Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [bolger] MJ Self righting??

Expand Messages
  • Leoandsandy@Juno.com
    Steve- thanks for the comments. But my martha jane experiences make me skeptical of the as 29 as a self- righting boat. I m not saying that she isn t - but
    Message 1 of 9 , Jun 30, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Steve- thanks for the comments.
      "But my
      martha jane experiences make me skeptical of the as 29 as a self-
      righting boat. I'm not saying that she isn't - but I'd take nothing
      for granted."
      Steve- Sure enjoyed finding the pictures of Landroval. The ones I've
      found I keep stored in "My Pictures" I'd like to profit from your
      experiences building and sailing a Martha Jane. Is there a problem with
      the adequacy of 500# waterbalast if the boat is always sailed in rough
      weather with the cabin closed tightly? Also, how effective is reefing?
      Most of my experience has been cruising a Dovekie. Is the problem that
      a MJ recovers from a knockdown, but not from being rolled over?
      Leo

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • daithiw2002
      Here we go again in relation to the MJ! As someone who was privileged to have been taught sailing from a very early age and who also appreciates the philosophy
      Message 2 of 9 , Jul 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Here we go again in relation to the MJ!

        As someone who was privileged to have been taught sailing from a very
        early age and who also appreciates the philosophy of Mr. P. Bolger's
        designs I find it quite unreasonable for people who appear to me to
        have no sailing experience and who have perhaps been enticed into the
        sailing world by, what is in my opinion, the misnomer of the "Instant
        Boat", to expect an instant solution to sailing and safety from the
        assembly of a stack of plywood according to a set of plans.

        I am nearing completion of an MJ (original hull shape but with some
        more ballast.) It has always been my opinion that this boat could
        capsize, lie hull awash and not self right. So what?

        If all the anti-this and anti-that pundits would learn how to sail
        first, then understand the limitations of the craft that they are
        sailing and then accept their own responsibilty for their safety in
        the conditions in which they are sailing, then perhaps we could have
        a more objective analysis of the indidual designs under
        consideration, whether it is an MJ or a 140' Ron Holland!!!

        David on the South Coast of Ireland

        --- In bolger@y..., Leoandsandy@J... wrote:
        > Steve- thanks for the comments.
        > "But my
        > martha jane experiences make me skeptical of the as 29 as a self-
        > righting boat. I'm not saying that she isn't - but I'd take nothing
        > for granted."
        > Steve- Sure enjoyed finding the pictures of Landroval. The ones
        I've
        > found I keep stored in "My Pictures" I'd like to profit from your
        > experiences building and sailing a Martha Jane. Is there a problem
        with
        > the adequacy of 500# waterbalast if the boat is always sailed in
        rough
        > weather with the cabin closed tightly? Also, how effective is
        reefing?
        > Most of my experience has been cruising a Dovekie. Is the problem
        that
        > a MJ recovers from a knockdown, but not from being rolled over?
        > Leo
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • jeff
        ... From: daithiw2002 To: Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 3:04 PM Subject: [bolger] Re: MJ Self righting?? ... I
        Message 3 of 9 , Jul 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "daithiw2002" <dhw@...>
          To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 3:04 PM
          Subject: [bolger] Re: MJ Self righting??


          > Here we go again in relation to the MJ!
          >
          > As someone who was privileged to have been taught sailing from a very
          > early age and who also appreciates the philosophy of Mr. P. Bolger's
          > designs I find it quite unreasonable for people who appear to me to
          > have no sailing experience and who have perhaps been enticed into the
          > sailing world by, what is in my opinion, the misnomer of the "Instant
          > Boat", to expect an instant solution to sailing and safety from the
          > assembly of a stack of plywood according to a set of plans.

          I have to agree here. Self righting, self bailing, and easy to build, are
          not usually used to describe a plywood boat designed for the backyard
          builder.

          Yes, some like the Micro are, but most ply boats are safe but that doesn't
          mean you won't have to bail. I just assumed on my Frolic2 that someday I'd
          swamp it and bail. Life jackets where the normal dress code especially when
          the wind kicked up.

          I've been in sailboat that almost rolled and then sank in 12 feet of water.
          We where racing when a micro burst hit with an open main hatch while putting
          away the spinaker, no one was seriously hurt. Yes it was self righting and
          self bailing, but it wasn't as safe as my Frolic2 in the long run. It was a
          extremely violent lesson in the forces involved in laying a self righting
          boat over.

          For inland waters, I rather float around in a swamped boat than go through
          that again. They refloated the "bleach bottle" with air bags but it's
          sailing days where over for the summer. A MJ for example would be going the
          same day.

          Jeff
        • proaconstrictor
          ... very ... Bolger s ... to ... the ... the Instant ... the ... build, are ... backyard ... As may or may not be. But is it not a fact that this boat did not
          Message 4 of 9 , Jul 2, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In bolger@y..., "jeff" <boatbuilding@g...> wrote:
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "daithiw2002" <dhw@g...>
            > To: <bolger@y...>
            > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 3:04 PM
            > Subject: [bolger] Re: MJ Self righting??
            >
            >
            > > Here we go again in relation to the MJ!
            > >
            > > As someone who was privileged to have been taught sailing from a
            very
            > > early age and who also appreciates the philosophy of Mr. P.
            Bolger's
            > > designs I find it quite unreasonable for people who appear to me
            to
            > > have no sailing experience and who have perhaps been enticed into
            the
            > > sailing world by, what is in my opinion, the misnomer of
            the "Instant
            > > Boat", to expect an instant solution to sailing and safety from
            the
            > > assembly of a stack of plywood according to a set of plans.
            >
            > I have to agree here. Self righting, self bailing, and easy to
            build, are
            > not usually used to describe a plywood boat designed for the
            backyard
            > builder.
            >

            As may or may not be.

            But is it not a fact that this boat did not meet the claims made for
            her (Some of the claims appeared second hand in WB, so it gets
            cloudy). Don't we know this because there are amendments to the
            design. The designer did not run stability calculations by his own
            admission, which is a little embarassing given the prominense of
            advocacy regarding the certification issue. What is also now clear
            is that we have to do some pretty weird things to get where we
            thought we were going. Things that lead down the
            Birdwatcher,Jochems, or Thomas the Tugboat redraw of MJ path.
          • proaconstrictor
            Is the problem that ... We ran calculations for Martha Jane, on pesimistic assumptions of weight location, and found that her point of no return was about 60
            Message 5 of 9 , Jul 2, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Is the problem that
              > a MJ recovers from a knockdown, but not from being rolled over?
              > Leo
              >

              "We ran calculations for Martha Jane, on pesimistic assumptions of
              weight location, and found that her point of no return was about 60
              degrees, with a substantial negative range until the sealed and
              bouyant masts and yards immersed. Their volume stabilizes her and
              she should float on her side with masts under water. But if some
              force rolled her down to 138 degrees she would go on to bottom up."

              MAIB 6/15/2000

              In Bolger's view 60 degrees is pushing pretty hard, and probably
              accounts for the few reported capsises. But self-righting she isn't.
            • Leoandsandy@Juno.com
              Thanks for this important info. Leo ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or
              Message 6 of 9 , Jul 3, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Thanks for this important info. Leo

                ________________________________________________________________
                GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
                Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
                Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
                http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
              • seap21
                Let me respond to a couple of things here - including, first, a question not copied below - 500 lbs of ballast is not adequate for the martha jane. Mr. Bolger
                Message 7 of 9 , Jul 5, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Let me respond to a couple of things here - including, first, a
                  question not copied below - 500 lbs of ballast is not adequate for
                  the martha jane. Mr. Bolger is now calling for 1000 lbs - but even
                  that is not adequate without at least the addition of the sponsons.

                  I/m sorry to say that I think the response from Ireland was poorly
                  considered. Even the best of sailors get knocked down. A good number
                  of martha janes have been knocked down. Plain and simple - the boat
                  with 500 lbs is underballasted. It's also not reasonable for a design
                  to go belly up when pushed slightly beyond 90 degees. There are
                  plywood sharpies ( the redesigned mj is now one of them ) which are
                  self-righting. This is a pretty important feature in a large boat and
                  since designers now understand what's required to make sharpies self
                  righting ... what reason is there not to do so. Bruce kirby has
                  written extensively about this - heavy ballast - crowned decks - high
                  sides. It's not rocket science any more. Yes, any boat can get
                  knocked down - a good boat has a reasonable self-rescuing
                  capablities. The redesigned mj is a good boat. The original version
                  had problems. Steve Anderson (martha jane landroval)

                  --- In bolger@y..., "daithiw2002" <dhw@g...> wrote:
                  > Here we go again in relation to the MJ!
                  >
                  > As someone who was privileged to have been taught sailing from a
                  very
                  > early age and who also appreciates the philosophy of Mr. P.
                  Bolger's
                  > designs I find it quite unreasonable for people who appear to me to
                  > have no sailing experience and who have perhaps been enticed into
                  the
                  > sailing world by, what is in my opinion, the misnomer of
                  the "Instant
                  > Boat", to expect an instant solution to sailing and safety from the
                  > assembly of a stack of plywood according to a set of plans.
                  >
                  > I am nearing completion of an MJ (original hull shape but with some
                  > more ballast.) It has always been my opinion that this boat could
                  > capsize, lie hull awash and not self right. So what?
                  >
                  > If all the anti-this and anti-that pundits would learn how to sail
                  > first, then understand the limitations of the craft that they are
                  > sailing and then accept their own responsibilty for their safety in
                  > the conditions in which they are sailing, then perhaps we could
                  have
                  > a more objective analysis of the indidual designs under
                  > consideration, whether it is an MJ or a 140' Ron Holland!!!
                  >
                  > David on the South Coast of Ireland
                  >
                  > --- In bolger@y..., Leoandsandy@J... wrote:
                  > > Steve- thanks for the comments.
                  > > "But my
                  > > martha jane experiences make me skeptical of the as 29 as a self-
                  > > righting boat. I'm not saying that she isn't - but I'd take
                  nothing
                  > > for granted."
                  > > Steve- Sure enjoyed finding the pictures of Landroval. The ones
                  > I've
                  > > found I keep stored in "My Pictures" I'd like to profit from your
                  > > experiences building and sailing a Martha Jane. Is there a
                  problem
                  > with
                  > > the adequacy of 500# waterbalast if the boat is always sailed in
                  > rough
                  > > weather with the cabin closed tightly? Also, how effective is
                  > reefing?
                  > > Most of my experience has been cruising a Dovekie. Is the
                  problem
                  > that
                  > > a MJ recovers from a knockdown, but not from being rolled over?
                  > > Leo
                  > >
                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • seap21
                  Leo - I suppose you have gathered that the original mj didn t recover from the knockdown - but I noticed that I didn t answer your question about reefing.
                  Message 8 of 9 , Jul 5, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Leo - I suppose you have gathered that the original mj didn't recover
                    from the knockdown - but I noticed that I didn't answer your question
                    about reefing. Reefing is pretty simple on Landroval because I have
                    two jiffy reefing lines. I have to go back and tie in the center
                    reefing points - but one pull of the line and the reefing point on
                    the leech comes down to the boom and it's simple to tie off the tack.
                    Reefed at tack and clew is sufficient - but I usually go back and tie
                    in the rest as well. Having a boom gallows helps some too. Of course
                    the yard needs to be lowered accordingly - which necessitates a
                    parrell line of some kind to keep the yard close to the mast when
                    lowered into the reefing position.

                    The only "problem" for me is that windward performance on one tack
                    isn't really very good. Windward performance on the opposite tack
                    however is excellent. It will surprise you that when sailing to the
                    wind - this big lug sail performs the best when the yard and boom are
                    on the windward side of the mast - NOT on the leeward side of the
                    mast. I expected just the opposite. I'm not sure why this is - (It is
                    an excellently sewn sail - from Hunter and Gamble in Maine). I think
                    the boom and the yard fall off some from the mast on the leeward
                    side - and I think the mast interfers with the airflow more when
                    it's "upwind" from the sail. There is a marked difference in the two
                    tacks. Of course - off the wind few boats keep up with us. Steve
                    Anderson (MJ Landroval)


                    --- In bolger@y..., Leoandsandy@J... wrote:
                    > Steve- thanks for the comments.
                    > "But my
                    > martha jane experiences make me skeptical of the as 29 as a self-
                    > righting boat. I'm not saying that she isn't - but I'd take nothing
                    > for granted."
                    > Steve- Sure enjoyed finding the pictures of Landroval. The ones
                    I've
                    > found I keep stored in "My Pictures" I'd like to profit from your
                    > experiences building and sailing a Martha Jane. Is there a problem
                    with
                    > the adequacy of 500# waterbalast if the boat is always sailed in
                    rough
                    > weather with the cabin closed tightly? Also, how effective is
                    reefing?
                    > Most of my experience has been cruising a Dovekie. Is the problem
                    that
                    > a MJ recovers from a knockdown, but not from being rolled over?
                    > Leo
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Leoandsandy@Juno.com
                    Steve- I guess I ll get the latest design updates from Bolger, and study some more. How does the boom gallows help you to reef? Do you lower all the sail,
                    Message 9 of 9 , Jul 8, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Steve- I guess I'll get the latest design updates from Bolger, and study
                      some more.
                      How does the boom gallows help you to reef? Do you lower all the sail,
                      and reef with the sail lowered on to the gallows?
                      I'm not surprised about one tack being better than the other. On our
                      Dovekie, the tack that has the sail pressed against the sprit boom seem
                      favored, too.
                      My "collection" has3 pictures of Landroval: one at the launch, and one
                      dried out. I think the third is of a blue-shirted sailor in the cockpit
                      showing the wild tiller arrangement. Are any other photos on the web?
                      I can see the sponsons, the twin rudders, the gallows (looks a lot like
                      the one on my Dovekie), and a bimini. What about added ballast or any
                      other modifications? I'm surprised that parrall lines are not on the
                      plans.
                      And about that (those?) capsize(s): Do you happen to know if the
                      hatches were closed and the slides all in? Leo

                      ________________________________________________________________
                      GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
                      Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
                      Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
                      http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.