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

Re: [bolger] Wave Height

Expand Messages
  • Will Samson
    I m no good at estimating it either, but I think this would have me heading for home. Looks wet and cold! Bill ... From: Richard Spelling To:
    Message 1 of 11 , May 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm no good at estimating it either, but I think this would have me heading for home. Looks wet and cold!

      Bill
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Richard Spelling
      To: bolger@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 9:36 AM
      Subject: [bolger] Wave Height


      I'm notoriously bad at estimating wave height. Whatcha think, about
      two feet?

      http://www.richardspelling.com/temp/P1010013.JPG



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Roger Derby
      Why should you be different? Waves are fractal, like clouds. A little one, up close, looks just like a big one at a distance. I found out recently that the
      Message 2 of 11 , May 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Why should you be different? Waves are "fractal," like clouds. A little
        one, up close, looks just like a big one at a distance.

        I found out recently that the USCG reports "wave height" as the distance of
        the peak above the mean sea level. Peak to valley is twice that.

        When the waves are significant, one looks up the face of the wave as the
        boat heels, so one measures the diagonal.

        Roger
        derbyrm@...
        http://home.earthlink.net/~derbyrm

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Richard Spelling" <richard@...>


        > I'm notoriously bad at estimating wave height. Whatcha think, about
        > two feet?
        >
        > http://www.richardspelling.com/temp/P1010013.JPG
      • seagulloutb
        Why, Yes, it looks like about 16 to 2 and maybe a bit more now and then. The boat is your Chebacco? How did it handle the waves? I d think that it d heel
        Message 3 of 11 , May 2, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Why, Yes, it looks like about 16" to 2'and maybe a bit more now and
          then. The boat is your Chebacco? How did it handle the waves? I'd
          think that it'd heel and dig in--then scoot perhaps with a reef or
          two. But perhaps that wasn't your Chebacco?

          Dick of Stealing Horses

          --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Spelling" <richard@r...> wrote:
          > I'm notoriously bad at estimating wave height. Whatcha think, about
          > two feet?
          >
          > http://www.richardspelling.com/temp/P1010013.JPG
        • Richard Spelling
          That was Schroedinger. She pounded a bit going to weather, and they washed up into the motor well when running, but other than that she pretty much ignored
          Message 4 of 11 , May 2, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            That was Schroedinger.

            She pounded a bit going to weather, and they washed up into the motor
            well when running, but other than that she pretty much ignored them.
            Wind was 14knots plus on the wind meter. Running with motor and every
            stich of sail up, averaged 7-8mph, with the occasional burst to 8.4mph.

            Beating we were averaging about 4.5 with the boat self steering, about
            6 if I took the tiller.

            Spent about 6 hours going to weather in this, mostly with the tiller
            bungied up and the boat steering itself, while I partook budweiser...

            --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "seagulloutb" <dickburnham1@a...> wrote:
            > Why, Yes, it looks like about 16" to 2'and maybe a bit more now and
            > then. The boat is your Chebacco? How did it handle the waves? I'd
            > think that it'd heel and dig in--then scoot perhaps with a reef or
            > two. But perhaps that wasn't your Chebacco?
            >
            > Dick of Stealing Horses
            >
            > --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Spelling" <richard@r...>
            wrote:
            > > I'm notoriously bad at estimating wave height. Whatcha think, about
            > > two feet?
            > >
            > > http://www.richardspelling.com/temp/P1010013.JPG
          • steelcb
            Yeah, looks like about 2 ft max. Great sailing weather, great conditions. Also looks like you had some fun. TomP
            Message 5 of 11 , May 2, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Yeah, looks like about 2 ft max. Great sailing weather, great
              conditions. Also looks like you had some fun.

              TomP

              --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Spelling" <richard@r...>
              wrote:
              > I'm notoriously bad at estimating wave height. Whatcha think, about
              > two feet?
              >
              > http://www.richardspelling.com/temp/P1010013.JPG
            • seagulloutb
              That sounds like it, Richard. The old bone-in-her-teeth bit. As I ve heard from Down Under folks in their great vernacular, Good on you!. But watch out for
              Message 6 of 11 , May 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                That sounds like it, Richard. The old bone-in-her-teeth bit. As I've
                heard from Down Under folks in their great vernacular, "Good on
                you!." But watch out for those Budweiser Tumors -- the over the belt
                sort!

                --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Spelling" <richard@r...>
                wrote:
                > That was Schroedinger.
                >
                > She pounded a bit going to weather, and they washed up into the
                motor
                > well when running, but other than that she pretty much ignored
                them.
                > Wind was 14knots plus on the wind meter. Running with motor and
                every
                > stich of sail up, averaged 7-8mph, with the occasional burst to
                8.4mph.
                >
                > Beating we were averaging about 4.5 with the boat self steering,
                about
                > 6 if I took the tiller.
                >
                > Spent about 6 hours going to weather in this, mostly with the
                tiller
                > bungied up and the boat steering itself, while I partook
                budweiser...
                >
                > --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "seagulloutb" <dickburnham1@a...>
                wrote:
                > > Why, Yes, it looks like about 16" to 2'and maybe a bit more now
                and
                > > then. The boat is your Chebacco? How did it handle the waves?
                I'd
                > > think that it'd heel and dig in--then scoot perhaps with a reef
                or
                > > two. But perhaps that wasn't your Chebacco?
                > >
                > > Dick of Stealing Horses
                > >
                > > --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Spelling" <richard@r...>
                > wrote:
                > > > I'm notoriously bad at estimating wave height. Whatcha think,
                about
                > > > two feet?
                > > >
                > > > http://www.richardspelling.com/temp/P1010013.JPG
              • Bruce Hallman
                Here is another ugly boat, that looks better in three dimensions: $100 in New Jersey, a steal. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5577920834
                Message 7 of 11 , May 3, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Here is another ugly boat,
                  that looks better in three dimensions:

                  $100 in New Jersey, a steal.

                  http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5577920834
                • Hugo Tyson
                  Skimmer is cool, a fun and cheap,fast boat that just about everyone could smile at,...but I m sorry that 55 sharpie is just plain ugly-to the extreme
                  Message 8 of 11 , May 3, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "Skimmer" is cool, a fun and cheap,fast boat that just about everyone could smile at,...but I'm sorry that 55' sharpie is just plain ugly-to the extreme almost! What a joke-she can't be considered beautiful, in anyway to look at, really we all know that Bolger loves extremes, this may be a joke of his to design the ugliest boat that for its purpose that is ultimately usable?? ... and beauty is only skin deep anyway? A weird paradox?.... No, she's ( the 55' live-aoard sharpie) VERY BAD TO THE EYE IN 2D, but she probbly would look a bit better in real life, still ugly though!!

                    I don't know, but just the fact on the profile, Bolger's sketched in silhouettes of some other of his designs on that block-like hull he realises that this boat is not an eye-pleaser?...... some camoflague is needed!!!!!!??

                    Look, seriously its a practical, motive ,live-aboard home, but maybe I don't think you'd tell anyone where you live if you were living in that craft!!!. Take it to some swamp, strike the masts, dazzle-paint it, and hope no one finds you!@!!

                    Phil's designed some of the most beautiful boats and also the most ugliest, but they all have their purposes(whether fullfilled or not - it doesn,t matter, some dreams are shattered by reality!!)

                    I'm just expressing my opinions, I still think Bolger is the best Small Boat (150' or smaller ) ever, well with 600-700 designs and innovative concepts, he has to be!
                    Sincerely, Hugo Tyson, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia.
                    Bruce Hallman <bruce@...> wrote:
                    Here is another ugly boat,
                    that looks better in three dimensions:

                    $100 in New Jersey, a steal.

                    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5577920834


                    Bolger rules!!!
                    - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
                    - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
                    - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
                    - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
                    - Unsubscribe: bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    - Open discussion: bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com



                    ---------------------------------
                    Yahoo! Groups Links

                    To visit your group on the web, go to:
                    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/

                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




                    ---------------------------------
                    Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Peter Lenihan
                    ... Looks like it could be anywhere from about two to three feet in some of the holes to some of the peaks. But so what :-) In a small boat of ones own making,
                    Message 9 of 11 , May 7, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Spelling" <richard@r...> wrote:
                      > I'm notoriously bad at estimating wave height. Whatcha think, about
                      > two feet?
                      >
                      > http://www.richardspelling.com/temp/P1010013.JPG


                      Looks like it could be anywhere from about two to three feet in some
                      of the holes to some of the peaks. But so what :-) In a small boat of
                      ones own making, this sort of stuff is great for fueling the imaginary
                      globe-trotting sailor in most of us.We just have to develope some
                      tunnel vision,block out the shoreline,and picture ourselves out in the
                      middle of nowhere ticking off the miles to somewhere.Having a nice
                      cozy dry cabin filled with food and drink makes the whole scenario all
                      the more fun since it also gives us a smug I'm-completely-self-
                      sufficient-and-free-from-landlubberly-concerns-catch-me-if-you-can
                      feeling inside.
                      With the magic of ones own imagination,our "weeks at sea" take a few
                      hours and our distant un-inhabited tropical island destination soon
                      looms large on our horizon in the form of a marina or boat launch
                      ramp.Shifting gears,we enter our marina or launch ramp feeling like
                      what we imagine the great ocean adventures must have felt like after a
                      rough trans-atlantic or pacific crossing...solo and for the first
                      time.Even after the boat is all secured to the quay or trailer,we can
                      continue our make-believe scenario by snuggling up inside our warm dry
                      cabin,rustling up some warm tasty food,while peering out through rain
                      spattled portlights,and thank god we have the wits about us to enjoy
                      such games in the first place.
                      It sure beats the hell out of even the best day at the office :-)

                      Thanks for the neat picture Richard!

                      Sincerely,

                      Peter Lenihan,who must have circled the globe several times now and
                      discovered dozen tropical islands uniquely inhabited by nubile natives
                      hungering for a change and all this without ever leaving the realm of
                      the mighty St.Lawrence..........talk about cheap vactions!!!
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.