[bolger] Re: mj knockdowns
Hi Steve, Obviously I've been following with great interest the
copious correspondence you've inspired with your dunking activities, and
I have been trying to imagine what might have happened based on my
experience. Does the following scenario resemble your situation just
prior to and during knockdown?
Forward motion stopped or at least slow; wind abeam; main uncleated and
luffing with boom, yard and sail way out to leeward; mizzen furled but
with loose sail at head catching wind; crew in cockpit; boat heeling
??deg..?
The combined weights of masts, boom, yards, sails, etc. must be maybe
200 pounds or more (plus crew?) with a c.g. several feet above the water
line and in this case off the lee beam and increasing with angle of
heel. When Zephyr's mizzen top came loose, as I described to you in my
recent e-mail, the force in similar wind conditions was strong enough to
shear off the foot. This could have added significantly to the other
windage heeling forces in your case. If your double reefed main was way
out how much heeling would it take to get the boom and reefed sail in
the water? At that point any drifting motion to leeward might drive it
further down even as buoyancy reduced the weight effect.
I think some of this ties in with the questions raised by Ed Haile,
Richard Spelling et al. and may give additional food for thought. If I
can solve the mystery of posting, I will add this to the group.
copious correspondence you've inspired with your dunking activities, and
I have been trying to imagine what might have happened based on my
experience. Does the following scenario resemble your situation just
prior to and during knockdown?
Forward motion stopped or at least slow; wind abeam; main uncleated and
luffing with boom, yard and sail way out to leeward; mizzen furled but
with loose sail at head catching wind; crew in cockpit; boat heeling
??deg..?
The combined weights of masts, boom, yards, sails, etc. must be maybe
200 pounds or more (plus crew?) with a c.g. several feet above the water
line and in this case off the lee beam and increasing with angle of
heel. When Zephyr's mizzen top came loose, as I described to you in my
recent e-mail, the force in similar wind conditions was strong enough to
shear off the foot. This could have added significantly to the other
windage heeling forces in your case. If your double reefed main was way
out how much heeling would it take to get the boom and reefed sail in
the water? At that point any drifting motion to leeward might drive it
further down even as buoyancy reduced the weight effect.
I think some of this ties in with the questions raised by Ed Haile,
Richard Spelling et al. and may give additional food for thought. If I
can solve the mystery of posting, I will add this to the group.
for Steve Anderson,
One of the first things I did with this boat was sail combinations. In high
winds the boat does fine under main alone. Under moderate winds she will
stall if coming about in less than, say, 180o. At 25k I think she comes
about in 100o. If the wind goes higher, this should be true of double reefs.
Lee helm? Little or none, actually.
I used to have a Mobjack, a racing dinghy sloop. Under 30k she was a
handful. Over 30k you could furl the main and sail all points under jib
alone, not even hiking. See what I mean?
But that's not your problem. Your wife is exactly right. The MJ should be
idiot proof. She should pop right back up regardless of what's flying. I
don't think wind can push her over. At least not winds blowing a mere 25k.
Does your mast have any flotation? It's hard to push a buoyant mast and a
big sail under. What happened?
from Ed Haile
One of the first things I did with this boat was sail combinations. In high
winds the boat does fine under main alone. Under moderate winds she will
stall if coming about in less than, say, 180o. At 25k I think she comes
about in 100o. If the wind goes higher, this should be true of double reefs.
Lee helm? Little or none, actually.
I used to have a Mobjack, a racing dinghy sloop. Under 30k she was a
handful. Over 30k you could furl the main and sail all points under jib
alone, not even hiking. See what I mean?
But that's not your problem. Your wife is exactly right. The MJ should be
idiot proof. She should pop right back up regardless of what's flying. I
don't think wind can push her over. At least not winds blowing a mere 25k.
Does your mast have any flotation? It's hard to push a buoyant mast and a
big sail under. What happened?
from Ed Haile
>From:Hwal@...______________________________________________________
>Reply-To:bolger@egroups.com
>To:bolger@egroups.com
>Subject: [bolger] Re: mj knockdowns
>Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 06:57:17 EST
>
>I'm going to be digesting this knockdown for a while yet - as I said - I
>was
>caught by surprise because she went over much more easily than I expected.
>One comment from ed - which surprised me - he said the Phil has suggested
>that when sailing double reefed one should furl the mizzen. This suprises
>me!
>Having sailed a seapearl ( catketch) for some time now - I know that boat
>has
>tremendous leehelm without the mizzen. But this is a different boat. I
>found
>tacking to be difficult under a double reef - as tho the mizzen was over
>powering the main. If this is true - that the mizzen can be or should be
>furled when double reefed it could make a lot of difference in gusty high
>wind days ( this is what I mean when I refer to "design factors"). In
>Saturday's experience - I felt like the loss of my mizzen ties contributed
>to
>the problem - making it more difficult for me to come up into the wind.
>But
>it all happens so fast :-) ( See - I'm smiling!)
>
>Perhaps by furled he meant reefed to a smaller size by furling it? Maybe
>Phil is reading and can comment on the appropriateness of furling the
>mizzen
>while double reefed.
>
>Steve
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 2.9%
>Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/936/5/_/3457/_/952343854/
>
>-- Talk to your group with your own voice!
>--http://www.egroups.com/VoiceChatPage?listName=bolger&m=1
>
>
In a message dated 3/6/2000 12:57:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
mkstocks@...writes:
<< Please talk a little about the contents of the interior of the boat.
Was everything lashed to the bottom, or did it all spill to leeward as
the boat went over. Perhaps that affected the self righting ability.
mkstocks@...writes:
<< Please talk a little about the contents of the interior of the boat.
Was everything lashed to the bottom, or did it all spill to leeward as
the boat went over. Perhaps that affected the self righting ability.
>>Hi Mike - there was nothing inside the boat - Steve
Hi -
Please talk a little about the contents of the interior of the boat.
Was everything lashed to the bottom, or did it all spill to leeward as
the boat went over. Perhaps that affected the self righting ability.
Thanks!
Mike
hwa-@...wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3443
Please talk a little about the contents of the interior of the boat.
Was everything lashed to the bottom, or did it all spill to leeward as
the boat went over. Perhaps that affected the self righting ability.
Thanks!
Mike
hwa-@...wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3443
I'm going to be digesting this knockdown for a while yet - as I said - I was
caught by surprise because she went over much more easily than I expected.
One comment from ed - which surprised me - he said the Phil has suggested
that when sailing double reefed one should furl the mizzen. This suprises me!
Having sailed a seapearl ( catketch) for some time now - I know that boat has
tremendous leehelm without the mizzen. But this is a different boat. I found
tacking to be difficult under a double reef - as tho the mizzen was over
powering the main. If this is true - that the mizzen can be or should be
furled when double reefed it could make a lot of difference in gusty high
wind days ( this is what I mean when I refer to "design factors"). In
Saturday's experience - I felt like the loss of my mizzen ties contributed to
the problem - making it more difficult for me to come up into the wind. But
it all happens so fast :-) ( See - I'm smiling!)
Perhaps by furled he meant reefed to a smaller size by furling it? Maybe
Phil is reading and can comment on the appropriateness of furling the mizzen
while double reefed.
Steve
caught by surprise because she went over much more easily than I expected.
One comment from ed - which surprised me - he said the Phil has suggested
that when sailing double reefed one should furl the mizzen. This suprises me!
Having sailed a seapearl ( catketch) for some time now - I know that boat has
tremendous leehelm without the mizzen. But this is a different boat. I found
tacking to be difficult under a double reef - as tho the mizzen was over
powering the main. If this is true - that the mizzen can be or should be
furled when double reefed it could make a lot of difference in gusty high
wind days ( this is what I mean when I refer to "design factors"). In
Saturday's experience - I felt like the loss of my mizzen ties contributed to
the problem - making it more difficult for me to come up into the wind. But
it all happens so fast :-) ( See - I'm smiling!)
Perhaps by furled he meant reefed to a smaller size by furling it? Maybe
Phil is reading and can comment on the appropriateness of furling the mizzen
while double reefed.
Steve
For Steve Anderson,
This sounds like one for PCB&F.
Ed Haile
This sounds like one for PCB&F.
Ed Haile
>From:Hwal@...______________________________________________________
>Reply-To:bolger@egroups.com
>To:bolger@egroups.com
>Subject: [bolger] mj knockdowns
>Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 20:17:32 EST
>
>Hi Ed - well we're joining the club. We got knocked down yesterday - and
>unfortuanely the hatch was open and we swamped. Quite an ordeal. It was
>far
>too windy to be out - but we were out - the winds had increased over the
>coarse of the day. The big contributing factor was that four or five of the
>laces on the mizzen broke - or the knots failed. I lost most of steerage
>without the mizzen working properly. We were broadside to the wind and the
>gust that knocked us down was probably about 25 mph. However - the main was
>double reefed and was set real low on the mast - and was uncleated and
>luffing. So it was the windage of the luffing main - the mizzen and the
>windage of the boat itself that knocked us over. It just seems to me that
>she
>went over far too easily. I know that our leeboard being down was not a
>help
>either - I think we tripped over it. But still - it all happened too
>easily.
>And once that flat bottom was flat to the wind - the wind pushed the bottom
>over too turning us turtle.
>
>I am very curious about the design aspects of this boat which are
>contributing to knockdowns - can you tell me about your knockdowns? How you
>think they happened?
>
>our 2 hp honda was way overpowered yesterday as well - when I lost the
>mizzen
>I started the outboard to push our nose to the wind - and it didn't have
>the
>guts. I think Im going to move up to a five.
>Steve
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>DON'T HATE YOUR RATE!
>Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as
>0.0% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees.
>Apply NOW!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/2120/5/_/3457/_/952305487/
>
>-- Create a poll/survey for your group!
>--http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=bolger&m=1
>
>
Hi Ed - well we're joining the club. We got knocked down yesterday - and
unfortuanely the hatch was open and we swamped. Quite an ordeal. It was far
too windy to be out - but we were out - the winds had increased over the
coarse of the day. The big contributing factor was that four or five of the
laces on the mizzen broke - or the knots failed. I lost most of steerage
without the mizzen working properly. We were broadside to the wind and the
gust that knocked us down was probably about 25 mph. However - the main was
double reefed and was set real low on the mast - and was uncleated and
luffing. So it was the windage of the luffing main - the mizzen and the
windage of the boat itself that knocked us over. It just seems to me that she
went over far too easily. I know that our leeboard being down was not a help
either - I think we tripped over it. But still - it all happened too easily.
And once that flat bottom was flat to the wind - the wind pushed the bottom
over too turning us turtle.
I am very curious about the design aspects of this boat which are
contributing to knockdowns - can you tell me about your knockdowns? How you
think they happened?
our 2 hp honda was way overpowered yesterday as well - when I lost the mizzen
I started the outboard to push our nose to the wind - and it didn't have the
guts. I think Im going to move up to a five.
Steve
unfortuanely the hatch was open and we swamped. Quite an ordeal. It was far
too windy to be out - but we were out - the winds had increased over the
coarse of the day. The big contributing factor was that four or five of the
laces on the mizzen broke - or the knots failed. I lost most of steerage
without the mizzen working properly. We were broadside to the wind and the
gust that knocked us down was probably about 25 mph. However - the main was
double reefed and was set real low on the mast - and was uncleated and
luffing. So it was the windage of the luffing main - the mizzen and the
windage of the boat itself that knocked us over. It just seems to me that she
went over far too easily. I know that our leeboard being down was not a help
either - I think we tripped over it. But still - it all happened too easily.
And once that flat bottom was flat to the wind - the wind pushed the bottom
over too turning us turtle.
I am very curious about the design aspects of this boat which are
contributing to knockdowns - can you tell me about your knockdowns? How you
think they happened?
our 2 hp honda was way overpowered yesterday as well - when I lost the mizzen
I started the outboard to push our nose to the wind - and it didn't have the
guts. I think Im going to move up to a five.
Steve