Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsBoatsPaddle BoatsSailingCruisingBuildingElectronics
Related Topics
CarsMotorcyclesMore Topics ...

Boat Forum / Cruising / December 2004



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

How much to offer below MSRP (for a Tayana) ?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
sweemer@aol.com - 11 Aug 2004 21:11 GMT
What percentage of manufacturer's suggested retail
should I offer for a 2003 Tayana sailboat which is
in good condition and has only been used as a demo ?

I know that the average selling price for brand new
motor homes (in the U.S.) is about 20 percent below
the MSRP but don't know if the same applies to boats.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions. Please reply
to the newsgroup. If there's a more appropriate group
to post this question please let me know. I've tried
the rec.boats.marketplace but my post didn't show up
because that group is moderated.

Also is it difficult to find experienced people to
help me sail my boat about halfway around the world
if I pay for all the living expenses ?
jt - 11 Aug 2004 21:25 GMT
I know of this sailor named Captian Ron that will do it for free.

> What percentage of manufacturer's suggested retail
> should I offer for a 2003 Tayana sailboat which is
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> help me sail my boat about halfway around the world
> if I pay for all the living expenses ?
Don White - 11 Aug 2004 22:57 GMT
snip
> Also is it difficult to find experienced people to
> help me sail my boat about halfway around the world
> if I pay for all the living expenses ?

A friend of mine based in the British Virgin Islands does a number
'deliveries' such as that but gets paid around $1K - $1.5K  US per week PLUS
expenses.
sweemer@aol.com - 12 Aug 2004 03:03 GMT
>snip
>> Also is it difficult to find experienced people to
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>does a number 'deliveries' such as that but gets paid
>around $1K - $1.5K  US per week PLUS expenses.

Sorry I didn't write more clearly. I won't need anybody
to deliver the boat for me but was thinking about finding
a couple of very experienced people to go sailing with me
(since I still don't know how to sail :-)
JAXAshby - 12 Aug 2004 03:20 GMT
>>A friend of mine based in the British Virgin Islands
>>does a number 'deliveries' such as that but gets paid
>>around $1K - $1.5K  US per week PLUS expenses.

$200/day, plus expenses, door to door.
Rolf - 12 Aug 2004 07:25 GMT
> >>A friend of mine based in the British Virgin Islands
> >>does a number 'deliveries' such as that but gets paid
> >>around $1K - $1.5K  US per week PLUS expenses.
>
> $200/day, plus expenses, door to door.

I was asking around for somebody to help me sail a 45 ft boat back
from BVI to florida. I am a very experience sailor, this is the second
boat I will own and I have been sailing for 20 years. So I am the
captn and I just need a pair of hands to let me sleep.  This might be
a one week trip, and was told that it would be relatively easy to fing
some one for $1000 plus expenses.
In your case I think they would consider this a "delivery". Many
deliveries are made with the owner on board sharing in the work. This
does not make it cheaper.
In addition if you expect them to give you sailing lessons, this would
be extra.
I think that it will be difficult to find somebody who can take
responsibility of the boat and expect them to do it for free. Since
you don't know how to sail nobody will accept that you can
responsibility for the boat.
Glen - 12 Aug 2004 08:48 GMT
>I was asking around for somebody to help me sail a 45 ft boat back
>from BVI to florida. I am a very experience sailor, this is the second
>boat I will own and I have been sailing for 20 years. So I am the
>captn and I just need a pair of hands to let me sleep.  This might be
>a one week trip, and was told that it would be relatively easy to fing
>some one for $1000 plus expenses.

That sounds reasonable for a deckhand and watchstander.  The problem
comes in when you have somebody waiting with you for a weather window
or a diesel mechanic at $150 a day plus meals.  Having been the
recipient of such largesse on occasion, I can only say, "Thanks!"  In
the OP's case, I'd might insist on being there for provisioning and
boat prep anyway.

>In your case I think they would consider this a "delivery". Many
>deliveries are made with the owner on board sharing in the work. This
>does not make it cheaper.

In my case, it makes me reluctant to take the job.  An inexperienced
hand on a crossing is not much of an asset. Might even be a net
liabilty. Also, if you keep having to replay the "You're the owner,
but I'm the captain!" discussion every time there's a decision to be
made, it gets old.

>In addition if you expect them to give you sailing lessons, this would
>be extra.
>I think that it will be difficult to find somebody who can take
>responsibility of the boat and expect them to do it for free. Since
>you don't know how to sail nobody will accept that you can
>responsibility for the boat.

Right.  I'd add one word though, just for clarity. I think that it
will be difficult to find somebody *competent* who can take
responsibility of the boat and expect them to do it for free.  You can
sometimes find someone looking for a ride home or an adventure.
Whether you'll be glad to have them aboard after a week or so is a
different question.

____________________________________________________________
Glen "Wiley" Wilson  <usenet1  SPAMNIX at worldwidewiley dot com>
To reply, lose the capitals and do the obvious.

Take a look at cpRepeater, my NMEA data integrator, repeater, and
logger at http://www.worldwidewiley.com/
JAXAshby - 12 Aug 2004 12:21 GMT
I am not sure what you are saying,  rolf.  What I am saying is if you want my
services, it is $200/day from the time my feet hit the tarmac to the time I
head out to the airport on the way back, plus expenses.  I'm a good guy, Rolf,
for most won't do a delivery with the owner onboard.

>> >>A friend of mine based in the British Virgin Islands
>> >>does a number 'deliveries' such as that but gets paid
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>you don't know how to sail nobody will accept that you can
>responsibility for the boat.
Don White - 12 Aug 2004 21:47 GMT
> I am not sure what you are saying,  rolf.  What I am saying is if you want my
> services, it is $200/day from the time my feet hit the tarmac to the time I
> head out to the airport on the way back, plus expenses.  I'm a good guy, Rolf,
> for most won't do a delivery with the owner onboard.

** You got that right. I had to laugh at one story my buddy told.
The owner tried to leave our harbour one fall with a cheaper 2nd rate
'captain'. They ran aground before clearing the port. They limped back in
and my buddy was hired for the job on the following weeks departure.  Seems
the owner thought he knew more than Vic, and after numerous heated
arguments, Vic threatened to lock the owner up in his cabin.
More trouble on the way back in the spring. After a rash of bad luck, storm
damage etc Vic arrived in Halifax with the boat. The owner blamed Vic for
the trouble and refused to reimburse him for out of pocket emergency
repairs. Vic went to see a lawyer friend and threatened seizure of the boat
if he wasn't paid. The hostile owner was boxed in and had to pay up after
the lawyer informed him that the damages would multiply if full blown legal
action was taken.
sweemer@aol.com - 13 Aug 2004 14:26 GMT
>I am not sure what you are saying,  rolf.  What I am
>saying is if you want my services, it is $200/day from
>the time my feet hit the tarmac to the time I head out
>to the airport on the way back, plus expenses. I'm a
>good guy, Rolf, for most won't do a delivery with the
>owner onboard.

Approximately how many days does it take to sail half way
around the world, say from San Diego, CA to Singapore or
Thailand ?

And don't you need at least two people to sail safely ?
Rich Hampel - 12 Aug 2004 04:12 GMT
Whoa!
A Tayana is NOT a boat that one 'learns' to sail on.   These are big,
slow to maneuver, with lots of forces generated; not, something you can
just walk up to and learn to sail on in a couple of hours.  The
learning curve from such a boat will be very slow and long.  And if you
havent any prior sailing experience, can get into one hell of a lot of
trouble in a hurry.

Why not consider to first learn to sail in a lightweight dinghy of
16-20 ft.  Such a boat because of its rapid 'response' will very
quickly develop your skills, etc. needed for a larger sailboat.
Without these prior skills, having a first time (ever) large boat is a
disaster waiting to happen.  

A larger heavyweight sailboat is not very sensitive, is slow to react,
and many times will not have the rapid 'tactile' feedback needed to
properly and safely sail her over a wide range of conditions - from
almost dead calm to blammo. A large boat is a 'momentum machine' ; is
slow to react and doesnt have the instant 'feedback' as a small boat -
so your brain already full of ***prior sailing experience*** has to
fill in the 'gaps' on a such large/heavy boat like a Tayana.    

You dont walk up to a Boeing 757 and begin to learn to fly on such a
complicated rig, you usually start out in small aircraft: safer, faster
learning, etc.  ... same with sailboats.

Sorry to put a pin in your baloon.  I suggest  if you're in a hurry
that you get enrolled in an accredited sailing school, first.   Start
small and then work your way 'up'.  Otherwise you can get seriously
hurt or worse, etc.
Don White - 12 Aug 2004 04:30 GMT
> Whoa!
> A Tayana is NOT a boat that one 'learns' to sail on.   These are big,
> slow to maneuver, with lots of forces generated; not, something you can
> just walk up to and learn to sail on in a couple of hours.
snip

Good advice. My buddy let me take over the helm of a 75 foot wooden ketch
and was I surprised at the wheel response.  I was fooling around trying to
steer by the compass leaving the harbour. The thing didn't seem to turn so I
over steered a couple of times. Before long the owner came marching back
giving me dirty looks. I gave the wheel back to my buddy who was captain at
that time.
sweemer@aol.com - 12 Aug 2004 05:22 GMT
>Whoa!
>A Tayana is NOT a boat that one 'learns' to sail on.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>get into one hell of a lot of trouble in a hurry.
>...

Thanks for the advice. I don't intend to sail this boat
myself until I know how to do this. I can either go and
take sailing lessons in smaller boats or spend a lot of
time watching other people show me how to sail this boat.

One reason for buying a boat is because I would like to
go and live near the ocean but can't afford a house near
the ocean at this time.

I've just read "The Voyage of the Northern Magic" which
is about a Canadian family sailing around the world in
a 40-year-old sailboat. Their entire sailing experience
before taking this journey consisted of 6 afternoons in
on the Ottawa River. (See www.northernmagic.com)
Rich Hampel - 12 Aug 2004 05:40 GMT
I can totally agree with those dreams.  Problem is that those 'dont
make it' arent around to tell their story.

A Tayana is a very expensive 'house boat'.

By no means let me put a damper on your dreams.  The best teacher is  -
time on the water.

Good luck.

  ;-)

> >Whoa!
> >A Tayana is NOT a boat that one 'learns' to sail on.
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> before taking this journey consisted of 6 afternoons in
> on the Ottawa River. (See www.northernmagic.com)
Dan Best - 12 Aug 2004 06:28 GMT
Good on ya!

Listen to what Rich says as he knows whereof he speaks.  What he says is
true.  You will learn to sail well much faster on a small boat.

It's true that if all you're interested in is getting the boat moving to
80% of it's potential, all you have to do it turn the wheel until you're
pointed in more or less the right direction then randomly fiddle with
the ropes until your moving.  But that's a far cry from being able to
keep yourself and your passengers safe in all conditions.  It's not that
sailing and seamanship is all that tough, it's just that you will find
most of the learning happens much faster and the mistakes are usually
less costly and dangerous on small boats.  Neither the boat, nor the sea
are out to "get" you, but they can be coldly unforgiving of your mistakes.

Also, if anything, he minimizes the risks of learning to sail on such a
"momentum machine" (love that term, Rich!).  This is not the boat to
begin learning how to maneuver around the docks in.  If you try, you
will almost certainly cause some very expensive damage to your boat and
others and possibly injure people.  Think of it as trying to learn to
drive in a fully loaded semi on wet ice in a crowded parking lot.

Another issue to consider, is that depending on where you want to be,
live aboard slips can be difficult or impossible to come by.  Most
places around the SF bay have multi-year waiting lists for live aboard
slips (the marinas are limited to allowing a max of 10% of their slips
to be live aboards)

If you do proceed with your plan to get a Tayana, rest assured that you
will be getting a great boat.  We've had ours for almost 3 years now and
love it.

Fair winds - Dan

>>Whoa!
>>A Tayana is NOT a boat that one 'learns' to sail on.
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> before taking this journey consisted of 6 afternoons in
> on the Ottawa River. (See www.northernmagic.com)

Signature

Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA  95448
B-2/75 1977-1979
Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean"
http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG

rhys - 12 Aug 2004 06:58 GMT
>I've just read "The Voyage of the Northern Magic" which
>is about a Canadian family sailing around the world in
>a 40-year-old sailboat. Their entire sailing experience
>before taking this journey consisted of 6 afternoons in
>on the Ottawa River. (See www.northernmagic.com)

Yes, and I spoke to Diane Stuemer shortly before she died, and she
admitted that this was in fact a foolish way to learn on a heavy
displacement boat. Her husband had some experience...she was
essentially the weak link, but learned quickly AND the hard way.

I think the tale of Northern Magic is very inspiring, but it is about
how the process of sailing with one's family and encountering foreign
peoples in distant places can be transformative...it is NOT in my
opinion a great book loaded with seamanship tips. The husband,
Herbert, seems to spend most of every chapter puking into the bilges
because he's trying to repair an alternator upside down in a heavy
following sea while his wife and kids hand-steer. Sorry, but if you
plan properly and don't insist on computers and refrigeration 24/7,
you don't spend much of your trip repairing expensive and dodgy
equipment. More than once they seem to have bought fifty kilos of
frozen meat, only to have the compressor or some related gadget fail
again. The Stuemers had a very interesting and memorable trip, but
their inexperience made it more difficult, IMO, than it needed to be,
if the book is anything to go by.

Give me a windvane and a can opener and maybe a Koolatron for the
beer, and I'll be a happier cruiser.

Having said that, I'm not a Luddite: radar and weatherfax and SSB are
the cruiser's mates, but more stuff means more complexity and more
crap that breaks in the middle of heavy weather.

R.
Rolf - 13 Aug 2004 05:25 GMT
I read the book with great interest. I am thinking that this is a
great adventure story where they took great risks. They got away with
it because the husband is a very great "fixer" After all how many
people would know how to rewire an alternator? They are also very
lucky. The third thing they did was that the husband taught the wife
how to sail all the way out from Ottawa.  They first motored a long
way before they put up the mast and then they just did some costal
cruising before they went into blue water. The husband ceratinly knew
a lot about boating since they selected exactly the right kind of
boat.
Still I wonder would I have takem my two young kids and an
inexperinced wife on this trip? I probably would have considered far
too risky for my taste.

> >I've just read "The Voyage of the Northern Magic" which
> >is about a Canadian family sailing around the world in
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>
> R.
rhys - 13 Aug 2004 18:26 GMT
>Still I wonder would I have takem my two young kids and an
>inexperinced wife on this trip? I probably would have considered far
>too risky for my taste.

WARNING: SEMI-TOPICAL RANT...

I have mixed feelings today.

I just got beat to the "offer" stage on a 41 foot steel pilothouse
ketch that was for sale at a reasonable price at my club...more or
less under my nose, but I didn't see it until another buyer was close
to offering the PO's price. Buying now is two years too early for me
(gotta finish the mortgage!), but when I start shopping, I'll have a
five year old son and possibly a one year old or younger. I plan on
going when Son No. 1 is six or seven, and to "boat school" like the
Stuemers until the boy is 12 or 13 and to circumnavigate in the
interim, living off writing (yes, I know, but I'm already a
journalist, so I think I have a shot at travel writing) and "diesel
and repair money" from renting out our house.

So that means a few things: I want a cutter-rigged ketch. I want
steel, stable and Perkins or similar "big iron" diesel. I want a
pilothouse or a hard dodger, and preferably center cockpit. I want a
skeg hung rudder, and a modified long keel. I want 38-45 feet, and
room for a small workshop. The hull must be super clean and all
structures must have unbroken epoxy or similar coatings to inhibit
rust...foam tends to disguise things.

After that, I'm not picky...the interior can be crap, nice or even
absent. I would prefer to modify than to build, but the fact is that
my best shot at something appropriate is a half-finished Roberts-style
boat done nicely by an old guy who had a clue but has lost interest,
gotten sick or died.

Surprisingly, there are dozens of boats around like this. Some are
superbly done and sail nicely, but have interiors of plywood and
outdoor carpeting over 2 X 4 benches <G>

That's the boat for me, as it would take two years and $20,000 to do
the interior to my tastes, which are more systems than entertainment
oriented.

All this is to make a safe and comfortable passagemaker that will
mitigate somewhat a less-experienced wife and small kids, who
nonetheless will probably stand half-watches and do navigation by nine
or ten years of age.

The wife is already a keen Great Lakes sailor, but is weak in
terminology, brute strength and familiarity with engines. All that can
be remedied with time and drive, and she's the daughter of a boat
builder and fearless about the foredeck and going up the mast.

Here's a suggestion: let the wife helm and dock as often as possible.
It's good confidence building, and the real art is in sail-tweaking
and navigation, anyway <G>.

Everything's a risk, including going nuts and driving yourself to an
early grave in a compromised office job. My wife and I have decided
that the risk of taking kids offshore during our "prime earning years"
is very much worth it when compared to the regret of not doing it at
all, or not being able to do it in our sixties due to age, illness or
family duties. I'm 43, she's 30...we want to be gone by the time I'm
47 and she's 34 and back (if ever) when I'm 53 or so.

My mother died at 68 in 2002, never having travelled much, despite
having had the money, because there were always obstacles, real or
imagined. My father at 80 is now alone and pretty much fixing to die.
I suppose if he leaves me their estate I could buy a house or two and
become a land-locked tinpot slum lord, but I think the best tribute to
their memory is to "carpe diem" and get a steel boat and give my
kid(s) the kind of childhood very few children experience, one full or
learning, adventure and real responsibility.

The late Diane Stuemer may not have been the best sailor, but she
learned enough to survive, and her kids had an enviable few years at
sea. Her husband, maybe less so, but I doubt he'd trade it for all the
fixed alternators in the world.

Don't give your kids Gameboys. Better a sextant!

So get the boat and go, my friend.
R.
sweemer@aol.com - 14 Aug 2004 18:33 GMT
>...
>So that means a few things: I want a cutter-rigged
>ketch. I want steel, stable and Perkins or similar
>"big iron" diesel. I want a pilothouse or a hard
>dodger, and preferably center cockpit.
>...

So if I want to sail to Tahiti and South East Asia
one day (would it be a bad idea to get a fiberglass
boat (like a Tayana) or is this what most people do
anyway ?
Jonathan - 15 Aug 2004 04:29 GMT
Plenty of people sail all over the world in fiberglass boats, wooden
boats and steel boats, and have wonderful trips.

There are/is a school of thought that is focused on the steel or
aluminum boat as the "ideal" because it might survive an encounter with
a reef. The odds of testing that theory, if you are a careful sailor
should be fairly small, hence the success rate of other types of
construction.

What you do want is a boat built sturdily enough to take a fair amount
of abuse. In the Sydney/Hobart race that got hit hard, a couple of boats
essentially collapsed under the weight of waves breaking on board.
But that too should be an uncommon rather than a common occurrence. The
Hiscocks sailed thousands of miles in various boats, and claimed they
never hit a survival storm because of good planning.  Dave Martin
circumnavigated in a reinforced Cal 25, starting a family on the way. He
and his wife Jaja cruised for years with infants in arms and toddlers.
Check out the Martin chronicles on SetSail.com:
http://www.setsail.com/s_logs/martin/martin.html

Check out the cruising logs at: http://cruisenews.net/index.php

All kinds of people, all kinds of boats and materials. The common
denominator? They all managed to take in the docklines and go......

Have fun,

Jonathan

>>...
>>So that means a few things: I want a cutter-rigged
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> boat (like a Tayana) or is this what most people do
> anyway ?
rhys - 15 Aug 2004 04:57 GMT
>All kinds of people, all kinds of boats and materials. The common
>denominator? They all managed to take in the docklines and go......

That in sum is the crucial point. I have my preferences, but if time
passes and all I can afford is something merely adequate, I won't
hesitate.

R.
rhys - 15 Aug 2004 04:56 GMT
>So if I want to sail to Tahiti and South East Asia
>one day (would it be a bad idea to get a fiberglass
>boat (like a Tayana) or is this what most people do
>anyway ?

No...no...not at all. Let's face it, most of the boats under 50 feet
today are fibreglass, particularly out of North America.

There is nothing wrong with fibreglass per se. When done correctly (as
can be said of ANY hull material, including the much disparaged
ferro-concrete). a fibreglass boat can be safe, fast and reasonable to
maintain.

However....<G>

If you look at the boats that ACTUALLY TRAVEL THE WORLD, as opposed to
those found in crowded Carribean anchorages, you will find a
substantial portion of them are metal, usually steel, but frequently
aluminum. By this I mean WORLD travel (including the far less popular
high latitudes).

From this, you can draw a couple of obsevations, not conclusions:

Metal boats are popular with people in oceanic cruising, long-distance
passagemaking and high-latitude travel. For the sake of argument, if
95 out of 100 boats *capable* of passagemaking are fibreglass in a
given anchorage, with the rest wood or metal, the odds are much
stronger to my knowledge that of those boats ACTUALLY PASSAGEMAKING,
perhaps 30 to 40 per cent will be metal or wood (cold-molded, etc.)

This does not necessarily mean that metal boats, for instance, are
more appropriate for passagemaking than fibreglass.

It could mean, however, that whatever causes an owner to choose metal,
also drives the decision to travel the world and not drop anchor in
Margaritaville. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Metal has some severe disadvantages relating to coatings, maintenance,
weight and design. Metal boats (not aluminum) can be slower and uglier
to some eyes.

Advantages include ease of repair (if steel, the owner can self-repair
after learning basic welding) ease of customization, brute strength,
potential safety margin, and so on.

Finally, I own a cored deck, fibreglass boat which I enjoy. But I am
sourcing steel boats for world travel. That's me. If you GAVE me a
Tayana, which is one of the better offshore plastic boat names to my
understanding, I wouldn't sneer for a moment. But a lot of the
fibreglass boats sold new today I wouldn't take into a 40 knot wind,
so suspicious am I of the design and construction decisions (wide
companionways, huge drinks-friendly cockpits, low lifelines, unbacked
deck gear, lack of handholds below, overly complex wiring and
plumbing, etc.) of many of today's "showboats". They look great, and
maybe they will survive a storm, but I would have better peace of mind
in something Dutch, steely and built for the North Sea or to survive a
hard grounding in coral reef.

Your mileage may of course vary. I love Dudley Dix and Robert Perry in
fibreglass, and Wallstrom/Brewer in steel, and Kanter in
aluminum/steel. There are others, but those spring to mind.

R.
JAXAshby - 15 Aug 2004 13:20 GMT
>If you look at the boats that ACTUALLY TRAVEL THE WORLD, as opposed to
>those found in crowded Carribean anchorages, you will find a
>substantial portion of them are metal, usually steel, but frequently
>aluminum.

no, you will not find "substantial portion" to be metal.  The vast, vast, vast
majority of them are fiberglass.  You will find a higher % of them to be metal
than compared to the general boat population, but by no means a "substantial
portion".

The real advantage of a metal boat is that it is cheeeep on the used market.
JAXAshby - 15 Aug 2004 13:21 GMT
>From this, you can draw a couple of obsevations, not conclusions:

one can not *draw* an observation.
JAXAshby - 15 Aug 2004 13:25 GMT
>ACTUALLY PASSAGEMAKING,
>perhaps 30 to 40 per cent will be metal or wood

I seem to recall the recorded data shows of boats ACTUALLY PASSAGEMAKING about
2% - 5% or so will be metal, and a % or so wood.  Far and away fiberglass is
most common if for no other reason than fiberglass boats are far and away the
most common.

of course, for a given strength boat, a fiberglass boat will weigh less, carry
more stores, be less top heavy, and carry less sails to go faster, but what the
hey.
JAXAshby - 15 Aug 2004 13:26 GMT
>whatever causes an owner to choose metal,

irrational fear of dying is the usual reason.  looking for a bargain in a used
boat is another.
JAXAshby - 15 Aug 2004 13:29 GMT
>But a lot of the
>fibreglass boats sold new today I wouldn't take into a 40 knot wind,

if you are afraid to take a Tayana 37 into a 40 knot wind *you* are a moral
reprobate for even thinking of going offshore in any boat.  you are not
qualified.  emotionally.

get a motorhome.
Roy Jose Lorr - 15 Aug 2004 16:16 GMT
> >But a lot of the
> >fibreglass boats sold new today I wouldn't take into a 40 knot wind,
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> get a motorhome.

What are the 'emotional qualifications'?
JAXAshby - 15 Aug 2004 16:57 GMT
to be unfraid of one's skills to handle a fine quality boat in rather easy
winds.

>> >But a lot of the
>> >fibreglass boats sold new today I wouldn't take into a 40 knot wind,
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>What are the 'emotional qualifications'?
Roy Jose Lorr - 15 Aug 2004 23:55 GMT
> to be unfraid of one's skills to handle a fine quality boat in rather easy
> winds.

Making a realistic assessment of one's limitations is a form
of emotional and moral cowardice?

> >> >But a lot of the
> >> >fibreglass boats sold new today I wouldn't take into a 40 knot wind,
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> >
> >What are the 'emotional qualifications'?
JAXAshby - 16 Aug 2004 00:14 GMT
no, but claiming one's talents are fine but then blaming a fine boat for being
inadequate in ordinary weather is.

>> to be unfraid of one's skills to handle a fine quality boat in rather easy
>> winds.
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>> >
>> >What are the 'emotional qualifications'?
Roy Jose Lorr - 19 Aug 2004 23:13 GMT
> no, but claiming one's talents are fine but then blaming a fine boat for being
> inadequate in ordinary weather is.

Rightly or wrongly expressing an opinion of a boat's limitations
signifies moral and emotional cowardice?

> >> to be unfraid of one's skills to handle a fine quality boat in rather easy
> >> winds.
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> >> >
> >> >What are the 'emotional qualifications'?

--

The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 02:37 GMT
I will say it again, dood of little comprehension:

claiming one's talents are fine but then blaming a fine boat for being
inadequate in ordinary weather is.

>> no, but claiming one's talents are fine but then blaming a fine boat for
>being
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>utopian sentimentalism
>is homicidal mania.
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 02:44 GMT
> I will say it again, dood of little comprehension:
>
> claiming one's talents are fine but then blaming a fine boat for being
> inadequate in ordinary weather is.

In other words, false accusation and insult is your forte.

> >> no, but claiming one's talents are fine but then blaming a fine boat for
> >being
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What are the 'emotional qualifications'?
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 03:50 GMT
no, moose stored, being afraid of a taking a T-37 out to sea in 3 foot seas is
emotionally abhorant (look the word up).

stay tied to the dock, dood, should you ever actually buy a boat.

>mosestorah@worldnet.att.net
>Date: 8/19/2004 9:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >What are the 'emotional qualifications'?
Skip Gundlach - 20 Aug 2004 03:57 GMT
> emotionally abhorant (look the word up).

Or run the spell-check :{))

L8R

Skip

Signature

Morgan 461 #2
SV Flying Pig
http://tinyurl.com/384p2

"And then again, when you sit at the helm of your little ship on a
clear night, and gaze at the countless stars overhead, and realize
that you  are quite alone on a great, wide sea, it is apt to occur to
you that in the general scheme of things you are merely an
insignificant speck on the surface of the ocean; and are not nearly
so important or as self-sufficient as you thought you were.  Which is
an exceedingly wholesome thought, and one that may effect a
permanent change in your deportment that will be greatly appreciated
by your friends."  - James S. Pitkin

JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 04:02 GMT
What?  ME mispell a wyred?  nevr heppen en this weirld.

>> emotionally abhorant (look the word up).
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>Skip
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 05:51 GMT
> no, moose stored, being afraid of a taking a T-37 out to sea in 3 foot seas is
> emotionally abhorant (look the word up).

Disgusting, loathsome, repellent, and despicable is the way
you see people who don't measure up to your standards?

> stay tied to the dock, dood, should you ever actually buy a boat.

I don't believe we've met.

> >mosestorah@worldnet.att.net
> >Date: 8/19/2004 9:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >What are the 'emotional qualifications'?
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 13:26 GMT
>> no, moose stored, being afraid of a taking a T-37 out to sea in 3 foot seas
>is
>> emotionally abhorant (look the word up).
>
>Disgusting, loathsome, repellent, and despicable is the way
>you see people who don't measure up to your standards?

no, moose stored, it is not a question of my standards, but rather a question
of yo-yo's (like you, it becomes more and more apparent) who put themselves in
stew ped lee dangerous situations utterly lacking in native capabilities and
skills to handle the situation, and THEN insisting it is someone else's moral
and legal responsibility to save their sorry a.s.

no EPIRB for you, dood.
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 16:11 GMT
> >> no, moose stored, being afraid of a taking a T-37 out to sea in 3 foot seas
> >is
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> skills to handle the situation, and THEN insisting it is someone else's moral
> and legal responsibility to save their sorry a.s.

Don't fret... I promise not to look to you for help.
JAXAshby - 21 Aug 2004 13:46 GMT
>Don't fret... I promise not to look to you for help.

>Don't fret... I promise not to look to you for help.

and if you were moral, you would not ask for anyone else's either.  you are a
floatin accident looking for a rock.
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 00:32 GMT
> >Don't fret... I promise not to look to you for help.
>
> >Don't fret... I promise not to look to you for help.
>
> and if you were moral, you would not ask for anyone else's either.

Strange philosophy you've got there.

>  you are a
> floatin accident looking for a rock.

I don't believe we've met.
JAXAshby - 23 Aug 2004 00:49 GMT
>> and if you were moral, you would not ask for anyone else's either.
>
>Strange philosophy you've got there.

not really.  it sometimes referred to as Darwin.
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 05:27 GMT
> >> and if you were moral, you would not ask for anyone else's either.
> >
> >Strange philosophy you've got there.
>
> not really.  it sometimes referred to as Darwin.

By whom?... beside yourself.
JAXAshby - 23 Aug 2004 00:50 GMT
>>  you are a
>> floatin accident looking for a rock.
>
>I don't believe we've met.

that is true.  And, if I am lucky, it will always be true.
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 05:29 GMT
> >>  you are a
> >> floatin accident looking for a rock.
> >
> >I don't believe we've met.
>
> that is true.  And, if I am lucky, it will always be true.

From your mouth to God's ear.
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 13:27 GMT
>> stay tied to the dock, dood, should you ever actually buy a boat.
>
>I don't believe we've met.

yeah, sometimes I get lucky.  so far, so good.
Roy Jose Lorr - 15 Aug 2004 06:37 GMT
> So that means a few things: I want a cutter-rigged ketch. I want
> steel, stable and Perkins or similar "big iron" diesel. I want a
> pilothouse or a hard dodger, and preferably center cockpit.

In his "Coastwise and Offshore Cruising Wrinkles", Tom Colvin
writes: "The supreme robber baron, vandal, thief, pirate, is
found aboard too often, threatening the safety of a proper sea
going vessel: the cockpit.  It has no place at sea."
sweemer@aol.com - 15 Aug 2004 21:07 GMT
>> So that means a few things: I want a cutter-rigged ketch.
>> I want steel, stable and Perkins or similar "big iron"
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>found aboard too often, threatening the safety of a proper
>sea going vessel: the cockpit.  It has no place at sea."

Does he mean the cockpit or the robber baron... has no place
at sea ?
Roy Jose Lorr - 15 Aug 2004 23:57 GMT
> >> So that means a few things: I want a cutter-rigged ketch.
> >> I want steel, stable and Perkins or similar "big iron"
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Does he mean the cockpit or the robber baron... has no place
> at sea ?

Are you taking it personally?
rhys - 16 Aug 2004 04:42 GMT
>In his "Coastwise and Offshore Cruising Wrinkles", Tom Colvin
>writes: "The supreme robber baron, vandal, thief, pirate, is
>found aboard too often, threatening the safety of a proper sea
>going vessel: the cockpit.  It has no place at sea."

I'm reading another Colvin book from the '70s at the moment. He's
dogmatic, but knowledgeable, or so I am thinking so far. I like center
cockpits for visibility and layout (they are less great for raising
the CE, alas), but I like them quite compact, with a bridgedeck and a
pretty small, easily sealed companionway.

At the other extreme is the very shallow, very wide, missing transom
look of a lot of performance boats. They accomplish the same thing in
different fashions: getting water and hence weight OFF or OUT OF the
boat in a hurry.

I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
cockpit. Well, who can blame him?

R.
Roy Jose Lorr - 19 Aug 2004 23:21 GMT
> I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
> cockpit. Well, who can blame him?

Fitted cushion salesmen, for starters.
rhys - 20 Aug 2004 02:22 GMT
>> I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
>> cockpit. Well, who can blame him?
>
>Fitted cushion salesmen, for starters.

Well, every aftermarket boat sales job is a compromise, or so they say
<G>

R.
Skip Gundlach - 20 Aug 2004 02:45 GMT
OT, my apologies:  Rhys, did you get my info about Shiloh?

L8R

Skip

Signature

Morgan 461 #2
SV Flying Pig
http://tinyurl.com/384p2

"And then again, when you sit at the helm of your little ship on a
clear night, and gaze at the countless stars overhead, and realize
that you  are quite alone on a great, wide sea, it is apt to occur to
you that in the general scheme of things you are merely an
insignificant speck on the surface of the ocean; and are not nearly
so important or as self-sufficient as you thought you were.  Which is
an exceedingly wholesome thought, and one that may effect a
permanent change in your deportment that will be greatly appreciated
by your friends."  - James S. Pitkin

> >> I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
> >> cockpit. Well, who can blame him?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> R.
rhys - 20 Aug 2004 19:27 GMT
No, sorry, Skip...I saw your message yesterday but was consumed with
work and retrieving engine spares from my boat...I have finally
enlisted some help on that front as I don't seem to have the time to
finish the rebuild personally...paint the block, swap out gears,
etc...

E-mail me offlist please at mdacey <AT> darkstar <dot> ca , and I will
learn of this "Shiloh" (isn't that a Civil War battlefield?)

R.

>OT, my apologies:  Rhys, did you get my info about Shiloh?
>
>L8R
>
>Skip
Garuda - 20 Aug 2004 03:05 GMT
> >> I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
> >> cockpit. Well, who can blame him?
> >
> >Fitted cushion salesmen, for starters.

I remember being pooped in a Hinckley B40 in what I considered to be
marginal seas, such as 1 to 3 feet, with an occasional 4 footer rolling in
due to weather or heavy traffic.  Would never have happen on my boat, which
had a somewhat higher freeboard than the Hinckley.
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 03:47 GMT
>I remember being pooped in a Hinckley B40 in what I considered to be
>marginal seas, such as 1 to 3 feet,

huh???  

dood, a plywood rowboat ain't no B40
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 02:39 GMT
hey, moose brain (what a weird addy you have.  yuk!) "fitted cockpit cushions"
are considered any part of the required equipment on an ocean voyaging boat to
make it more seaworthy.

stay tied to the dock, dood.

>mosestorah@worldnet.att.net
>Date: 8/19/2004 6:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>Fitted cushion salesmen, for starters.
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 02:51 GMT
> hey, moose brain (what a weird addy you have.  yuk!)

Hmm... I, have a weird attitude?

> "fitted cockpit cushions"
> are considered any part of the required equipment on an ocean voyaging boat to
> make it more seaworthy.

Since when?

> stay tied to the dock, dood.

How old are you?

> >mosestorah@worldnet.att.net
> >Date: 8/19/2004 6:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> >
> >Fitted cushion salesmen, for starters.
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 03:51 GMT
>> hey, moose brain (what a weird addy you have.  yuk!)
>
>Hmm... I, have a weird attitude?

yes, moose brain, you do.
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 05:53 GMT
> >> hey, moose brain (what a weird addy you have.  yuk!)
> >
> >Hmm... I, have a weird attitude?
>
> yes, moose brain, you do.

How so?
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 13:28 GMT
well, for one, you think fitted cockpit cushions make a boat more seaworthy.

>> >> hey, moose brain (what a weird addy you have.  yuk!)
>> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>How so?
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 16:13 GMT
> well, for one, you think fitted cockpit cushions make a boat more seaworthy.

Huh?

> >> >> hey, moose brain (what a weird addy you have.  yuk!)
> >> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> >
> >How so?
JAXAshby - 21 Aug 2004 13:48 GMT
that is what you said, moose stored.  changed your mind, or just can't remember
what you said from one day to the next?

>> well, for one, you think fitted cockpit cushions make a boat more
>seaworthy.
>
>Huh?
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 00:34 GMT
> that is what you said, moose stored.  changed your mind, or just can't remember
> what you said from one day to the next?

Produce a quote where I said any such thing.

> >> well, for one, you think fitted cockpit cushions make a boat more
> >seaworthy.
> >
> >Huh?
JAXAshby - 23 Aug 2004 00:51 GMT
moose stored hits and runs totally unable to accept responsibility for his
actions below.  it clearly shows why moose store should never own an EPIRB

>> that is what you said, moose stored.  changed your mind, or just can't
>remember
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>> >
>> >Huh?
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 02:31 GMT
> moose stored hits and runs totally unable to accept responsibility for his
> actions below.  it clearly shows why moose store should never own an EPIRB

Judging from your posts you're in constant distress, so I suggest
you keep yours with you at all times..

> >> that is what you said, moose stored.  changed your mind, or just can't
> >remember
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> >> >
> >> >Huh?

--

The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
JAXAshby - 23 Aug 2004 03:00 GMT
weight to gow, moose store.  what a fine comeback showing yoour exteseve unders
standings of tings natuicatla.

btw, why in hell do you call yourself a name that rhymes with "whore"

>From: Roy Jose Lorr mosestorah@worldnet.att.net
>Date: 8/22/2004 9:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>utopian sentimentalism
>is homicidal mania.
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 05:23 GMT
> weight to gow, moose store.  what a fine comeback showing yoour exteseve unders
> standings of tings natuicatla.
>
> btw, why in hell do you call yourself a name that rhymes with "whore"

Methinks you're lacking an adequate number of  holes in your euphroe.

> >From: Roy Jose Lorr mosestorah@worldnet.att.net
> >Date: 8/22/2004 9:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> >utopian sentimentalism
> >is homicidal mania.

--

The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 03:52 GMT
>> "fitted cockpit cushions"
>> are considered any part of the required equipment on an ocean voyaging boat
>to
>> make it more seaworthy.
>
>Since when?

since 10,000 B.C.
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 05:55 GMT
> >> "fitted cockpit cushions"
> >> are considered any part of the required equipment on an ocean voyaging boat
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> since 10,000 B.C.

How so?
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 13:29 GMT
geesh, dood, back to study with you.  lunch isn't for another 45 minutes.

>> >> "fitted cockpit cushions"
>> >> are considered any part of the required equipment on an ocean voyaging
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>How so?
Roy Jose Lorr - 20 Aug 2004 16:20 GMT
> geesh, dood, back to study with you.  lunch isn't for another 45 minutes.

Can you say dementia?

> >> >> "fitted cockpit cushions"
> >> >> are considered any part of the required equipment on an ocean voyaging
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> >
> >How so?

--

The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
JAXAshby - 21 Aug 2004 13:50 GMT
>> geesh, dood, back to study with you.  lunch isn't for another 45 minutes.
>
>Can you say dementia?

moose stored, I believe the word used for someone like you who is terrified of
3 foot seas in a Tayana 37, yet intends to push the button on an EPIRB when the
beer runs low is "chickenshit".  You may have dementia as well, but we were not
discussing that.
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 00:39 GMT
> >> geesh, dood, back to study with you.  lunch isn't for another 45 minutes.
> >
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> beer runs low is "chickenshit".  You may have dementia as well, but we were not
> discussing that.

You scorn me for preferring my foam in a schooner?... shame.
JAXAshby - 23 Aug 2004 00:53 GMT
speaking of dementia ...

>> >Can you say dementia?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>You scorn me for preferring my foam in a schooner?... shame.
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 03:10 GMT
> speaking of dementia ...

Can you say dullard?

> >> >Can you say dementia?
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> >
> >You scorn me for preferring my foam in a schooner?... shame.

--

The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
JAXAshby - 23 Aug 2004 03:14 GMT
>> speaking of dementia ...
>
>Can you say dullard?

of course.  you are a dullard.  and a damned stew ped one at that.
Roy Jose Lorr - 23 Aug 2004 04:55 GMT
> >> speaking of dementia ...
> >
> >Can you say dullard?
>
> of course.  you are a dullard.  and a damned stew ped one at that.

stew ped: sailors midwatch snack, made
from slue footed crowsnesters.
DSK - 20 Aug 2004 12:01 GMT
>>I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
>>cockpit. Well, who can blame him?

> Fitted cushion salesmen, for starters.

Or anyone who grasps the concept of sufficient reserve bouyancy coupled
with an open transom.

It's just amazing, if water gets in it runs right back out again quick
as a wink. And it's handy a lot of other ways, too.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King
JAXAshby - 20 Aug 2004 13:30 GMT
so, doug, where do the fitted cockpit cushions in that reserve bouyancy
concept?

>>>I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
>>>cockpit. Well, who can blame him?
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
>Fresh Breezes- Doug King
DSK - 20 Aug 2004 13:43 GMT
> so, doug, where do the fitted cockpit cushions in that reserve bouyancy
> concept?

They should fit between your ears nicely. An improvement over what's
there now.

DSK
JAXAshby - 21 Aug 2004 13:52 GMT
so, doug, what kind of "reserve bouyancy" did you "fitted cockpit cushions"
provide on your Hunter 19?

>> so, doug, where do the fitted cockpit cushions in that reserve bouyancy
>> concept?
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>DSK
DSK - 21 Aug 2004 20:46 GMT
> so, doug, what kind of "reserve bouyancy" did you "fitted cockpit cushions"
> provide on your Hunter 19?

We did not have fitted cockpit cushions on our Hunter 19

http://community.webshots.com/photo/37908878/83126076NPuUer

Any other questions Jax?

DSK
JAXAshby - 21 Aug 2004 21:06 GMT
>> so, doug, what kind of "reserve bouyancy" did you "fitted cockpit cushions"
>> provide on your Hunter 19?
>
>We did not have fitted cockpit cushions on our Hunter 19

why is that?  after you claimed that fitted cockpit cushions are a serious
safety imporvement are we to take it you have a death wish for not installing
such on your personal boat?
DSK - 21 Aug 2004 21:30 GMT
> why is that?  after you claimed that fitted cockpit cushions are a serious
> safety imporvement

Please quote where I said any such thing.

DSK
JAXAshby - 21 Aug 2004 22:37 GMT
how soon you forget, dougies.  having a senior moment, are you?

>> why is that?  after you claimed that fitted cockpit cushions are a serious
>> safety imporvement
>
>Please quote where I said any such thing.
>
>DSK
otnmbrd - 21 Aug 2004 21:49 GMT
Sheesh, Doodles, you're really gett'n hard up for an argument, aren't you.

>>>so, doug, what kind of "reserve bouyancy" did you "fitted cockpit cushions"
>>>provide on your Hunter 19?
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> safety imporvement are we to take it you have a death wish for not installing
> such on your personal boat?
JAXAshby - 21 Aug 2004 22:40 GMT
dougies were bein' pontificatin' on hous muches hiss noses 'bout dem boaty
tings and hiss says "fitted cockpit cushions" are for whats makes dem boaty
tings mosterler seeworthee.  I jes pointin' outs dat dougoies gots nose see
'cperience to nose whatz iss seeworthees or nots.

>Sheesh, Doodles, you're really gett'n hard up for an argument, aren't you.
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>installing
>> such on your personal boat?
otnmbrd - 21 Aug 2004 22:46 GMT
Oops, Doodles, forgot to turn your spell checker on, again, I see.

otn

> dougies were bein' pontificatin' on hous muches hiss noses 'bout dem boaty
> tings and hiss says "fitted cockpit cushions" are for whats makes dem boaty
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>>
>>>such on your personal boat?
JAXAshby - 22 Aug 2004 00:30 GMT
sorry, over the knee.  I turned on my trailer trash spel czech especially for
you.  are you saying you didn't appreciate being rminded of your language of
origin?

>Oops, Doodles, forgot to turn your spell checker on, again, I see.
>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>>>
>>>>such on your personal boat?
otnmbrd - 22 Aug 2004 01:11 GMT
LOL, Doodles, spell check on, spell check off, it's obvious that your
knowledge of spelling just about equals your knowledge of anything boating.
As for being "trailer trash" <BG> ....nah .... my old schools song says
it best .... starts off, "For we're a bunch of bastards, scum of the
Earth ..... ".

otn

> sorry, over the knee.  I turned on my trailer trash spel czech especially for
> you.  are you saying you didn't appreciate being rminded of your language of
> origin?
JAXAshby - 22 Aug 2004 03:16 GMT
over the knee tells up for god know what reason buried deep in the backwaters
of his head:

>my old schools song  
>starts off, "For we're a bunch of bastards, scum of the
>Earth ..... ".
otnmbrd - 22 Aug 2004 03:41 GMT
LOL I guess Doodles hasn't heard that song.

otn

> over the knee tells up for god know what reason buried deep in the backwaters
> of his head:
>
>>my old schools song  
>>starts off, "For we're a bunch of bastards, scum of the
>>Earth ..... ".
Rich Hampel - 20 Aug 2004 15:42 GMT
It amazing all right .... when the force of the breaking wave across an
open transom throws you into the wheel.... and when you recover the
wave who doesnt want to be in the cockpit in the first place attempts
to rip your pants off and knock you off your feet as is 'empties'.    
Nah ..... give me a  place to hide.
An open transom is like standing naked on a sheet of plywood. If You
want a sailboard, buy a sailboard.
;-)

> >>I gather Colvin hates the idea of getting pooped in a Jacuzzi-sized
> >>cockpit. Well, who can blame him?
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Fresh Breezes- Doug King
DSK - 20 Aug 2004 19:22 GMT
> It amazing all right .... when the force of the breaking wave across an
> open transom throws you into the wheel.... and when you recover the
> wave who doesnt want to be in the cockpit in the first place attempts
> to rip your pants off and knock you off your feet as is 'empties'.

???

I guess the part about "reserve bouyancy" didn't really mean anything?

> Nah ..... give me a  place to hide.

If conditions are that bad, then one would most prudently be either
reaching off under very small sail or else lying to a sea anchor.

If you have irrational prejudices against modern boats, then surely you
can come up with some better rationalization?

A heavy displacement boat and/or double ender would be even worse off in
the same scenario, getting hit by breaking crests much harder as it
responds less to the waves.

> An open transom is like standing naked on a sheet of plywood.

Oh yeah, that's *exactly* what it's like! Funny, in all the years of
sailing open transom boats, I never thought of that!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King
Rich Hampel - 20 Aug 2004 19:55 GMT
> > It amazing all right .... when the force of the breaking wave across an
> > open transom throws you into the wheel.... and when you recover the
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> I guess the part about "reserve bouyancy" didn't really mean anything?
Oh really?  I guess you missed the part that equates to too much
bouyancy in the stern causes the stem to dive/plunge when a large wave
comes astern.

> > Nah ..... give me a  place to hide.
>
> If conditions are that bad, then one would most prudently be either
> reaching off under very small sail or else lying to a sea anchor.
Yup, open sterns equate to optimally light weight (low scantling
numbers) boats that coudnt stand the pounding.

> If you have irrational prejudices against modern boats, then surely you
> can come up with some better rationalization?
Not at all, I own both traditional, modern and crazy.

> A heavy displacement boat and/or double ender would be even worse off in
> the same scenario, getting hit by breaking crests much harder as it
> responds less to the waves.
Not so, most double enders (Perry, Creighlock, Harris, etc. designs)
have quite a bit of 'bustle' to the stern. In those designs one
considers that the 'protuberance' of the tumblehome canoe stern is just
a cosmetic/styling addition .... when you imaginarily cut the styling
off, you have essentially the same hull form bouyancy-wise.  Go look at
the line drawings of them sometime - the 'pinch' is an addition well
aft of where the reserve is located.   I guess by the same reasoning a
boat with an extended retractable bowsprit would be deemed to have less
reserve in the bow section. ;-)

> > An open transom is like standing naked on a sheet of plywood.
>
> Oh yeah, that's *exactly* what it's like! Funny, in all the years of
> sailing open transom boats, I never thought of that!
Honestly, when was the last time you were in the OCEAN for more than an
easy coastal passage with an open stern.... didnt happen.  Open sterns
are nice for protected bays and lakes..... nope not on the ocean (balls
to the wall racing excluded).

> Fresh Breezes- Doug King
DSK - 20 Aug 2004 20:27 GMT
>>I guess the part about "reserve bouyancy" didn't really mean anything?

> Oh really?  I guess you missed the part that equates to too much
> bouyancy in the stern causes the stem to dive/plunge when a large wave
> comes astern.

Not necessarily.

If you want to have a serious discussion, let's. But your earlier post
seemed mocking.

>>If conditions are that bad, then one would most prudently be either
>>reaching off under very small sail or else lying to a sea anchor.
>
> Yup, open sterns equate to optimally light weight (low scantling
> numbers) boats that coudnt stand the pounding.

Depends on the builder and the intent of the design, doesn't it?
Certainly there is nothing inherent about an open transom that requires
flimsy construction.

There are plenty of instances of modern designs sticking out weather
that hammered more traditional boats, including (sadly) breaking up.

>>A heavy displacement boat and/or double ender would be even worse off in
>>the same scenario, getting hit by breaking crests much harder as it
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> a cosmetic/styling addition .... when you imaginarily cut the styling
> off, you have essentially the same hull form bouyancy-wise.

The original Colin Archer redningskoite designs were dependent on
reserve bouyancy forward and aft... an aside, they were also built as
lightly as possible given the technology of the times...

A bustle or canoe stern isn't going to have the same reserve bouyancy as
a heavily flared stern section.

> ...  Go look at
> the line drawings of them sometime

I have, thanks.

> ... - the 'pinch' is an addition well
> aft of where the reserve is located.

It's all about enclosed volume. If the shape reduces volume, then it
reduces bouyancy.

OTOH it's also possible to have the volume in the wrong place, such as
those beautiful old fashioned counter sterns that are utter beasts at sea.

> ... I guess by the same reasoning a
> boat with an extended retractable bowsprit would be deemed to have less
> reserve in the bow section. ;-)

Yep, I'd think so... judging by the amount of water that comes in some
of them...

>>Oh yeah, that's *exactly* what it's like! Funny, in all the years of
>>sailing open transom boats, I never thought of that!
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> are nice for protected bays and lakes..... nope not on the ocean (balls
> to the wall racing excluded).

Funny, all those racing boats have to be delivered to the starts and
from the finishes. Usually they have a tight schedule and are often out
in weather that's at least a little uncomfortable. If they were that
bad, then we'd be hearing news about them sinking and loss of life etc
etc. But not a whisper... is it a cover-up?

Some people's "easy coastal passage" is another person's nightmare. It's
all relative. If you want to believe that open transoms are death traps
(and I've had several "old salt" types tell me exactly that) then be my
guest. But there isn't really much fact to support that position.

DSK
Rich Hampel - 20 Aug 2004 21:36 GMT
> If you want to have a serious discussion, let's. But your earlier post
> seemed mocking.
I'm an iconoclast at heart, I cant help myself.  Whenever someone
states such and so is the correct true form ...  usually means whats
currently in vogue' ....  and soon to go out of 'vogue'.

> There are plenty of instances of modern designs sticking out weather
> that hammered more traditional boats, including (sadly) breaking up.
All depends on if the sailor KNOWS how to sail, doesnt it.  

> The original Colin Archer redningskoite designs were dependent on
> reserve bouyancy forward and aft... an aside, they were also built as
> lightly as possible given the technology of the times...
I dont think they were, my perception is that they were quite 'pinched'
on the ends, simply because one cant bend the strakes to include much
bustle in the ends.

> OTOH it's also possible to have the volume in the wrong place, such as
> those beautiful old fashioned counter sterns that are utter beasts at sea.
They weren NOT designed for 'comfort', they were designed as 'rule
beaters' .... and wound up with too much 'rocker' and extreme short
water line length when upright.  The rule at the time penalized long
waterline length .......

> Funny, all those racing boats have to be delivered to the starts and
> from the finishes. Usually they have a tight schedule and are often out
> in weather that's at least a little uncomfortable. If they were that
> bad, then we'd be hearing news about them sinking and loss of life etc
> etc. But not a whisper... is it a cover-up?
Essentially its is when you know how many designs destructively fail
and never make it to the race course at all.

> Some people's "easy coastal passage" is another person's nightmare. It's
> all relative. If you want to believe that open transoms are death traps
> (and I've had several "old salt" types tell me exactly that) then be my
> guest. But there isn't really much fact to support that position.
Except those that that have had their teeth loosened during a blow
riding on a wildly bucking, fat assed sled.  Thanks, I prefer to go
below and simply wait it out.   hmmmmmpf.

> DSK

;-)
DSK - 21 Aug 2004 20:50 GMT
> I'm an iconoclast at heart, I cant help myself.  Whenever someone
> states such and so is the correct true form ...  usually means whats
> currently in vogue' ....  and soon to go out of 'vogue'.

Some things never go out of style... long sweeping overhangs, for
example... beautiful! But not practical unless you can have a really big
one like say, Shamrock

>>There are plenty of instances of modern designs sticking out weather
>>that hammered more traditional boats, including (sadly) breaking up.
>
> All depends on if the sailor KNOWS how to sail, doesnt it.

>>Funny, all those racing boats have to be delivered to the starts and
>>from the finishes. Usually they have a tight schedule and are often out
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Essentially its is when you know how many designs destructively fail
> and never make it to the race course at all.

>> There are plenty of instances of modern designs sticking out weather
that hammered more traditional boats, including (sadly) breaking up.

> All depends on if the sailor KNOWS how to sail, doesnt it.

Sure. That's the key to getting performance... whatever one defines the
performance goal to be... out of any type boat.

Of course, if one's defined goal is "impress everybody around the dock,
while being slow under sail and difficult to maneuver in optimal
circumstances" that's easy to achieve. It's one reason why I have such a
distaste for the faux Colin Archer types.

Some time ago I overheard a couple of people arguing about whether the
Valiant 40 was derived from North Sea or Baltic working vessels... I
didn't interrupt to ask how many of either had fin keels, but I should
have...

>> The original Colin Archer redningskoite designs were dependent on
reserve bouyancy forward and aft... an aside, they were also built as
lightly as possible given the technology of the times...

> I dont think they were, my perception is that they were quite 'pinched'
> on the ends, simply because one cant bend the strakes to include much
> bustle in the ends.

Take a look at the lines of the real deal Colin Archer some time. There
is no bustle, they have flared aft and foreward sections for reserve
bouyancy. They also have more salient keel flat, unpopular with
fiberglass builders.

Here's an interesting pic of a model
http://www.maritim-modellklubb.no/Images/Klubbmoeter/2004-02/Colin_Archer_4.jpg

There used to be a Colin Archer lines plan on the wwweb but I can't find
it at the moment.

William Atkins "yacht-ized" the original plans back in the 1930s and
each successive generation has bowdlerized it even further and still
claimed the pedigree. Some are nice boats. Most have little relation to
the original and any similarity in sailing/handling characteristics are
coincidental.

>> OTOH it's also possible to have the volume in the wrong place, such
as those beautiful old fashioned counter sterns that are utter beasts at
sea.

> They weren NOT designed for 'comfort'

I didn't say they were.

> ... they were designed as 'rul