Re: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
Gavin L,
After reading your and and Peter W's posts I searched
a pile of doggeared mags and finally found that as Id feared my
memory was on the fritz.
The NIS I mentioned was indeed ballasted with a permanent
lead filled NACA section keel, but it weighed 600 lbs not the whopping 600kg
I recalled. Apologies. It was fitted straight thru a widened centreboard
hole by
bolting top and bottom to stainless bar/brackets (probably 90deg angle
section)
before sealing.
Jeff Gilbert
After reading your and and Peter W's posts I searched
a pile of doggeared mags and finally found that as Id feared my
memory was on the fritz.
The NIS I mentioned was indeed ballasted with a permanent
lead filled NACA section keel, but it weighed 600 lbs not the whopping 600kg
I recalled. Apologies. It was fitted straight thru a widened centreboard
hole by
bolting top and bottom to stainless bar/brackets (probably 90deg angle
section)
before sealing.
Jeff Gilbert
----- Original Message -----
From: Langmuir <llangmuir@...>
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
Greetings Jeff, Funny you should say that about the Sydney NIS.
I have been idly doodling steel fins with lead end plates to go on
the bottom of my Long Micro. I reckon I could sawzall off the
long keel in 1/2day leaving a bit for a rudder skeg. Existing 400kg of
lead located 600mm lower gives power the existing boat lacks and
NACA fin would help pointing. Interesting to see my mates eyes glaze
when I mention this. Not another wacko idea.Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Gilbert <jgilbert@...>
> A 23 ft Sydney NIS in Sydney added 600kg on 3ft fin after
>enthusiastic sail areas had them on their ear.
.............
Not crazy, more a matter of can you still use the boat with that appendage.
It will certainly
up the performance in the water, on land its a hassle!
It will certainly
up the performance in the water, on land its a hassle!
----- Original Message -----
From: Langmuir <llangmuir@...>
To: <bolger@egroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2000 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
Greetings Jeff,
Funny you should say that about the Sydney NIS. I have been idly doodling
steel fins with lead end plates to go on the bottom of my Long Micro. I
reckon that I could sawzall off the long keel in half a day leaving a little
bit for a rudder skeg. The existing 400kg of lead located 600mm lower would
give the power that the existing boat lacks and the naca fin would have to
help pointing. Interesting to see my mates eyes glaze over when I mention
this. Not another wacko idea.
Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Gilbert <jgilbert@...>
To: Bolger eGroup <bolger@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 6:25 AM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
> David,
> A 23 ft NIS in Sydney added 600kg on a 3ft fin after
> some enthusiastic sail areas had them on their ear.
> They are very happy with the way it now sails but
> obviously its old trailer is out.
> A drop plate could be the answer.
> Jeff Gilbert.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Ryan <david@...>
> To: <bolger@egroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:15 AM
> Subject: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
>
>
> Would I ballast the LS^2?
>
> Based on similar craft, I think the LS^2 would easily take 1-2 tons
> of ballast. I'm sure that would have to stiffen her up a bit.
>
> However, the "design concept" behind the LS^2 doesn't call for
> super-seaworth craft. Of course, the unexpected can, and usually does
> happen, but an LS^2 that is never sailed out of sight of land is very
> unlikely to encounter conditions that she can't handle unballasted.
>
> Reuel Parker's account of having his 44 footer Teresa knocked down in
> New York harbor (in "The Sharpie Book" is worth reading as a
> cautionary tale. She was yet unfinished didn't have her ballast shoe
> when a sudden gust knocked her over. Still, Parker went on to do
> quite a bit of sailing before he got around to adding the ballast.
>
> I believe the phase is "If you think it's time to reef, you're too
> late." Certainly the easiest way to keep a sharpie on her feet is not
> to carry too much sail.
> YIBB,
> David
>
> >Thanks for the link to that great Bruce Kirby article. I'd never seen
> >the potential stability of shoal-draft boats explained so thoroughly
> >before. Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his Norwalk
> >sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.? Would you ballast LS^2?
> >Garth
> >> This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on the
> >> topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing
> - stay on topic
> - use punctuation
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
> - add some content: send "thanks!" and "ditto!" posts off-list.
>
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing
- stay on topic
- use punctuation
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
- add some content: send "thanks!" and "ditto!" posts off-list.
Since I have the plans for the NIS 23 out this morning, I quote:
Ballast: This boat requires 600 pounds of ballast for normal use.
More could be used (up to 800 pounds) at the discretion of the owner,
for sailing in rough, open waters and heavy winds. Owners should keep
in mind that even in protected waters and small lakes, weather can
become severe with very little warning.
Ballast is in the form of lead bars laid on the bottom below the
bunks, or may be in the form of outside ballast (see below). The
recommended procedure for the all-inside system is to cast 10
bars .... These would weigh approximately 60 pounds each.
...
Alternative Ballasting system, which is slightly more efficient as it
puts the center of ballast weight lower, is to fasten lead to the
outside of the boat in the form of an exterior keelson along the
centerline. A lead keelson for 10 feet, ....9 inches wide and 1.5
inches thick would weight approximately 600 pounds with the
centerboard slot cut through it.
Peter
Ballast: This boat requires 600 pounds of ballast for normal use.
More could be used (up to 800 pounds) at the discretion of the owner,
for sailing in rough, open waters and heavy winds. Owners should keep
in mind that even in protected waters and small lakes, weather can
become severe with very little warning.
Ballast is in the form of lead bars laid on the bottom below the
bunks, or may be in the form of outside ballast (see below). The
recommended procedure for the all-inside system is to cast 10
bars .... These would weigh approximately 60 pounds each.
...
Alternative Ballasting system, which is slightly more efficient as it
puts the center of ballast weight lower, is to fasten lead to the
outside of the boat in the form of an exterior keelson along the
centerline. A lead keelson for 10 feet, ....9 inches wide and 1.5
inches thick would weight approximately 600 pounds with the
centerboard slot cut through it.
Peter
Cliff
belive that the answer is that twin keels have more form resistance
than a single keel ( surface friction and cross sectional) also
perhapse spreading out the mass may have a damping effect of the boat
rising to waves comming from the side so that greenwater may be more
readly taken aboard and finaly the lee side keel would move closer to
the center of boyancy insteed of farther away as the boat heels more
and there fore would have a smaller righting arm
Jeff
belive that the answer is that twin keels have more form resistance
than a single keel ( surface friction and cross sectional) also
perhapse spreading out the mass may have a damping effect of the boat
rising to waves comming from the side so that greenwater may be more
readly taken aboard and finaly the lee side keel would move closer to
the center of boyancy insteed of farther away as the boat heels more
and there fore would have a smaller righting arm
Jeff
--- Inbolger@egroups.com, cliff25@w... wrote:
> <<Ballast for the NIS sharpies is normally fitted as twin skegs...>>
>
> Can someone please tell me why twin ballast skegs wouldn't always be
> preferable, or for that matter twin keels over a single keel?
>
> Cliff
>
>http://www.angelfire.com/mi/mmmkkk/
> (Last of the Red Ho
In a message dated 11/4/2000 8:20:16 PM Eastern Standard Time,
pvanderw@...writes:
<< The plans I have for the 23 show options for the ballast, either
internal along each chine, or an external slab a couple of inches
deep running for most of the length of the bottom. >>
That makes sense - Thanks! I thought some of them had internal ballast. Steve
pvanderw@...writes:
<< The plans I have for the 23 show options for the ballast, either
internal along each chine, or an external slab a couple of inches
deep running for most of the length of the bottom. >>
That makes sense - Thanks! I thought some of them had internal ballast. Steve
hwal@...wrote:
notes I have seen have used external ballast. You can see a
good photo of Klaus Sussenbach's NIS 26 at:
http://pages.slic.com/wempsall/images/Building_sequence_and_Tips_.htm
Given that these boats have a completely flat bottom and no
keel, the difference between internal and external ballast is
probably not such a big deal. We are talking a few inches.
Bruce.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it from Mi Services
Group may contain information which is
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure.
If it is not addressed to you, please immediately contact
nzpostmaster@...and do not use, disclose,
copy, distribute or retain any of it without our authority.
**********************************************************************
> In a message dated 11/3/2000 6:30:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,Skeg may not be the right term, but most of the construction
>bruce.fountain@...writes:
>
> << Ballast for the NIS sharpies is normally fitted as twin skegs,
> although some builders have fitted internally. The skegs are
> glued and bolted to the hull. From what I can tell the lead
> is exposed (not boxed or glassed over).
> >>
> Bruce - Are you sure about this? I didn't think there were
> any skegs on the
> NIS boats - I seem to recall that there was an external shoe
> keel on the 31 -
> but I thought the nis 23 and 26 had internal ballast? Steve
> Anderson ( MJ
> Landroval)
notes I have seen have used external ballast. You can see a
good photo of Klaus Sussenbach's NIS 26 at:
http://pages.slic.com/wempsall/images/Building_sequence_and_Tips_.htm
Given that these boats have a completely flat bottom and no
keel, the difference between internal and external ballast is
probably not such a big deal. We are talking a few inches.
Bruce.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it from Mi Services
Group may contain information which is
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure.
If it is not addressed to you, please immediately contact
nzpostmaster@...and do not use, disclose,
copy, distribute or retain any of it without our authority.
**********************************************************************
> NIS boats - I seem to recall that there was an external shoe keelon the 31 -
The plans I have for the 23 show options for the ballast, either
internal along each chine, or an external slab a couple of inches
deep running for most of the length of the bottom.
Peter
In a message dated 11/3/2000 6:30:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bruce.fountain@...writes:
<< Ballast for the NIS sharpies is normally fitted as twin skegs,
although some builders have fitted internally. The skegs are
glued and bolted to the hull. From what I can tell the lead
is exposed (not boxed or glassed over).
NIS boats - I seem to recall that there was an external shoe keel on the 31 -
but I thought the nis 23 and 26 had internal ballast? Steve Anderson ( MJ
Landroval)
bruce.fountain@...writes:
<< Ballast for the NIS sharpies is normally fitted as twin skegs,
although some builders have fitted internally. The skegs are
glued and bolted to the hull. From what I can tell the lead
is exposed (not boxed or glassed over).
>>Bruce - Are you sure about this? I didn't think there were any skegs on the
NIS boats - I seem to recall that there was an external shoe keel on the 31 -
but I thought the nis 23 and 26 had internal ballast? Steve Anderson ( MJ
Landroval)
I also looked at the NIS before launching into building a Micro.
There is no question the the NIS is going to be a better sailor on the
breeze, but it is going to cost about 3 times the price of a Micro to
build one. I think that that is even a conservative estimate. If
deeper draft, going faster, and getting there is your objective, buy
an older used J24 for under $10,oooUS and you have accomplished your
goal.
If an easy to strike rig, simple to trailer boat, that is
downright cheap to build is your objective, then stick with your
Micro. It has "character" people will either admire it when it is
floating in the backyard of some Newport mansion, or they will ask you
to cover it with a tarp of some kind. "taste is all in the mouth"
David Jost
"wonderful day for boating in Massachusetts, to bad I was
working"
There is no question the the NIS is going to be a better sailor on the
breeze, but it is going to cost about 3 times the price of a Micro to
build one. I think that that is even a conservative estimate. If
deeper draft, going faster, and getting there is your objective, buy
an older used J24 for under $10,oooUS and you have accomplished your
goal.
If an easy to strike rig, simple to trailer boat, that is
downright cheap to build is your objective, then stick with your
Micro. It has "character" people will either admire it when it is
floating in the backyard of some Newport mansion, or they will ask you
to cover it with a tarp of some kind. "taste is all in the mouth"
David Jost
"wonderful day for boating in Massachusetts, to bad I was
working"
--- Inbolger@egroups.com, "Langmuir" <llangmuir@v...> wrote:
> Greetings Jeff,
> Funny you should say that about the Sydney NIS. I have been idly
doodling
> steel fins with lead end plates to go on the bottom of my Long
Micro. I
> reckon that I could sawzall off the long keel in half a day leaving
a little
> bit for a rudder skeg. The existing 400kg of lead located 600mm
lower would
> give the power that the existing boat lacks and the naca fin would
have to
> help pointing. Interesting to see my mates eyes glaze over when I
mention
> this. Not another wacko idea.
> Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeff Gilbert <jgilbert@d...>
> To: Bolger eGroup <bolger@egroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 6:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
>
>
> > David,
> > A 23 ft NIS in Sydney added 600kg on a 3ft fin after
> > some enthusiastic sail areas had them on their ear.
> > They are very happy with the way it now sails but
> > obviously its old trailer is out.
> > A drop plate could be the answer.
> > Jeff Gilbert.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: David Ryan <david@c...>
> > To: <bolger@egroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:15 AM
> > Subject: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
> >
> >
> > Would I ballast the LS^2?
> >
> > Based on similar craft, I think the LS^2 would easily take 1-2
tons
> > of ballast. I'm sure that would have to stiffen her up a bit.
> >
> > However, the "design concept" behind the LS^2 doesn't call for
> > super-seaworth craft. Of course, the unexpected can, and usually
does
> > happen, but an LS^2 that is never sailed out of sight of land is
very
> > unlikely to encounter conditions that she can't handle
unballasted.
> >
> > Reuel Parker's account of having his 44 footer Teresa knocked down
in
> > New York harbor (in "The Sharpie Book" is worth reading as a
> > cautionary tale. She was yet unfinished didn't have her ballast
shoe
> > when a sudden gust knocked her over. Still, Parker went on to do
> > quite a bit of sailing before he got around to adding the ballast.
> >
> > I believe the phase is "If you think it's time to reef, you're too
> > late." Certainly the easiest way to keep a sharpie on her feet is
not
> > to carry too much sail.
> > YIBB,
> > David
> >
> > >Thanks for the link to that great Bruce Kirby article. I'd never
seen
> > >the potential stability of shoal-draft boats explained so
thoroughly
> > >before. Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his
Norwalk
> > >sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.? Would you ballast LS^2?
> > >Garth
> > >> This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on
the
> > >> topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bolger rules!!!
> > - no cursing
> > - stay on topic
> > - use punctuation
> > - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
> > - add some content: send "thanks!" and "ditto!" posts off-list.
> >
Greetings Jeff,
Funny you should say that about the Sydney NIS. I have been idly doodling
steel fins with lead end plates to go on the bottom of my Long Micro. I
reckon that I could sawzall off the long keel in half a day leaving a little
bit for a rudder skeg. The existing 400kg of lead located 600mm lower would
give the power that the existing boat lacks and the naca fin would have to
help pointing. Interesting to see my mates eyes glaze over when I mention
this. Not another wacko idea.
Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
Funny you should say that about the Sydney NIS. I have been idly doodling
steel fins with lead end plates to go on the bottom of my Long Micro. I
reckon that I could sawzall off the long keel in half a day leaving a little
bit for a rudder skeg. The existing 400kg of lead located 600mm lower would
give the power that the existing boat lacks and the naca fin would have to
help pointing. Interesting to see my mates eyes glaze over when I mention
this. Not another wacko idea.
Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Gilbert <jgilbert@...>
To: Bolger eGroup <bolger@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 6:25 AM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
> David,
> A 23 ft NIS in Sydney added 600kg on a 3ft fin after
> some enthusiastic sail areas had them on their ear.
> They are very happy with the way it now sails but
> obviously its old trailer is out.
> A drop plate could be the answer.
> Jeff Gilbert.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Ryan <david@...>
> To: <bolger@egroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:15 AM
> Subject: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
>
>
> Would I ballast the LS^2?
>
> Based on similar craft, I think the LS^2 would easily take 1-2 tons
> of ballast. I'm sure that would have to stiffen her up a bit.
>
> However, the "design concept" behind the LS^2 doesn't call for
> super-seaworth craft. Of course, the unexpected can, and usually does
> happen, but an LS^2 that is never sailed out of sight of land is very
> unlikely to encounter conditions that she can't handle unballasted.
>
> Reuel Parker's account of having his 44 footer Teresa knocked down in
> New York harbor (in "The Sharpie Book" is worth reading as a
> cautionary tale. She was yet unfinished didn't have her ballast shoe
> when a sudden gust knocked her over. Still, Parker went on to do
> quite a bit of sailing before he got around to adding the ballast.
>
> I believe the phase is "If you think it's time to reef, you're too
> late." Certainly the easiest way to keep a sharpie on her feet is not
> to carry too much sail.
> YIBB,
> David
>
> >Thanks for the link to that great Bruce Kirby article. I'd never seen
> >the potential stability of shoal-draft boats explained so thoroughly
> >before. Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his Norwalk
> >sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.? Would you ballast LS^2?
> >Garth
> >> This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on the
> >> topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing
> - stay on topic
> - use punctuation
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
> - add some content: send "thanks!" and "ditto!" posts off-list.
>
Cliff,
I vote it would be to retain the beachability/shoal draft/trailability
that make this design so versatile.
Also with the flattish V bottom you can mount keels at right angles
giving a splayed set-up in section and so sail
with one keel straight down on either tack, whilst the other is giving
you plenty leverage too. In a stiff breeze you may lift one out =
less wet area = even more speed. Ive only
been on one and was astonished by its speed.
Jeff Gilbert
I vote it would be to retain the beachability/shoal draft/trailability
that make this design so versatile.
Also with the flattish V bottom you can mount keels at right angles
giving a splayed set-up in section and so sail
with one keel straight down on either tack, whilst the other is giving
you plenty leverage too. In a stiff breeze you may lift one out =
less wet area = even more speed. Ive only
been on one and was astonished by its speed.
Jeff Gilbert
----- Original Message -----
From: <cliff25@...>
To: <bolger@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 3:13 PM
Subject: RE: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
<<Ballast for the NIS sharpies is normally fitted as twin skegs...>>
Can someone please tell me why twin ballast skegs wouldn't always be
preferable, or for that matter twin keels over a single keel?
Cliff
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/mmmkkk/
(Last of the Red Hot DJs)
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing
- stay on topic
- use punctuation
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
- add some content: send "thanks!" and "ditto!" posts off-list.
<<Ballast for the NIS sharpies is normally fitted as twin skegs...>>
Can someone please tell me why twin ballast skegs wouldn't always be
preferable, or for that matter twin keels over a single keel?
Cliff
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/mmmkkk/
(Last of the Red Hot DJs)
Can someone please tell me why twin ballast skegs wouldn't always be
preferable, or for that matter twin keels over a single keel?
Cliff
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/mmmkkk/
(Last of the Red Hot DJs)
Garth Battista wrote:
although some builders have fitted internally. The skegs are
glued and bolted to the hull. From what I can tell the lead
is exposed (not boxed or glassed over).
Bruce.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it from Mi Services
Group may contain information which is
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure.
If it is not addressed to you, please immediately contact
nzpostmaster@...and do not use, disclose,
copy, distribute or retain any of it without our authority.
**********************************************************************
> Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his NorwalkBallast for the NIS sharpies is normally fitted as twin skegs,
> sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.?
although some builders have fitted internally. The skegs are
glued and bolted to the hull. From what I can tell the lead
is exposed (not boxed or glassed over).
Bruce.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it from Mi Services
Group may contain information which is
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure.
If it is not addressed to you, please immediately contact
nzpostmaster@...and do not use, disclose,
copy, distribute or retain any of it without our authority.
**********************************************************************
David,
A 23 ft NIS in Sydney added 600kg on a 3ft fin after
some enthusiastic sail areas had them on their ear.
They are very happy with the way it now sails but
obviously its old trailer is out.
A drop plate could be the answer.
Jeff Gilbert.
A 23 ft NIS in Sydney added 600kg on a 3ft fin after
some enthusiastic sail areas had them on their ear.
They are very happy with the way it now sails but
obviously its old trailer is out.
A drop plate could be the answer.
Jeff Gilbert.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Ryan <david@...>
To: <bolger@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:15 AM
Subject: [bolger] Re: Shallow Draft/Bruce Kirby
Would I ballast the LS^2?
Based on similar craft, I think the LS^2 would easily take 1-2 tons
of ballast. I'm sure that would have to stiffen her up a bit.
However, the "design concept" behind the LS^2 doesn't call for
super-seaworth craft. Of course, the unexpected can, and usually does
happen, but an LS^2 that is never sailed out of sight of land is very
unlikely to encounter conditions that she can't handle unballasted.
Reuel Parker's account of having his 44 footer Teresa knocked down in
New York harbor (in "The Sharpie Book" is worth reading as a
cautionary tale. She was yet unfinished didn't have her ballast shoe
when a sudden gust knocked her over. Still, Parker went on to do
quite a bit of sailing before he got around to adding the ballast.
I believe the phase is "If you think it's time to reef, you're too
late." Certainly the easiest way to keep a sharpie on her feet is not
to carry too much sail.
YIBB,
David
>Thanks for the link to that great Bruce Kirby article. I'd never seen
>the potential stability of shoal-draft boats explained so thoroughly
>before. Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his Norwalk
>sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.? Would you ballast LS^2?
>Garth
>> This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on the
>> topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
Would I ballast the LS^2?
Based on similar craft, I think the LS^2 would easily take 1-2 tons
of ballast. I'm sure that would have to stiffen her up a bit.
However, the "design concept" behind the LS^2 doesn't call for
super-seaworth craft. Of course, the unexpected can, and usually does
happen, but an LS^2 that is never sailed out of sight of land is very
unlikely to encounter conditions that she can't handle unballasted.
Reuel Parker's account of having his 44 footer Teresa knocked down in
New York harbor (in "The Sharpie Book" is worth reading as a
cautionary tale. She was yet unfinished didn't have her ballast shoe
when a sudden gust knocked her over. Still, Parker went on to do
quite a bit of sailing before he got around to adding the ballast.
I believe the phase is "If you think it's time to reef, you're too
late." Certainly the easiest way to keep a sharpie on her feet is not
to carry too much sail.
YIBB,
David
134 W.26th St. 12th Floor
New York, NY 10001
(212) 243-1636
Based on similar craft, I think the LS^2 would easily take 1-2 tons
of ballast. I'm sure that would have to stiffen her up a bit.
However, the "design concept" behind the LS^2 doesn't call for
super-seaworth craft. Of course, the unexpected can, and usually does
happen, but an LS^2 that is never sailed out of sight of land is very
unlikely to encounter conditions that she can't handle unballasted.
Reuel Parker's account of having his 44 footer Teresa knocked down in
New York harbor (in "The Sharpie Book" is worth reading as a
cautionary tale. She was yet unfinished didn't have her ballast shoe
when a sudden gust knocked her over. Still, Parker went on to do
quite a bit of sailing before he got around to adding the ballast.
I believe the phase is "If you think it's time to reef, you're too
late." Certainly the easiest way to keep a sharpie on her feet is not
to carry too much sail.
YIBB,
David
>Thanks for the link to that great Bruce Kirby article. I'd never seenCRUMBLING EMPIRE PRODUCTIONS
>the potential stability of shoal-draft boats explained so thoroughly
>before. Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his Norwalk
>sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.? Would you ballast LS^2?
>
>Garth
>
>
>> This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on the
>> topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
>>
>>http://www.coastalcruising.com/shallow.htm
>
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing
>- stay on topic
>- use punctuation
>- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
>- add some content: send "thanks!" and "ditto!" posts off-list.
134 W.26th St. 12th Floor
New York, NY 10001
(212) 243-1636
David --
Thanks for the link to that great Bruce Kirby article. I'd never seen
the potential stability of shoal-draft boats explained so thoroughly
before. Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his Norwalk
sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.? Would you ballast LS^2?
Garth
Thanks for the link to that great Bruce Kirby article. I'd never seen
the potential stability of shoal-draft boats explained so thoroughly
before. Do you know offhand how he places the ballast in his Norwalk
sharpies? Box keel or internal, etc.? Would you ballast LS^2?
Garth
> This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on the
> topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
>
>http://www.coastalcruising.com/shallow.htm
FBBB --
This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on the
topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
http://www.coastalcruising.com/shallow.htm
YIBB,
David
CRUMBLING EMPIRE PRODUCTIONS
134 W.26th St. 12th Floor
New York, NY 10001
(212) 243-1636
This URL has probably been posted before, but since we're on the
topic of Shoal draft safety, it seems timely.
http://www.coastalcruising.com/shallow.htm
YIBB,
David
CRUMBLING EMPIRE PRODUCTIONS
134 W.26th St. 12th Floor
New York, NY 10001
(212) 243-1636