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

Re: [bolger] Re: wider as 29

Expand Messages
  • Douglas Pollard
    Eric, Sorry I did not get back before now. Yes you are right about the weight of Wolftrap. Had not really thought that much about it but she weighed 5000
    Message 1 of 123 , Jun 1, 2012
      Eric, Sorry I did not get back before now.   Yes you are right about the weight of Wolftrap.  Had not really thought that much about it but she weighed 5000 lbs as she was when we first sailed her with500 lbs of ballast. Later we added more and finally as a schooner she must have weighed maybe 6500 lbs. She was build very light with tubing for stringers and almost no frames and using aluminum furniture that was built into the hull.   She was mono coupe construction.  She was intended for Chesapeake bay sailing and we added the ballast to get her a little heavier.  When we first began sailing her she didn't even have a chine in the water.   She was intended to carry a lot of sail for the light air of the Bay here and so was  reefed early.  We sailed her off the wind with main, mizzen, flat spinnaker and a Mizzen stay-sail.  On my Blog "Sailboats Fair and Fine' there are lots of pictures, story and description.  Click this link or copy and paste. I think I mentioned she was slower with the schooner rig and additional Ballast.  This will keep you busy for a while. :-)                
                                                                                                                                               Doug

       http://sailboatsfairandfine.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2006-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&updated-max=2007-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&max-results=9  


      On 05/30/2012 02:40 PM, Eric wrote:
       

      Douglas, you started this thread because you are looking for a wider sharpie hull form than the AS-29. In this ranging discussion you have talked about Wolf Trap. I had not, before you said so, thought of Wolf Trap as a Sharpie. That statement by you created an itch which I scratched by re-reading Phil's description and lines drawing in Different Boats. Itch still not satisfied I searched this list for references to Wolf Trap. Interesting reading, the parts I found most interesting are pasted below. A lot of experience and wisdom. I am incredibly impressed that a thirty foot boat that displaces just 6,000 lbs but could set 800 square feet of sail, 500 square feet of working sail, and keep up with a forty foot boat. I'm impressed that Wolf Trap 30' x 10' weighs just 6000 lbs. My ROGUE is a considerably smaller boat at 26' x 7.5', enginless, I strove for lightness, and ROGUE still displaces about 6000 lbs. I could not find any photos of Wolf Trap. Are there any online? If not, could you post some? I am especially interested to see the schooner rig and compare it to the original. Also, what sort of 8 hour, 12 hour or 24 hour runs did Wolf Trap achieve on various points of sail? Wolf Trap is an extraorninary boat. I'll be very interested to see your criteria for your next boat, and better yet the boat itself, though I would have known more about that had I not missed (until today) your post about how the Trillo boat offers much of what you want, and what sort of rig you would want.

      Eric

      Re: [bolger] Re: pounding multihull vs pounding monohull?

       I built Phil Bolgers Wolftrap she was a little bit Sharpie a little bit Presto she had about 5 degrees of deadrise amidships and the rudder was fantastic.  WE sailed back from the bahamas to Lake worth Florida in a  North wind of about 18 knots and that against the Gulf stream was enough to raise 6 to 10 ft waves yet we carried full sail.  A friend was anchored inside the inlet and rowed over to talk to us and said "MY GOD Doug, that was the most impressive thing I have ever seen.  You guys coming in, in big seas throwing spray and white water all over the place. Beautiful!
      Wolftrap's rudder had some blade forward of the rudder post and most aft. She had a plate on the top and bottom and one in the middle that stuck out about  for inches on each side.  So with maybe a 8 inches od f rudder in the water when running in big was we never lost steering control.  Even if the rudder cam out the boat had enough direction stability that she would not change direction very much or fats enough that the rudder was not back in the water sooner than needed. The boat had a 10" deep full length shallow keel so the rudder was a little deeper that the average sharpie.  Mr. Bolger did not make any ocean going claims for the boat because she had a really big cockpit but we sailed her more than her share in the Ocean and in some pretty bad conditions though we usually kept her within a couple days of a place to hide should something really bad be coming.   the cockpit size was helped by the transom having an 18x4 inch slot across the bottom to allow water to dump out. On occasion it also dumped in. So you could get a wet foot .  Because the cockpit was wide Phil put a crank Type till that you could pull over and lock in place just above your lap.  Getting in and out of the marina was a tight fit.  My boat was the only sailboat in the marina that could back out of the sliip and turn to port or starboard without jokying back and forth.  If the boat was great then the rudder was pure genious.  Since the centerboard whent up through the deck I built a weighted keel to drop down therough the boat to see how she acted in big seas. This basically turned her into a keel boat it was a fun exercise but did not changer her any, for the better and the keel was never installed used.  One of my old sailing friends stated that she was the best thought out boat he had ever seen.  I had to agree.  The guys at the yacht club called her that fast funny looking boat. They really, really did not  understand her rig or anything else about her. I have had people ask me all these years later what did you ever do with that fast little boat you had. She had developed a reputation.  I stuck out my chest as their is no pride greater than that of having a really great boat.                                                                         Doug

      Re: [bolger] Re: Bolger Romp Spinnaker

      Peter Kortlucke wrote:
      >
      > >
      > > Hi Peter - Bolger designed a number of boats with "single luff
      > > spinnakers," which, somewhat modified, are now commonly known as
      > > asymmetrical spinnakers. He was a bit ahead of the times . . . .
      > >
      > > Anyway, I suspect you just hoist and fly the chute like a jib (off
      > the
      > > wind, of course),
      >
      > >
      > > Good luck and have fun, I envy your chance to sail on this boat!
      > How
      > > about posting your impressions on how she sails . . . and pics,
      > too!
      > >
      > > Dave
      > >
      >
      > Hi Dave
      >
      > Well it was a bit breezy for spinnakers- 20-25 knots, double reef in
      > the main and heeling 40 degrees.
      >
      > I've posted a few not very good photos at
      > http://sports.webshots.com/album/569311503nspyVW
      > <http://sports.webshots.com/album/569311503nspyVW>
      >
      > Top speed was just over 6 knots and she's not so weatherly but does
      > have a pretty solid feel underfoot.
      >
      > Peter
      >
      >
      I had one on my 30ft Wolftrap by Bolger. It had a spinnaker pole that
      rested on on the front of the lower mast with a rounded pies and
      cushioned to front of the mast. The spinnaker pole went forward and the
      end was attached by a line to the end of the bowsprit. This would allow
      me to tighten the luff of the spinnaker in so that the sail could be
      used slightly to windward and was pretty effective that way. She was
      sheeted straight back much as a jib would be. There were to more lines,
      one on each side of the boat much like a jib sheet that by pulling on
      say the starboard side the front of the sail and forward end of the
      spinnaker pole could be hauled to the starboard side. If the main was on
      the port side you were now sailing wing and wing. If you take down
      wind you simply pulled the spinnaker to the part side and jibed the man
      to again run wing on wing on the other tack. On a broad reach the sail
      and spinnaker pole could could be set at any suitable angle. I often
      sailed with main dumping into the spinnaker. Wolf trap carried 500
      square ft of working sail
      in main and mizzen with 300 in the flat spinnaker. The sail was a bit
      of work to get set initially but once set you could carry it up to about
      60 degrees off the wind so there were often sailing trips where we never
      dropped the sail in a weeks sailing down the coast. With a boat that
      weighed less than 7000 lbs and 800 sq ft of sail you can well imagine it
      was exciting.
      In later years we converted Wolf trap to a schooner rig to make her
      a little easier to handle for my wife and I during the Northers that
      blow up in the Bahamian winters. I set the mast and made the main such
      that we could carry the flat spinnaker.above the cockpit. We were back
      up to 800 square feet of sail and it was over the cockpit so I did not
      have to scramble around on the bow. I could sail and set the spinnaker
      at the same time single handing. Four guys in Marsh Harbor wanted to
      know what the hell kind of boat she was when we raced from the West End
      to Marsh Harbor and them sailing a 40 ft boat with them scrambling all
      over her handling sails. The beat us by 9 minuets to cross the end of
      the town dock. There boat was not a racing boat of any kind but then
      neither was ours. I sailed about five miles out of my way because I was
      going to Guana key and had to turn around an go back. My wife thought
      I was crazy but I thought I might have a chance to beat them.
      Any way it's a good sail no mater where you set it.
      Doug

      > Bruce Hallman wrote:
      > >
      > > > and in light of Bruce's comment- "IMO, headroom on a boat is needed
      > > > about as much as headroom is needed in an automobile."
      > >
      > > I don't want to take credit for this being an original thought. I
      > > recall that L. Francis Herreshoff wrote, (I think in his book Sensible
      > > Cruising Designs) that he never sleeps, reads, or eats standing up so
      > > he doesn't miss standing headroom. And, I recall reading. I forget
      > > where (Annie Hill?), that a negative effect of standing headroom in
      > > rough conditions is that you have further to get tossed around with
      > > increased risk of injury.
      > >
      > >
      > I would say standing head room or not is to a great degree what you
      > are doing with the boat. We lived abord Bolgers Wolf trap for 18
      > months. While we were traveling, sailing the Bahammas, Florida keys and
      > messing around the carolina's and Georgia stahnding head room was never
      > missed. Most time was spent outdoors anyway. We slept in the cabin
      > part of the time on deck some and in the cockpit some. There was
      > standing room for me 5' 7" in the head where it counts cause it's
      nice
      > to stand and pull your pants up.
      > The problem began when we worked in the winter in the Chesapeake
      > bay. Here you are trapped inside by cold weather snow and such. A
      > winter of that gets to be a drag. We sold her and bought a Fantasia
      35
      > though I din't like the boat much with it's 7 ft of headroom in the
      main
      > salon and 6ft farther forward and the aft cabin we felt much less
      > confineing. A boat with lots of headroom has the feel of a much
      bigger
      > boat though it may not be. Other than living aboard in colder
      climates I
      > very much like the boats that are lower on top the water.
      > On Wolf trap we used a biminy and izenglass side curtains. ( only
      > in the winter) With a kero heater out there, a few fairly warm
      cloths,
      > an enclosed cockpit can be great on a cold and even rainy day. The top
      > needs to be plastic as any amount of rain will beat through a sunbrella
      > one no matter how much you water proof them. Set under one long enough
      > and the fine mist that comes through will eventually get you damp all
      > over.
      > Here on the Chesapeke in some places we have what is locally called
      > sheep flies. The buggers bite! The must hve teeth like a tiger cause
      > they hurt like hell when they bite. They are striped and look like a
      > F18 with their swept back wings.
      >
      > Doug

      Re: [bolger] AS29, LM2, WW and Similar Rudders

      Jon, I had such a rudder on my boat Wolftrap . I sailed her In the
      Chesapeake Bay up to about 6ft short chop quite a few years and only had
      the rudder come out of the water one time. The boat had it's original
      cat yawl rig and was over canvased at my request from Mr. Bolger with
      the idea that I would reef sooner. Well I didn't, so the bottom plate
      was already jacked up within about 8inches of the that plate coming out
      of the water. I changed the rig to schooner later (my favorite rig) and
      I 'm sure the big sail aft tended to drive the stern down some. Because
      the boat had good direction stability she did not change course at all
      when she broke out. If course the rudder was out of the water only seconds.
      The rudder on Wolftrap was aluminum as was the whole boat and had 3
      wings on it one just above water level, one below water at mid level and
      one on the bottom. I sailed back from the Bahamas In what was said to be
      15ft seas. I thought they were less maybe 8-10 ft. WE sailed into Lake
      Worth on a broad reach throwing water all over the place. A good friend
      said we were the most magnificent thing coming in there, he had ever
      seen. Anyway I trusted her helm completely. When backing up under power
      we had none of that thing of her backing to one side. The boat could be
      steered in both directions. I liked being able to climb up the wings to
      get on board. All In all I think it was the best rudder I ever had on a
      boat. Doug

      Doug,
      Wow, good memories. And I'd say close enough for a "You built it"!
      Thanks for the history. Imagine the history behind all of Phil's
      Boats, so much of it we will loose over time.

      Sincerely,
      Gene T.

      On 15 Dec, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Douglas Pollard wrote:

      >
      > I guess who built Wolftrap depends on who you talk to. Mine and my
      > partners machine shop had the best Welder in town and we were running
      > short on work for him. I suggested that we build a sailboat maybe
      > one a
      > year as fill in work. All agreed. I went to Mr. bolger and told him I
      > liked Moccasin I believe the name was and would like to build a
      > similar
      > boat out of aluminum as that was the material we could work with
      > best. I
      > had owned a Sam Crocker 30 1/2 ft. raised deck ketch and liked the
      > inside room of a raised deck. After some back and forth arguing
      > between
      > him and I we came to an agreement and he designed her. By the way he
      > won
      > most of the arguments he has a hard logic and it's hard to argue with.
      > But there was one I could not abide with and that was an off center
      > mizzen after about a week he came up with an excellent solution to put
      > the mast on center and bring the tiller up through the transom and
      > under
      > the mast worked out great. I lofted her and the shops apprentice boys
      > and I when we had time cut out a lot of her and our welder put her
      > together. My partner who has painted several airplanes painted her
      > with
      > Emron. My wife a seamstress made all the cushions. When my wife and I
      > decided to go spend a couple years in the Bahamas I wanted a split
      > rig.
      > I am only 5'7" and was about 140 lbs and I felt the big main might
      > cause
      > me a problem at sea so we went radical and made a schooner out of her.
      > Using the same center of effort Mr. Bolger used for the original rig
      > she
      > handled beautifully but was a little slower. I used the flat spinnaker
      > that is set forward in the pictures for a mizzenstaysail that I could
      > easily handle from the cockpit. At 6000 lbs. she was carrying 800
      > square
      > feet of sail off the wind and was a screamer downwind with no handling
      > vices what so ever. I have owned several boat and sailed on a lot
      > more I
      > don't hesitate to say she was the finest boat I ever sailed on. She is
      > now owned By a Marine Biologist that works for Virginia marine
      > institute
      > and is much loved by him and his family. We sold her because we could
      > not stand up in her and wanted to continue to live aboard for a lot
      > more
      > years. Fourteen years in all. Doug

      Re: [bolger] Re: Work Skiff

      My boat Wolf Trap had a box keel about 8" wide and 8" deep pointed on
      both ends. The width of the keel had a straight run amidships ( no
      taper there) also had a centerboard down through it. It worked fine but
      it took about 400 lbs of ballast just to sink the keel. Seems like a 3"
      wide keel would have carried the ballast the boat need and she could
      have been several hundred pounds or more lighter. I never saw any
      problem in it but just seemed a wast of ballast to me?? Thinking back I
      put more ballast in than was needed anyway which likely didn't do
      anything but slow her. If I had her today I would take some out and I
      advised her present owner to do that. Bolger told me to sail her
      without ballast and then ballast her until she felt good. I put in 1600
      lbs and she felt pretty good. He then told me he was thinking more in
      terms of 800 lb max. Live and learn!
      Doug

      Douglas Pollard wrote:
      >
      > In the early years of boat drag racing a fellow I grew up with decided
      > to build a dragboat and I helped him some. the boat was vee bottomed
      > forward and nearly flat across her stern. The first mistake we made was
      > to put a third as much area in front of the rudder post as there was aft
      > on the rudder itself, a balanced rudder we thought. This was thought to
      > be a kind of rule of thumb at least for slower boats but a disaster at
      > higher speed. She jerked the wheel out of my hand when I tried to turn
      > her. My friend, her owner, was aft messing with the carburetors and was
      > thrown over board. We fixed the rudder.
      > She had no skeg and was really squirrelly running straight and
      > absolutely dangerous in a turn. She would slide sideways and then dig
      > in. This was at 40 miles per hour. It didn't matter much as drag
      > racing had no turns to make and she turned alright at 10 mph.
      > When he found out he couldn't keep up with the speed improvements
      > out of his own pocket he gave up drag racing and wanted to play with her
      > on the river. The turning there was a problem. He put a long skeg on her
      > but it was too big we guessed. She still turned flat on the water and
      > sometimes dug a chine in but was much less violent. One problem seemed
      > to be that the engine needed to slide her stern sideways to turn and the
      > engine lugged down slowing her. At least that was our thinking at the
      > time.
      > One of the more experienced racers told us she was tripping over
      > her keel. A common problem with a large skeg he said. We shortened the
      > keel lengthwise and she was better, we shortened even more until the
      > skeg was only about a foot long and a couple of inches shallower and
      > that seemed to cure the problem.
      > My thinking with the box keel was that that kind of keel might do
      > very well at hull speeds but cause turning problems when plaining at 18
      > knots.
      > There is a good possibility that there were hull shape problems
      > as we designed the hull by the seat of our pants though I guess we had a
      > fair idea of what she ought to look like. We may have been
      > trying to cure a hull shape problem with a skeg!!
      >
      > Doug
      > graeme19121984 wrote:
      > >
      > > > The boyancy of a box keel I believe causes a boat to have less
      > > > stability.
      > >
      > > I don't know about that increased risk of tripping, could be, but agree
      > > that similar to an unballasted dory the box-keel sharpies are initially
      > > more tender than regular sharpies.
      > >
      > > In some examples the box keel shifts the sharpie displacement from the
      > > middle out to the ends. This allows higher speed through preventing the
      > > more burdensome type of hull bogging down in its own waves. The box
      > > keel has a finer bow half-angle than the hull proper, and this too
      > > reduces wavemaking. The finer bow will also be less slowed by oncoming
      > > waves and chop.
      > >
      > > However, in most ways other than at the bow and stern, the addittion of
      > > a box keel to a sharpie hull turns the hull effectively into a dory. It
      > > mightn't look much like a dory in cross section, but it behaves like
      > > one. Witness the Gloucester Yawl for example, the design where Bolger
      > > published his sharpie flow theory. The Gloucester Yawl is, depending on
      > > how you want to look at it, a narrow sharpie with added sponsons, or a
      > > sharpie with a box keel! Key hull measurements correspond almost
      > > exactly in all respects to those of the Long Dory. Proportionally the
      > > measurments similarly correspond to those of the tender Gloucester
      > > Gull, aka Light Dory! It can only have stability characteristics that
      > > are similar - ie tenderness! (It stands to reason that with plumb upper
      > > topsides it would be wetter though - and GY was reported as a wet ride!)
      > >
      > > Graeme
      > >
      > > --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com <mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com>
      > <mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com>,
      > > Douglas Pollard <Dougpol1@...> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Seems to me like the box keel might increase the chances of tripping
      > > > over a chine as the deeper keel and it's boyancy would seem to heel
      > > the
      > > > boat over in a turn and drop the keel in the water. The boyancy of a
      > > > box keel I believe causes a boat to have less stability.
      > > >
      > > Doug
      > >


    • Eric
      Doug, It was fun to give some thought to your situation. I think you have reached a good conclusion. Someone posted a link on the Junk Rig group to a Craigs
      Message 123 of 123 , Jun 21, 2012
        Doug,

        It was fun to give some thought to your situation. I think you have reached a good conclusion. Someone posted a link on the Junk Rig group to a Craigs List add for a wooden Colvin designed 36' junk. The boat, now just a hull and diesel in pretty good shape, was selling for half the cost of the cushions I'm having built for my boat. It took me a decade and a lot of money to build as much a boat (and smaller by far) as someone can buy for less than $2000. Buying used or keeping the boat one has is a much better idea than building unless building is the point, or building gets special qualities that are just too important to compromise on.

        Happy sailing. Its been fun talking boats with you. And I'm really glad our conversation lead me to the wisdom contained in some of your earlier posts.

        Eric



        --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, Douglas Pollard <dougpol1@...> wrote:
        >
        > Eric I lost a couple of your posts so replied to this older one. I
        > spent a week on My Albin Vega sailing and doing a little work while at
        > Anchor. Had a great time. The marina I am in has lost about half of the
        > boats that have been kept there and many of them are up for sale and are
        > selling for nothing. To build a new boat I would have to sell mine and
        > If I needed to sell the new boat it would have to go really cheap. I
        > came to the conclusion that this is just not the time to be building and
        > selling boats.
        > There is just to much that is up in the air to make such a change.
        > We have decided to keep our house maybe rent it out some but let our
        > kids worry about what the heck to do with it later.
        > The boat we have has enough space to live aboard in the winters
        > down in Florida and the Bahamas and stay here in the house in Virginia
        > during the summer. The Vega is a bit cramped and draws more water than
        > I would like but is easy to sail and won't take a year to build another
        > year to get ready to go cruising. At my age those two years are
        > valuable ones for cruising and sailing.
        > So we had a long talk, an that is the decision we have made. and
        > believe it or not we are feeling much relieved that we don't have to
        > tackle the big job of building a boat.
        > I am sorry I worried you with my problem but in truth I guess old
        > age conservatism has won out over youthful adventure. Thanks much, Doug
        >
        >
        > On 06/02/2012 09:18 PM, Eric wrote:
        > >
        > > Wolf Trap's cat yawl rig is handsome, but the schooner rig is so
        > > beautifully married to the hull form that you would just have to go
        > > slower in order to give people more time to admire Wolf Trap. (Picture
        > > and line drawings here
        > > http://sailboatsfairandfine.blogspot.com/search/label/Wolftrap ) I
        > > took notice of the bagged flat spinnaker and other large sail bag that
        > > I assume carried a staysail to fly off the main mast. Your demonic
        > > desire for ever more canvas brought a smile of appreciation to my face.
        > >
        > > Wolf Trap is a hard act to follow. Perhaps there is a possibility for
        > > your last boat to be one you could love as much as you loved Wolf
        > > Trap. I have a possibility to suggest which might interest others on
        > > this list.
        > >
        > > In most cases making a good design wider on the same length spoils the
        > > good of a design, but lengthening a good design on the same width
        > > often produces an even better boat. It is a safer bet, in any case.
        > >
        > > Doug, from what you have said, I gather Wolf Trap had standing
        > > headroom in the head under the hatch. The hatch being only a few
        > > inches higher than the deck would mean that the flush deck would not
        > > have to be raised very much to get standing headroom throughout the
        > > cabin. Doing so would spoil Wolf Trap, but not if Wolf Trap was scaled
        > > up. Stability increases with length as well as width, so it might be
        > > possible to get a very nice boat by stretching the length and hight
        > > dimensions, and perhaps not even needing to expand the width
        > > dimension. Obviously aluminum would be ideal, but the same expansions
        > > that are good for building in aluminum are directly transferable to
        > > plywood. Phil Bolger was a master at drawing designs which wasted
        > > little material. An enlarged Wolf Trap might be much more wasteful of
        > > material, but some wasted MDO plywood might be easily tolerated. Mono
        > > coupe construction could be had by epoxy fiberglass coating interior
        > > and exterior and joining interior components one with the hull, as
        > > with the original Wolf Trap. A different design, but a design perhaps
        > > worth paying for. With schooner rig you would have an easy rig to
        > > handle that would not require that you set enough sail to beat forty
        > > footers.
        > >
        > > A significant advantage of a slightly enlarged plywood Wolf Trap over
        > > a Trillo would be resale value. This would be an advantage over an AS
        > > design as well. It would be a somewhat more difficult boat for an
        > > amateur to build, but not for a skilled boat builder. So the cost
        > > difference between a Trillo or AS design would simply be whatever
        > > differences there were of displacement, and differences in
        > > complication of interior, rig and auxilliary propulsion. It might not
        > > amount to much, or at least be an economical trade off.
        > >
        > > Eric
        > >
        > > --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com <mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > Douglas Pollard <dougpol1@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Eric, Sorry I did not get back before now. Yes you are right about the
        > > > weight of Wolftrap. Had not really thought that much about it but she
        > > > weighed 5000 lbs as she was when we first sailed her with500 lbs of
        > > > ballast. Later we added more and finally as a schooner she must have
        > > > weighed maybe 6500 lbs. She was build very light with tubing for
        > > > stringers and almost no frames and using aluminum furniture that was
        > > > built into the hull. She was mono coupe construction. She was
        > > > intended for Chesapeake bay sailing and we added the ballast to get her
        > > > a little heavier. When we first began sailing her she didn't even have
        > > > a chine in the water. She was intended to carry a lot of sail for the
        > > > light air of the Bay here and so was reefed early. We sailed her off
        > > > the wind with main, mizzen, flat spinnaker and a Mizzen stay-sail. On
        > > > my Blog "Sailboats Fair and Fine' there are lots of pictures, story and
        > > > description. Click this link or copy and paste. I think I mentioned she
        > > > was slower with the schooner rig and additional Ballast. This will keep
        > > > you busy for a while.:-)
        > > >
        > > > Doug
        > > >
        > > >
        > > http://sailboatsfairandfine.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2006-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&updated-max=2007-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&max-results=9
        > > <http://sailboatsfairandfine.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2006-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&updated-max=2007-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&max-results=9>
        > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.