yes.

From: otnmbrd
Date: 8/5/2004 10:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: . net

ROFL More Jaxtroll. You ever been outside the 100 fathom curve Jax?

JAXAshby wrote:
I guess over the knee didn't know either.



Date: 8/5/2004 12:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: .net



JAXAshby wrote:

btw dood, you know -- of course -- the easiest way to to avoid breaking

waves

is to stay outside the hundred fathom line, don't you?


JAXtroll ......

he doesn't know what a 'fathom' is..

fathom

\Fath"om\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Fathomed; p. pr. & vb. n. Fathoming.] 1. To
encompass with the arms extended or encircling; to measure by throwing the arms
about; to span. [Obs.] --Purchas.

2. The measure by a sounding line; especially, to sound the depth of; to
penetrate, measure, and comprehend; to get to the bottom of. --Dryden.

The page of life that was spread out before me seemed dull and commonplace,
only because I had not fathomed its deeper import. --Hawthotne




otnmbrd wrote:
ROFL More Jaxtroll. You ever been outside the 100 fathom curve Jax?

JAXAshby wrote:

I guess over the knee didn't know either.


Date: 8/5/2004 12:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: .net



JAXAshby wrote:

btw dood, you know -- of course -- the easiest way to to avoid breaking


waves

is to stay outside the hundred fathom line, don't you?



JAXtroll ......

JAXAshby wrote:
yes.


From: otnmbrd
Date: 8/5/2004 10:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: . net

ROFL More Jaxtroll. You ever been outside the 100 fathom curve Jax?

G Well, if you've been outside the curve as much as you've been in
charge of the navigation, you probably did it once for a short time on a
flat calm day.
Later dood.

(Trent D. Sanders) wrote in message . com...
You might want to look at the video "Storm Tactics" by Larry & Lin
Pardey before you judge para-anchors. Used properly, as the video
shows , they're very effective.
T. Sanders
S/V Cimba

(Bryan Glover) wrote in message . com...
Para anchor,sea anchors dont provide the protection in storms
advertised by the manufacturers. The leading yachting magazines
perpetuate the myth, because para anchor manufacturers are prolific
advertisers. Both parties show themselves as little better than bilge
raised haddock. Here is some examples of what research has concluded
about para anchors.

“Even with a large sea anchor the bow of a modern yacht will
tend to yaw
away from the wind when the towline goes slack as it will when the
boat passes through the trough of the wave. For these reasons the use
of a sea anchor deployed from the bow is not recommended”
U.S. Coast Guard Report No CG-D-20-87 sec 6-6
A series type drogue provides significant advantages over a cone or
parachute type drogue/sea anchor”
U.S. Coast Guard Report CG-D-20-87

“ When we were doing our research for Surviving the storm, we
did not find a single positive experience in these conditions using
para anchors. And the unmistakable conclusion for us from this is that
in dangerously breaking seas, tactics other than a parachute anchor
have a higher chance of success – for most situations”.
Steve Dashew

“With a series drogue deployed, a well-designed and properly
constructed fibreglass boat should be capable of riding through a
Fastnet type storm with no structural damage. Model tests indicate
that the loads on the hull and rigging in a breaking wave strike
should not be excessive”
U.S. Coast Guard Report CG-D-20-87 sec 6-4

“Para anchor users interviewed all find their parachute
anchors extremely difficult to retrieve in other than moderate wind
and sea.
A major factor regarding both personal comfort and one’s use
of parachute anchors in breaking seas is the boat’s tendency to
sail at anchor. As stated earlier, if your boat sails on the hook, the
odds are it will sail around even more fiercely while lying to a
parachute in the middle of the ocean. This oscillation creates extreme
loads, presents the bow at a wide and dangerous angle to the sea, and
is extremely uncomfortable.”
Steve Dashew

There is much more of the same on my web site www.seriesdrogue.com
I have the following questions:-
Do product description codes/laws cover para anchors
Is it legal to advertise para anchors as safe in open ocean storms.
Do yachting magazines do any research when writing articles, or are
they spoon fed by interest groups.

Regards
Bryan Glover

Rich, you may find this of interest,
"There are two ways around this. One is some form of riding sail or
backstaysail as we’ve discussed. The other is to bridle the
parachute off the bow, as advocated by the Pardeys. The bridle is used
with a reefed trysail or deeply reefed main to increase resistance to
rolling. A key feature of this approach for the Pardeys is the
creation of a slick off their keel, which – theoretically, at
least – calms the seas. This is a major safety issue, because
without the slick, the boat is now lying at an angle of 50 deg or 60
deg to breaking crests, quite vulnerable to a knockdown or worse. I
have no doubt that the Pardey’s Seraffyn did in fact create a
slick to windward in its day, but I have never seen this myself, and I
have interviewed only one other sailor who claims to have been able to
crate this type of beneficial slick and have it work as advertised."
Stev Dashew

Heaving to, Lying ahull, or Running off
“It is important to note that most storms, even severe storms,
do not create dangerous breaking waves. Sailors who survive such
storms may conclude that the tactics they employ, such as heaving to,
lying ahull or running off, are adequate to prevent capsize. This is a
serious mistake. There is very compelling evidence to show that while
a well found boat will survive a storm in non-breaking waves, none of
the above tactics will prevent capsize in a breaking wave
strike.”
U.S. Coast Guard Report CG-D-20-87 sec1-1

Bryan

(JAXAshby) wrote in message ...
para anchor manufacturers are prolific
advertisers.

"prolific"? it seems you don't know what the word means. Here, let me help
you out.

prolific

\Pro*lif"ic\, 1. Having the quality of generating; producing young or fruit;
generative; fruitful; productive; -- applied to plants producing fruit, animals
producing young, etc.; -- usually with the implied idea of frequent or numerous
production; as, a prolific tree, female, and the like.

2. Serving to produce; fruitful of results; active; as, a prolific brain; a
controversy prolific of evil.

Jax
prolific
2b this age being not very prolifique of customers for such a
commodity.PEPYS.
3 By Niles prolific torrents delug'd o'er. ad1738.
Shorter Oxford Dic
I assumed you would have known the above, as in 1738 you people still
spoke the Queens English, shame on you.
Bryan

ah, so if the word had some particular meaning back in the early eighteenth
century it has the same meaning and usage today?

btw, dood, you missed the nuance of the early 18th century meaning.

? dood? are *you* now stating that the product you are pushing for profit
works as you have stated as shown by your use of a three hundred year old
meaning of a word no longer used in that fashion.

dood, it sounds like you are trying to justify your sloppy word usage. that
gives one and all cause for pause about every last thing you might be claiming
about that product you are trying to turn a buck on.

dood, it is the third millenium. try to keep up.

para anchor manufacturers are prolific
advertisers.

"prolific"? it seems you don't know what the word means. Here, let me
help
you out.

prolific

\Pro*lif"ic\, 1. Having the quality of generating; producing young or
fruit;
generative; fruitful; productive; -- applied to plants producing fruit,
animals
producing young, etc.; -- usually with the implied idea of frequent or
numerous
production; as, a prolific tree, female, and the like.

2. Serving to produce; fruitful of results; active; as, a prolific brain; a
controversy prolific of evil.

Jax
prolific
2b this age being not very prolifique of customers for such a
commodity.PEPYS.
3 By Niles prolific torrents delug'd o'er. ad1738.
Shorter Oxford Dic
I assumed you would have known the above, as in 1738 you people still
spoke the Queens English, shame on you.
Bryan

Wayne.B wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:50:00 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote:
Dashew is one who never is found in a hove-to position but advocates
running off whenever possible. (Is that running off ..... while
dragging a sea anchor - dont think so!)

======================================

Running off while towing lines (warps) or a drogue has been reported
as very effective.

(Heavy Weather Sailing/ K. Adlard Coles)


Rich, you may find this of interest,
"There are two ways around this. One is some form of riding sail or
backstaysail as we’ve discussed. The other is to bridle the
parachute off the bow, as advocated by the Pardeys. The bridle is used
with a reefed trysail or deeply reefed main to increase resistance to
rolling. A key feature of this approach for the Pardeys is the
creation of a slick off their keel, which – theoretically, at
least – calms the seas. This is a major safety issue, because
without the slick, the boat is now lying at an angle of 50 deg or 60
deg to breaking crests, quite vulnerable to a knockdown or worse. I
have no doubt that the Pardey’s Seraffyn did in fact create a
slick to windward in its day, but I have never seen this myself, and I
have interviewed only one other sailor who claims to have been able to
crate this type of beneficial slick and have it work as advertised."
Stev Dashew

Heaving to, Lying ahull, or Running off
“It is important to note that most storms, even severe storms,
do not create dangerous breaking waves. Sailors who survive such
storms may conclude that the tactics they employ, such as heaving to,
lying ahull or running off, are adequate to prevent capsize. This is a
serious mistake. There is very compelling evidence to show that while
a well found boat will survive a storm in non-breaking waves, none of
the above tactics will prevent capsize in a breaking wave
strike.”
U.S. Coast Guard Report CG-D-20-87 sec1-1

Bryan

On 6 Aug 2004 07:27:56 -0700, (Bryan Glover)
wrote:
There is very compelling evidence to show that while
a well found boat will survive a storm in non-breaking waves, none of
the above tactics will prevent capsize in a breaking wave
strike.”
U.S. Coast Guard Report CG-D-20-87 sec1-1

=============================================

Sounds reasonable to me. Watch some of the extreme surfing movies on
the cable channels, some of which were filmed on offshore sea mounts
off San Diego. The waves are in the 50 to 60 foot range with huge
overhanging crests. It doesn't take much imagination to realize that
a wave that size and shape could tumble a 70 foot boat like a toy.

The next question is if a wave like that could form in the open ocean?
Probably not very often it seems but who knows... Given the right
combination of multiple wave trains in different directions, wind,
current, etc., almost anything is possible. So called "freak waves"
in the 100 foot wave are apparently showing up on the weather
satellites much more often than previously suspected. If a 100 foot
wave breaks just a little bit, that's still an awesome force to be
reckoned with.

The next question is if a wave like that could form in the open ocean?

it is unusual, and takes unusual conditions. by far, most waves break because
the water is too shallow for the wave height, as bottom friction slows the
bottom of the wave (water in a waves turns in large circles at the top of the
wave, and ever smaller circles as water depth increases) and the top of the
wave simply gets ahead of the bottom and falls over.

(JAXAshby) wrote in message ...
ah, so if the word had some particular meaning back in the early eighteenth
century it has the same meaning and usage today?

btw, dood, you missed the nuance of the early 18th century meaning.

? dood? are *you* now stating that the product you are pushing for profit
works as you have stated as shown by your use of a three hundred year old
meaning of a word no longer used in that fashion.

dood, it sounds like you are trying to justify your sloppy word usage. that
gives one and all cause for pause about every last thing you might be claiming
about that product you are trying to turn a buck on.

dood, it is the third millenium. try to keep up.

para anchor manufacturers are prolific
advertisers.

jax

"prolific"? it seems you don't know what the word means. Here, let me
help
you out.

prolific

\Pro*lif"ic\, 1. Having the quality of generating; producing young or
fruit;
generative; fruitful; productive; -- applied to plants producing fruit,
animals
producing young, etc.; -- usually with the implied idea of frequent or
numerous
production; as, a prolific tree, female, and the like.

2. Serving to produce; fruitful of results; active; as, a prolific brain; a
controversy prolific of evil.


prolific
2b this age being not very prolifique of customers for such a
commodity.PEPYS.
3 By Niles prolific torrents delug'd o'er. ad1738.
Shorter Oxford Dic
I assumed you would have known the above, as in 1738 you people still
spoke the Queens English, shame on you.
Bryan


jax, you obviously have a small dic, I on the other hand have the shorter oxford, which serves me in good stead, because it is understood by the educated that if it is in the oxford, its usage may be made in that context, unless the particular usage is designated obsolete, which,in the context i have used, it is not.

it originates from the latin, prolificus, in use from c600 to c1500,
from the earlier latin proles meaning offspring.
It should be pronounced proli.fik

I am sure that you would agree with me that the americanisation of the
english language is something that should be resisted, and all
perpetrators tared and feathered.

bryan