any good).  Many of the modern sail shapes can be
varied a great deal with other sail controls, outhauls (especially on
loosefooted mains), cunninghams (downhauls), leech lines, vang
tension, inhauls, diamond tension, mast rotation, sheet vs traveller
tension, etc.

On the Hobie I stuff my battens according to what I think I will need
for the day, then fine tune using the other sail controls on the
water...

--
Al Bowers                       bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov
NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle, Lead Aero
NASA, Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, California
From: EPLUS17@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Boat Show
Date: 29 Jan 93 03:58:43 GMT
Organization: C.C.S.O.

In article <1k950nINN367@male.EBay.Sun.COM>
jeffh@nonsuch.EBay.Sun.COM (Jeff Huntington) writes:
 
>In article 30284@oasys.dt.navy.mil, hanners@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Robert Hanners) writes:
>> In rec.boats, dudley@treefort.Corp.Sun.COM (Dudley Gaman) writes:
>> >In article 11437@cbnewsj.cb.att.com, legacy@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (wayne.m.simpson
>> >) writes:
>> >> In article <106693@netnews.upenn.edu> karina@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Karina Haa
>> >vik) writes:
>> >> >Man looking at Catalina 30: 'I don't like this one as much.  It doesn't have
>> >> >                             a microwave.'
 
When my wife says "but it isn't blue"--as when we were looking
at cars within earshot of a salesman--she meant, "I don't like
this and will explain later, in private."  After hearing "But
it isn't blue" a number of times each trip to the lot, the guy
was rather surprised when we settled one that was red.  Maybe
the "I don't like this one as much" was the important part of
the message, and the rest was for the benefit of any eavesdroppers.
It is the sort of thing that my wife and I would do.
 
..Richard E+17
 
(Life is too short to always be serious.)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: awootten@slacktide.cv.nrao.edu (Al Wootten)
Subject: Re: Split rec.boats??
Organization: nrao
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:32:36 GMT

In article <1jpjsjINNms@gilligan.East.Sun.COM> mike@gilligan.East.Sun.COM (Mike Roncadori) writes:


   What do the rest of you think?

Like many here, I am 100% in favor of canoeing and sailing.  But then I returned
from an observing trip to find my wife (100% in favor of power, noise and fumes)
had bought a jetski--Yamaha Waverunner to be exact.  Of course, it falls upon
me to (grudgingly) feed and maintain the thing.  But I have to admit, it
WAS fun to blast up the Rappahannock into the setting sun, or to zip over
to the Club without half an hour of preparation.  The tricky part is to try to
sway the children to my way of thinking but I'm afraid that will be like the
battle between books and the TV-Video Games.  The posting frequency here
really isn't so high that I think a split is yet in order, and many items
are of interest to varied readerships.  Let's keep rec.boats as it is.
--
 Alwyn  Wootten
From: guglielmetti@elia.epfl.ch (Philippe Guglielmetti)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Somebody in Europe reading?
Date: 28 Jan 93 16:17:03 GMT
Organization: IA-DME-EPFL
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d11
X-XXMessage-ID: <A78DC74C02027B20@iamace9.epfl.ch>
X-XXDate: Thu, 28 Jan 93 17:24:28 GMT

And Switzerland ?

Ph. Guglielmetti, Lausanne, Switzerland
Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: meyer@dbsun.uucp (Don Meyer)
Subject: Re: Jet Skis
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 12:40:19 GMT

In article <4038@wyse.wyse.com> jmunro@wyse.wyse.com (Jim Munro x2497) writes:
>But jumping waves, fify feet from a public beach, or buzzing by rowers in
>lightweight rowing shells, or zipping through groups of defensless surfers,
>they deserve what they get. And what they get is more  and more restrictions.

I disagree with the solution, which I take to be an across the board ban
on PWC in many areas (I'm 100% in agreement with your other
statements).  This logic could be applied to *anything*.

  Some people are hurting themselves with chainsaws, lawnmowers,
  and even the tools in their woodshops.  Let's ban all of these
  dangerous items.

My point is that the real solution is to penalize or educate the OFFENDERS,
not take the easy way out and say "Gee those ______ might hurt someone.
 Let's ban them."
Education, and _reasonable_ regulations that are _enforced_ are the real
solution to all of the above situations.

IMHO one of the problems with America today is that as a society we
would rather limit the freedoms of the many rather than make the few
take *responsibility* for their actions.

Make some sort of "driving test" and general domain knowledge test a
requirement before letting anyone ride a PWC.  While we're at it,
let's do the same for ALL powerboats above the electric trolling motor
stage.  Come to think of it, let's implement an automobile driving test
that actually tested driving SKILL as opposed to rote memorization of
inane rules that no one actually uses along with that ultimate test of
driving ability -- parallel parking!

Don
-- 
" 'Cause you see son, it's one of my responsibilities as a parent to wean
you from life's joy and prepare you for the relentless heartache that is
adulthood." -- Earl Sinclair to Robbie
    =========================================================
From: hagerman@serve.shr.dec.com (Doug Hagerman)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Daggerboard design question
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:32:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1k6o01INNqjf
Reply-To: hagerman@serve.shr.dec.com (Doug Hagerman)
Distribution: world
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
NNTP-Posting-Host: serve.shr.dec.com


In article <BOWERS.93Jan26115012@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov>, bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers) writes:

|>
|>Think of it this way.  The induced drag (drag due to load or to lift
|>With zero load on the rudder, we
|>get zero units of rudder drag and a total of 1 unit total drag.  Now
|>lets say we take half the load on the rudder (leaving half on the
|>daggerboard).  So now we get 1/4 unit drag on the dagger (1/2 times
|>1/2) and 1/4 unit of drag on the rudder (ditto).  Total drag is now
|>1/2 (1/4 + 1/4).  So by loading up the rudder we got half the total
|>drag!

This sounds plausible, but in a fairly heavy wind where
say 100 pounds of leeway force is being prevented by the foils, my Laser
rudder would, if trimmed using these rules, support a load of around
40 pounds.  Even taking into
consideration the considerable leverage of the tiller this doesn't
sound like the right trim since I would feel something like say 5 pounds
of force at the hiking stick.  Is the implication here that most boats
are incorrectly set up to give insufficient weather helm (i.e. too much
of leeway force taken by centerboard?)

Doug.
Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: walter@watson.ibm.com (Walter Wilson)
Subject: Rhodes' Chesapeake 32'
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:58:26 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

Can anyone tell me ANYTHING about a 32' Chesapeake (Rhodes design)?
I have never seen one; however, I have recently seen a couple of
ads for one -- since I am (leisurely) looking for a coastal cruiser
(NY area) I am trying to decide if I should take a closer look.

-- 

  Walter G. Wilson  (walter@watson.ibm.com)
  The opinions expressed here are my own.
From: ber@otter.hpl.hp.com (Brenda Romans)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 11:52:36 GMT
Subject: Re: charter sailing in greece or turkey
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.
Newsgroups: rec.boats

A few years ago we went flotilla sailing in Turkey for two weeks and had a
great time.  We were worried that sailing in a group could be a pain but it was
very relaxed.  The first day they showed us the charts and how to work the
heads, stove etc and we all followed the leader to the next harbour.

That night they went over the charts for the next area and told us to meet up
in three days at an arranged meeting point.  The holiday went on like this with
briefings followed by several days free sailing.  We all had radios so that we
could contct the lead boat if we had problems and it worked very well.

We had heard that in Turkey the wind is reliable and comes up every afternoon.
This is what happened for us and we flew along every afternoon.  The latest
brochure came through the post a few weeks ago, I'll try to remember to bring
in the name and address of the tour operator.

Cheers

Brenda
From: bwb1@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (BRENT W. BENSON)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Daggerboard design question
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:19:30 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <16B5D12C29.EPLUS17@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu>, EPLUS17@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu (Rich
ard Engelbrecht-Wiggans) writes:
>I was hoping to tap into the net wisdom for help in designing
>a daggerboard for my sailing dinghy.
>
>Currently, the daggerboard measures about 10" front to back
>at hull level (tapering to about 7" at the bottom), extends
>about 35" below the hull, and sits in a daggerboard well that
>measures about 16" front to back.   Thus the dinghy could easily
>accomodate a daggerboard about 60% bigger front to back.
>
>1.  If there were no limitation on draft, what would the ideal
>board for light winds look like?  (length, taper, width, foil?)

Lift coefficient increases by about a factor of 2 when the aspect ratio
(approx=length/width) increases from 1 to 4. The increase is much smaller
above 4.  Your current board is about right.  NACA 63a-010 is a good foil
choice.  Taper is no advantage.

>2.  Given that I would like to reduce the draft by at least 12",
>what sort of compromises am I making in performance?
>
>
Assume that the current board is ok, i.e. not too much leeway in light air
(you need more board at low than higher speed).  Reducing from 35 to 23 in
depth requires a larger width to get the same area, and then even more width
to compensate for loss of lift due to smaller aspect ratio.  Your full 16"
width by 23" length gives about 30% more area which is not quite enough to
compensate for the decrease of lift coefficient from reducing the aspect ratio
from 4 to 1.4.  Your boat should still sail decently.
More important may be the location of the new center of lift along the
centerline. The wide board may shift this enough to induce weather helm (if
forward) or lee helm (if aft).  Either of these reduce performance
significantly, and lee helm makes the boat difficult to sail.
Brent
From: kellerd@ilex.lle.rochester.edu (David E. Keller)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Full Batten Main - Problem
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:07:46 GMT
Reply-To: kellerd@ilex.lle.rochester.edu (David E. Keller)
Organization: UofR Laboratory for Laser Energetics

In article <20015@mindlink.bc.ca>, Bill_Gardner@mindlink.bc.ca (Bill Gardner) writes:

Hi Bill,
 
I have an older C&C 30 a '75.  3 seasons ago I had full battens added to an
older sail to extent its' life and make it easier for my wife and I to handle.
The sail had round slugs.  We installed a Harken lazy jack system at the time
as well.
 
We always had smooth operation of the sail up until this past season.  We had
three slugs break loose.  I handstiched on some replacment slugs using the
round slugs that have the little channel molded in.  I thought that they might
hold up longer by minimizing the chafe on the webbing.  Since that time
we have noticed it is much more difficult to get the main up.  I think the 
presure from them battens leverage the slugs out of alignment and cause a lot
of friction.
 
I was just at the sailmakers last week and related the problem.  They said "Yeh,
full battens and round slugs are natorious.  They recomended round slugs
similar to the ones I used only they had an extra angled opening on either end
of the slug.  They knew I was on a tight budget and did not even bother
mentioning bat-cars etc.  Their attidude was "yes they wear, we will just give
you a few extra to sew on when you notice they pop...".  
 
Regarding "lazy jack systems".  OMHO they are a waste of money.  Not because
of what they do - (they make mainsail dousing simple),
but because you could buy the individual parts for a fracttion of the 
"kit" price.  The kit is designed so that you can adjust the tension on the
jack lines as need may be.  What we found was there is seldom a need to adjust
them.  You adjust the tension when you put the main on in the spring and that
is about it!  Consequently, I believe that rather than a $100 kit (or whatever)
all you really need is three deadeyes and some line - total cost about $10.
The hype is that it is some "system".  If you saw one installed you would see
they are very simple and have been around far longer than Harken.
 
Hope this helps,

Dave