HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: steve@bcrvmpc2.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Knots
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 12:44:47 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: steve@bcrvmpc2.vnet.ibm.com
Organization: IBM, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

Just had a reason to try the Hunter's bend that appeared here
a few weeks ago.  The knot it absolutely perfect for joining
two lengths of poly rope.  The stuff is normally *so* slipery
thae knots magically untie.  The Hunter's bend clinching action
works kind of like chinese finger cuffs on the line, the knot
stays.

Also, did any fishermen out there notice that a Hunter's bend is
a one turn version of the blood or barrel knot.  The blood or barrel
is the best knot for joining monofilament.  It's the same as the
hunters, except that you make 5 or 6 turns around the standing
line before you tuck the end through, as opposed to one turn with
the Hunter's bend so it looks like interlocking half hitches.

Also, thanks to the kind soul who showed the super quick bowline.
It's already caused a half dozen 'well I'll be damned's'

Steve                   Steve Weingart        IBM Boca Raton
                        steve@bcrvmpc2.vnet.ibm.com

It's bad enough that I think these things, please don't think it's
my employer's opinion too.
From: steph@cs.uchicago.edu (Stephen Wilson Bailey)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Help, strange tiller action
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:56:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: candide.STEPH.92Oct16125643
Organization: University of Chicago Computer Science

I dunno 'bout the oscillation, but as for not tying the sail to the
boom when you reef, I think it depends upon what reefing system you
use.

Most jiffy reefed sails are designed to be loaded only at the reefing
cringles.  If you tie the middle of the foot of the sail to the boom
tightly you may tear the sail when you sheet hard.  I've had some
first hand experience with this.

Nonetheless jiffy reefed sails do have grommets in the middle of the
foot of the sail.  These are for ``tidying up,'' rather than
controlling or shaping the sail.  You should reave sail ties through
them, roll up the the reefed portion of the sail, and LOOSELY tie the
sail tie around the boom and the roll of sail.

On the other hand, there are also sails which are reefed by tying them
tightly at several points along the length of the boom, either with
bits of line built into the sail or ones you reave when you want to
reef, hence the confusion.

Steph
From: terry@gtm-inc.com (Terry Gerritsen)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: GPS
Keywords: Happy
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 06:29:13 EDT
Reply-To: terry@gtm-inc.com (Terry Gerritsen)
Distribution: na
Organization: G.T.M. Incorporated, Kingston, ON (613) 546-3078
Content-Type: Text

gerard@progress.COM (Gerard Bras) writes:

> keith@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Keith Hawkins) writes:
> 
> 
> 
> >Terry,
> 
> >Would you recommend GPS over Loran.
> 
> >I'm new to this boating thing and have used
> >neither GPS nor Loran, but will be acquiring
> >one of these devices soon.  GPS is usually
> >noted as superior to Loran.  And it sounds as if
> >your happy.  Have you used Loran before??  Can
> >you make a comparison??  Is GPS worth the extra
> >money??
> 
> >I don't plan to sail around the world, but sailing up
> >to Block Island, Martha's Vineyard, Cape Cod, etc
> >would be nice.
> 
> You didn't ask me but you did ask publicly so I'll just
> jump in.  IMO, for what you want LORAN will work to 100%
> satisfaction at a fraction of the price.  They are both excellent
> systems, with GPS having a few advantages.  On the other hand GPS
> still costs at least three times as much.  Unless you are going
> offshore beyond LORAN range or need the precision of GPS it's up
> to you whether it's worth the extra bucks.
> 
> cheers,
> gerard

I have to disagree with you Gerard, LORAN will not work to 100% 
satisfaction, if you sail, or power through any magnetic fields, it 
will not give you accuracy, you do not encounter this with the GPS
so what is more important a Loran that works part of the time, but
costs a lot less, and could endager your life because magnetic fields
interfer with its signal, or a GPS that is accurate to one foot, but cost
three times as much. Don't get me wrong I have the Raython Loran and I
used it a lot and was happy. The GPS is far more advanced has more features
and probably will come down in cost as more and more people purchase it.

Terry


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terry Gerritsen         |  G.T.M. Incorporated              (613) 384 0162
terry@gtm-inc.com       |  Kingston, Ontario           Fax: (613) 389 4594
                      "Transportation is our business"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: stefan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stefan Michalowski)
Subject: Re: Boat Enhancement Advice
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 16:52:02 GMT

In article <STEPH.92Oct6153016@candide.uchicago.edu> steph@cs.uchicago.edu (Stephen Wilson Bailey) writes:
>Of course, some people consider Spinlock stoppers to be ``cheap
>imitation Antals.''  We don't have any stoppers on our boat (yet),
>but with all the glowing reviews I've heard (from locals and BOC
>racers) I'd probably go for Antals unless I was really strapped for
>cash...
>

Good quality sheet stoppers are a must (not that anyone would use them
for sheets!). My boat came equipped with "cheap imitations" that would
open if you looked at them crooked. Before I replaced them, I used to
have nightmares about the main halyard releasing suddenly, braining the
crew in the cockpit. I'd like to install one of those spring-loaded
shock-absorber things to support the boom (I hate topping lifts) but,
for some reason, they're incredibly expensive.

Stefan
From: kevang@ocf.berkeley.edu (kevan G)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Sailing in Colorado?
Keywords: is there any???
Date: 14 Oct 92 00:38:25 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: tsunami.berkeley.edu


Hi there all.  I am thinking about moving to Colorado (Boulder) and
I need to know if there is any good lake sailing in the area.  Any
racing?  Sailing clubs?  Water at all?

Any help will be greatly, well, helpful  ;^}

Kevan
From: bennett@erich.triumf.ca (P.Bennett)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Help in choosing a VHF radio
Keywords: Radio VHF
Date: 12 Oct 92 17:20:00 GMT
Organization: TRIUMF: Tri-University Meson Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: erich.triumf.ca
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Oct12.105715.15337@hemlock.cray.com>, ss@tamarack16.cray.com (Sandra Swanson) writes...
> 
>We would like to upgrade the radio in our boat.  We are currently
>using a hand-held, but would like something more powerful.  So we
>are looking to purchase a permanently mounted 25 watt VHF.  We
>already have a 1/2 wave 6db antenna on the boat.
> 
>Looking in the various catalogs one sees 25 watt radios priced from
>$119 to $500+.  Some have scanning (is it useful and what about all
>channel scanning vs. selectable scanning?), others don't.  Some have
>microphone speakers & channel changing, others don't.

I have never found scanning to be useful, although the ability to scan between
Chan. 16 and one or two selected channels may be occasionally useful.  Channel
controls on the mic. may look useful, but, on a Ham VHF, I found I accidently
changed frequency too often, so I disabled the mic. buttons.

> 
>Could some of you netters that have had experience with VHF radios
>please share your expertise?  What brands are best?  Most reliable?
>Take punishment (both water [fresh] & pounding) and still work?

Icom (you get what you pay for)
> 
>Also, are the speakers in most radios adequate or should we think about
>a separage speaker closer to the helm?  I know with our hand-held we
>have trouble hearing it over the engine noise.

The "built-in" radios will have much higher audio power than a hand-held, so,
(depending on where the radio is mounted) you should not need an external
speaker.


Peter Bennett VE7CEI                | Vessels shall be deemed to be in sight
Internet: bennett@erich.triumf.ca   | of one another only when one can be
Bitnet:   bennett@triumfer          | observed visually from the other
TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., Canada     |                          ColRegs 3(k)
From: bsmith@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Brian Smith)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 19:00:05 GMT
Subject: Re: Catalina 30 (WAS: Request for advice ... Cruising sailboats)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO
Newsgroups: rec.boats

In rec.boats, greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough) writes:

    that makes into an orgy-bed, the boat has been given a terminal
                       ^^^^^^^^^
    case of nautical thunder-thighs.
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Isn't it rather delightful, seeing those two terms in such close
proximity?
B.S!
From: bloxham@geophysics.harvard.edu (Jeremy Bloxham)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Polyesther leisure chutes
Date: 7 Oct 92 15:33:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: das.1992Oct7.153342.8481
Reply-To: bloxham@geophysics.harvard.edu
Organization: Dept. of Earth & Planetary Sciences, Harvard University

In article 718403298@spssig, bartley@spss.com (Dennis Bartley) writes:
>Way back last winter I asked if anyone on the net had experience with
>polyesther spinnakers. 
>
>Theoretically shock loading may be a problem, but here's an anecdote
>from my sailmaker: down at Key West race week he was on a Taylor 40.
>It was a pretty windy series, and they were doing windward/leeward
>courses. In one race where it was blowing 25 or 30 true, after the
>first run they threw there 3/4 oz chute below expecting to use the 1.5
>oz. the next time. When they went to set it, the bag somehow jumped
>into the water and they had a real mess. After dragging the 1.5
>onboard, the only chute available was the new .6 oz poly. Without
>telling the back of the boat what was going on, they hooked it up. Of
>course sheets got screwed up in the earlier mess, the sail didn't
>fill right away, and it was flogging quite a bit. When it did finally
>fill, it was quite abrupt, shock loading. Nothing happened to the
>sail. After the race the sailmaker inspected it carefully, and
>couldn't find anything wrong. 
>
>
Now that's strange, because I've heard an almost identical anecdote
from Key West from my sailmaker but with a few differences. First, in
the version I heard it was a Taylor 42, second, it was a nylon 0.6 oz
chute, and third it did blow apart, but not until near the end of the
leg when they broached. And they put up the 0.6 by accident because the
owner had stuffed it in the wrong bag.

I got a new nylon 0.6 this year and have been very pleased with it,
especially after a little tweaking of the tapes by the sailmaker. Some
of the owners of polyester kites around here have found them rather
hard to fly in choppy conditions, but then what isn't?

Jeremy
From: joel@ssd.intel.com (Joel Clark)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Boat Enhancement Advice
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:58:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: SSD.1992Oct8.185840.1563
Organization: Supercomputer Systems Division, Intel Corp.

In article <1992Oct7.165202.8149@leland.Stanford.EDU> stefan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stefan Michalowski) writes:
>I'd like to install one of those spring-loaded
>shock-absorber things to support the boom (I hate topping lifts) but,
>for some reason, they're incredibly expensive.
>
>Stefan

My Catalina 42 came with a spring-loaded boom support made by ISOMAT.  This
came with aluminum and stainless and bronze in contact with each other and
a 3/16" pop rivet as a stop in the compression direction.  It self-destructed 
twice in 18 months as the blocks at each end bent and came apart.

So I replaced it with one made locally. It has a 1" stainless shaft, milled
"Derlon"? bushings and a heavy duty aluminum tube.  It has a great deal
of adjustability and is about 20 times stronger than ISOMAT's.  

Cost: $450  (on a 42' boot).   No more problems.

If you are interested on one send me your name etc. and I will forward it
to the manufacturer so he can contact you.

joel clark
joel@ssd.intel.com
From: hanners@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Robert Hanners)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Butane on Powerboats?
Date: 13 Oct 92 10:26:59 GMT
Reply-To: hanners@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Robert Hanners)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Annapolis, MD

In rec.boats, EPLUS17@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu (Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans) writes:
>In article <Bvv8q2.LuH@news.udel.edu>
>mike@ravel.udel.edu (Michael James Porter) writes:
>
>>Is butane lighter than air?  How well does it heat compared to alcohol?
>>How dangerous is it?
>
>According to my 47th edition of the CRC handbook, Butane has the chemical
>formula CH3CH2CH2CH3 giving it a molecular weight of 34 versus roughly
>an average of roughly 15 for the stuff that makes up air.

Where could you have learned this?  Butane's mw is 58.12 (~4x12+10x1);
air is ~29.

-- Bob

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert J. Hanners         "My comments; only mine."          *DIASTOLE* 676673
CD, NSWC, Annapolis, MD                              hanners@oasys.dt.navy.mil
Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough)
Subject: Re: dingy bottoms
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 00:43:37 GMT

In article <bartley.718488761@spssig> bartley@spss.com (Dennis Bartley) writes:
>Is there anything good (and legal) to apply to the bottoms of dingys
>(like Lasers)? I understand waxing the bottom is not recommended. I
>read in a book by Melges that he used to put dish detergent on his
>Star. Somehow I'de guess that's no longer allowed? 

I believe wet-sanding with 400-grit paper is the conventional method
to provide best resistance to flow-separation.
 
Greg

Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: dudley@fir35.cray.com (Dudley Knappe)
Subject: Re: dingy bottoms
Reply-To: dudley@fir.cray.com
In-reply-to: roy@mchip00.med.nyu.edu's message of Sun, 11 Oct 1992 17:58:23 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
	<1687BBAA5.EPLUS17@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu>
	<1992Oct11.175823.9797@phri.nyu.edu>
Date: 12 Oct 92 07:51:44 CDT

In article <1992Oct11.175823.9797@phri.nyu.edu> roy@mchip00.med.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes:

|>   Rule 63(b) also prohibits "specially textured hull surfaces".  I'm
|> not 100% sure what they're getting at, but I suspect that what David Spencer
|> suggested, i.e. making the middle third of his bottom rough to induce
|> non-laminar flow, would be illegal.

	I think that this rule was added to the book in response to Dennis
Conner's use of the 3M ribblets in the 1987 America's Cup.  The plastic 
ribbed sheets added to the hull of his 12 meter made a significant difference
in the flow of water at the boundary layer.  I am not sure if these were 
one-offs for Dennis or if they are a standard product.

--
Dudley Knappe, Software Development Division            Cray Research, Inc.
Phone: (612) 683-5529                                   655F Lone Oak Drive
E-mail: dudley@cray.com or uunet!cray!dudley            Eagan, MN 55121
Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: rrusk@ssd.csd.harris.com (Bob Rusk)
Subject: Re: "OMC Sea Drives"
Reply-To: rrusk@ssd.csd.harris.com
Organization: Harris Computer Systems Division
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 13:31:39 GMT

On 13 Oct 92 08:37:06 GMT, pavlov@niktow.canisius.edu (Greg Pavlov) wrote:

>   Another power-related question:  I keep running into boats powered by
>   "OMC sea drives".  I've noticed that these boats are usually priced
>   somewhat lower than identical ones with i/o's or "regular" outboards.
>   Had one dealer tell me that people distrust them.  Would any of you
>   know something about them, what problems may exist, etc ?  To me, they
>   appear to be integrated bracket/outboard combinations with some additional
>   gear that, I would assume, is a mechanism for turning/tilting the 
>   outboards themselves ?  Any info would be appreciated.


The OMC Sea Drive is, as you have seen, basically an OMC outboard motor
with a different mounting/trim/tilt arrangement.  From my point of view,
they removed its only advantage over a comparable bracket-mounted outboard
a few years ago when they removed the ducted air intake (which used to
draw air from inside the boat).  I'm not terribly familiar with the later
ones, but the early ones had problems with premature shift and throttle
cable failure due to the cable routing scheme.  Also, the engine cover
didn't seal as well as on a conventional outboard.  In addition, the
four-cylinder model used mechanical steering, with the cable even more
exposed than on a conventional outboard.  Seized steering cables in salt water
were even more prevalent than on conventional mechanically-steered outboards.
Also, the tilt/trim mechanism has a very high pivot.  This results in
a much greater increase in overall boat length when the motor is tilted up
than is seen with conventional outboards.  And lastly, it's hard to repower
a SeaDrive powered boat with anything but another SeaDrive.  A bracket-
mounted outboard, like most outboards, can easily be replaced by another
brand.

Overall, though, I think you are right about people not trusting the 
SeaDrives.  They are basically just bracket-mounted outboards, and
seem to hold up as well as OMC's outboards do.  I would look at the
lower resale value as an advantage if I were purchasing a used boat
that I didn't plan on repowering.  


>   thanks,

Sure!

>   Greg Pavlov,
>   pavlov@fstrf.org

--
--
 Bob Rusk
 rrusk@ssd.csd.harris.com
 My thoughts, probably not Harris'.

Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: mwhhlaw!tim (Timothy E. Hollingsworth)
Subject: Re: Backing up
Reply-To: uunet!mwhhlaw!tim
Organization: Martin Wade Hartley & Hollingsworth
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:17:29 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.180646.27416@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>  
keith@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Keith Hawkins) writes:
> 
> The other day I was having trouble backing up
> with my sailboat and turning at the same time.
> 
> Turning in one direction worked fine, turning the
> other direction did not.  In fact, the boat kept turning
> in the original direction despite havning the tiller
> pushed all the way to the other side.
> 
> One of the guys in the marina said that was normal, that
> sailboats seem to back in one direction better than
> the other.
> 
> What causes this??
> 
The rotation of the prop will often cause a boat to crab to one
side or another.  Fin keeled boats are particularly bad.
The direction your boat is pulled will always be the same.
This can be an advantage *if* that is the direction you want the stern
to go.  If not, it can be a pain.

Old trick.  Back hard until you get some way on and then shift to neutral.
Now the rudder does not have to over come the sideways pull of the prop.

--
Tim Hollingsworth
From: steph@cs.uchicago.edu (Stephen Wilson Bailey)
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Polyesther leisure chutes
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:34:17 GMT
Organization: University of Chicago Computer Science

These stories are rampant.  One of our close competitors had a 0.6 oz
blow up on a broad reaching distance race, and our sailmaker said:
``Oh the same thing that happened to them [the competitors sailmaker]
  in Key West, they're not even making poly chutes right now.  Now,
  we had our 0.6 up in 25 knots down there with no problem.''

Who knows...

Steph
Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: zztop@sabrina.dei.unipd.it (Valentino Chinellato 275544/im)
Subject: test
Summary: just a test
Organization: D.E.I. Universita' di Padova, Italia
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 10:16:49 GMT


Testing.......


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Valentino Chinellato 275544/IM       zztop@sabrina.dei.unipd.it
   via Ticino, 8 30030 Oriago
   (Venezia) ITALY                         Hobie Cat 18  15338
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: wtm@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bill Mullaney)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:40:26 GMT
Subject: Re: Butane on Powerboats?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.boats

In rec.boats, mike@ravel.udel.edu (Michael James Porter) writes:

> We're trying to decide between a single burner alcohol stove and a
> butane stove.  

Powerboat Reports did a writeup on butane vs alcohol early this year.
They came down in favor of butane, and their arguments convinced me.

This year I bought *two* single burner butane stoves to replace a double
burner pressurized alcohol burner.  Reasons given below.  The price of
the stoves was about $60 each and the fuel is available for about $25 for
a case of a dozen cans.

> Is butane lighter than air?  How well does it heat compared to alcohol?
> How dangerous is it?

Having failed my only attempt at formal chemistry education (and there
weren't near as many elements then, either), I can't comment with any
authority on previous responses.  Butane is supposed to be heavier than
air, but not as bad as propane.  I know that it brings a quart of water
to a boil a lot faster than alcohol, and that it lights with the
built-in piezo-electric spark every time.  Fuel storage is about the
same, since I need more alcohol for a week than I do butane cans.  And
empty cans do get in the way.  However, I am not *ever* trying to
transfer fluid from one container to another.  The butane does not flare
and spit.  The burners do not get clogged if the fuel is contaminated.
And it does not sound like a jet engine next to me. 

The stove has a warning about letting the can get over 110F, and that it
will shut down if that happens.  Never has to me.  My guess is that a
dip in water will cool it off to an acceptable temperature quickly.

> Any info or experiences would be appreciated.

The pressure valve on my Kenyon two-burner alcohol stove broke about two
days into a one-week excursion.  Cold meals and no coffee.  The cost of
an Origo unpressurized alcohol one burner stove was considerably more
than the price of two butane stoves.  And the refilling process was
considered to be awkward.  I looked at one at a West Marine store and
agreed.  So now we have two butane stoves for redundancy and for those
occasions when we need two things going at once.  Probably cooked two
dozen meals on one or the other this summer, and used three cans of
fuel.  Your mileage may vary.

Bill Mullaney
From: ben@hpcvra.cv.hp.com (Benjamin Ellsworth)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:33:30 GMT
Subject: Re: What makes a boat a better pointer ??
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, OR, USA
Newsgroups: rec.boats


> I'm certainly no expert, but the boat's own speed creating increased
> relative wind is not one of them. ...

Have you considered ice boats?

---

Ben