[Rhodes22-list] boat weight and lifting

[Peter Thorn]

Todd,

Phoenix is off the trailer to allow some "minor punchlist work" to the
trailer, and more importantly, to give much easier access to the bottom for
the restoration work that's planned.   We're going to use an 80 grit 2x16
air sander down to bare gelcoat, then apply an epoxy bottom. In case there
are any gov't inspectors on this list, we have all the PPE required (air
feed head hood, Tyvek suits).   If the trailer were not removed, all that
close contact would be even more uncomfortable.  She is resting keel 16" off
the ground on two concrete blocks, with steel shoring supports chained
together fore and aft - pretty solid.

Todd, your weekend experience sounds like a nightmare, although I suppose
it's wonderful no one was hurt.   Is the boat OK?    Once I loaded the
Starwind on the trailer wrong (not quite your 30 degrees) and got a 4" bunk
dent in the hull.   Fortunately, after relaunching and proper loading the
dent popped right back smooth.  Fiberglass is incredibly strong.

PT








> Peter,
>
>    This is probably answered in a previous post,  but why is the boat off
of the trailer?
>  I had the opportunity...or should I say task...this weekend of putting my
boat up on blocking and taking the trailer out from under it.  Going back
under with the trailer,  I knocked the boat off of the blocks and she
rolled, resting on the trailer in about a 30 degree "heel".   The starboard
bunk was almost under the rail, and the port side bunk was an inch from the
keel.  My brother-in-law joked that I was dry sailing for sure.
>
>   I jacked and blocked the bow, and using my A-frame and two chain falls,
picked the stern using the two eyes on the transom to raise and level the
boat.  I was skeptical that the eyes would hold.   I thought I had read here
on the list some time ago someone called them lifting eyes and said Stan
picks the boats by the stern and bow eyes in the factory, but I didn't have
the time to go online and research the archives.  I doubt I'll ever do that
again, but they were rock solid.  I was amazed!!  And my hat is off to Stan!
>
>
> Todd
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Thorn" <pthorn at nc.rr.com>
> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 12:14:07 -0500
> To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> Subject: [Rhodes22-list] boat weight
>
> > Hi Mary Lou!
> >
> > Phoenix was weighed at the I-95 truck scales near the South
Carolina/Georgia
> > border last October.  By subtracting the known weight of tow vehicle and
> > trailer, something like 3 tons,  and allowing 250 pounds for mast, boom,
> > cushions, sails, rigging, rotten particle board in the cabin, and for
the
> > tropical frog in the lazarette that hasn't been found yet, she's about
> > 3,300.  I admit and hope, this boat weight estimate could be high.
> >
> > The first major Phoenix project is a bottom restoration and
reinstallation
> > of the new CB.  Come to think of it, after we remove the approximate 10
> > coats of heavy metal bottom paint accumulated since 1984, that should
reduce
> > some weight too!  When that is complete, the plan is to get her back on
the
> > trailer, after taking a very accurate tare of the truck and Triad, and
to
> > the Chapel Hill landfill scales to determine a true "bare boat" weight.
> > I'll let you all know these more accurate results then... but please
don't
> > hold your breath waiting.
> >
> > In real cruising life, I don't think 10-15% variances in boat weight
matter
> > much.  If it were not relatively easy for me the determine Phoenix's
weight,
> > I probably wouldn't bother.  As you know, many of us, especially me, are
> > obsessed with our boats and messing around with them, so these facts
become
> > interesting.  Best regards to you and Fred.
> >
> > Fair winds,
> >
> > PT
> >
> >
> >
> > > Pete - was there anything else on board when you weighed Phoenix? I
assume
> > > you subtracted the trailer weight.  3300 is 400 over the published
> > weight -
> > > though I'm not sure there was ever an R22 that weighed 2900 lbs. Maybe
> > > without the mast? We've never weighed Fretless but she's a '91 so
we've
> > > always figured she was on the heavy side though perhaps not as heavy
as
> > the
> > > boats with the permanent head, holding tank and head enclosure.
> > >
> > > Mary Lou
> > >
> > > At 08:04 AM 3/14/2004 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >Wally,
> > > >
> > > >I think it's great that you are enjoying racing, and have learned you
can
> > > >PHRF race with bigger boats and beat them.  Go Wally!
> > > >
> > > >As for the genny selection, I'm with Steve on this... get the 155.
It
> > makes
> > > >a great deal of sense NOT to penalize yourself to start with a worse
> > (lower)
> > > >rating just because of the perceived benefit a bigger sail implies,
but
> > > >really only comes into play in light air conditions.  Around here
(lake
> > > >sailing; no seabreeze), the best racing is in the winter anyway,
where
> > the
> > > >155 would be preferable for winter's fresh breezes. You can probably
furl
> > a
> > > >155 down to about a 110 with a tapered luff pad and have a little
sail
> > shape
> > > >left to race with.  Also, a 155 is still considered a "light air"
sail.
> > > >
> > > >Another important consideration is clew height.  A higher clewed
headsail
> > > >furls easier and gives you move visibility under the foot to view the
> > > >crossing approaching traffic, so you would not need a window.  Many
> > > >racer/cruisers seem to like these features.  However, due to
geometry, a
> > > >higher clewed 155 would extend much farther aft than a decksweeper
155.
> > > >Also, with a decksweeper I've heard talk about "end plate" effect
with
> > the
> > > >wind on the deck.  Plus the sail's center of effort is lower and more
> > > >forward so it's easier to hold down..  I just mention these points to
you
> > so
> > > >you can have a good discussion with your sailmaker.
> > > >
> > > >My 84 R22, the Phoenix, is on shoring supports in the yard patiently
> > waiting
> > > >for her "make-over".  It will probably be two years before she is
ready
> > to
> > > >launch, with other work and sailing distractions in my que ahead of
her.
> > > >Just for the record, on the trip to NC, the Phoenix weighed in at
3,300
> > > >pounds at a highway truck scale.   Seems heavy for an old boat, don't
you
> > > >think?
> > > >
> > > >Fair winds,
> > > >
> > > >PT
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > As I mentioned in an earlier post it would be nice to be able to
test
> > sail
> > > > > before you buy. I also said I am trying to keep an open mind.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not confusing discomfort with speed. Any decent sailor knows
that
> > a
> > > > > boat heeling excessively is not at optimum trim. Sure the race
> > committee
> > > > > penalizes you for head sails larger than a 155. I agree that a 175
can
> > be
> > > >a
> > > > > faster sail. I am just not sure the advantage is at 20 knots of
true
> > wind.
> > > > > That being said I have never sailed with one and I am looking for
the
> > best
> > > > > sail for about 8 - 12.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't have a wind gauge or knot meter. I guess at wind speed
when
> > > >pleasure
> > > > > sailing and rely on the committee boat to announce and record wind
> > speed
> > > > > when racing.  I measure boat speed with my GPS. I am also trying
to
> > use
> > > >the
> > > > > VMG features.
> > > > >
> > > > > Many variables to consider but Rummy and I both have an 84. I
don't
> > think
> > > >my
> > > > > boat is loaded down much at all, can't speak for Rummy's. Earlier
> > posts
> > > >did
> > > > > not mention hanky mains when sailing in 20. I know that I need to
furl
> > > >main
> > > > > and my 125 when sailing in 20 knots. If I make the main too small
it
> > seems
> > > > > like I have eliminated the slot and there is no lift provided. I
might
> > as
> > > > > well just furl all of the way.
> > > > >
> > > > > PS - Just got back from a nice 24 mile sail. Picture perfect with
> > about 10
> > > > > -15. Too bad I didn't have a 175 to play with. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Wally
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >From: "Bill Effros" <bill at effros.com>
> > > > > >Reply-To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > > > >To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > > > >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Bullshit.
> > > > > >Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 14:29:03 -0500
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Roger,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I use a hand held anemometer, also, and, like you, I know people
> > often
> > > > > >overestimate wind speed.  But, again, like you, I do not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >The mistake we sometimes make is in thinking that all of our
boats
> > and
> > > > > >conditions are the same.  But, as I recall, your boat does not
have
> > IMF,
> > > > > >your mainsail has battens, you do not have a 175 genny, your boat
is
> > > > > >considerably lighter in weight than boats of more recent vintage,
you
> > do
> > > > > >not normally sail in currents, and you do not normally sail in
> > conditions
> > > > > >where you can stay on a single tack for hours on end in a steady,
> > > > > >non-gusting wind.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >"Bullshit" is rather a strong technical term when so many
different
> > > >factors
> > > > > >could be involved.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I asked Wally if he has a standard or IMF main because in my
> > experience
> > > >it
> > > > > >is the main sail that controls heel, and the genny that provides
the
> > > >power
> > > > > >on my boat.  In strong winds I roll up the main far enough so the
> > boat
> > > > > >sails upright.  Sometimes this results in a stupid looking
"hanky"
> > coming
> > > > > >out of my IMF slot.  I leave the 175 all the way out.  There
isn't
> > > >another
> > > > > >boat on Long Island Sound that has its sails set even remotely
like
> > > > > >mine--but my boat goes like a bat out of hell--in total comfort,
> > > >completely
> > > > > >under control.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I don't like to lower the boom, and rarely do so.  I reduce main
sail
> > > >size
> > > > > >instead.  I don't race, I don't sail triangular courses.  I can
set
> > an
> > > > > >interesting tack and stay with it all day, and with any luck I
can
> > > >reverse
> > > > > >the tack and sail all the way home.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >If Wally had said he has a standard mail sail, I would not
> > necessarily
> > > > > >recommend the 175 for his boat.  But since he says he has the
IMF, I
> > > >would.
> > > > > >  The race committees are right.  The 175 genny is going to make
the
> > boat
> > > >a
> > > > > >faster boat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Many people don't know how fast they're going through the water,
> > either.
> > > > > >They tend to confuse discomfort with speed.  It feels much faster
> > when
> > > >you
> > > > > >are petrified about tipping over.  But an R-22 is designed to
sail
> > > >upright,
> > > > > >and if you can measure the speed you will see it goes faster
upright
> > than
> > > > > >heeled, all other conditions being equal.  Ask Jay about this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Furthermore, the characteristics of a fully extended 175 genny
> > outside
> > > >the
> > > > > >shrouds are substantially different from the characteristics of a
125
> > > >fully
> > > > > >extended genny inside the shrouds.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >If it is important to me to point higher I will move the sail
inside
> > > > > >shrouds, but the amount of sail available in those conditions is
> > > > > >substantially less than is available with smaller sails cut to
the
> > > >purpose.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Returning from all these digressions to what is actually my main
> > point:
> > > > > >because we are all owners of Rhodes-22 sailboats we frequently
forget
> > > >that
> > > > > >there are substantial and important differences between our
boats.  I
> > > >don't
> > > > > >have the time to mention it every time I see it, but it disturbs
me
> > when
> > > >I
> > > > > >see forceful writers or experienced sailors try to bludgeon
others
> > into
> > > > > >accepting their points of view, which may not be valid for all
other
> > > > > >members of the list.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Bill Effros
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >From: Roger Pihlaja
> > > > > >To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> > > > > >Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 10:16 AM
> > > > > >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Bullshit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Rummy,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >It is when folks claim things that are physically impossible.
The
> > force
> > > > > >available from the wind on the sails is proportional to the
> > > > > >[Wind Speed]^2.  How is it that my Rhodes 22 is healed over at 30
deg
> > > >with
> > > > > >the rails awash at about 12 -15 knots of wind when sailing an
upwind
> > beat
> > > >&
> > > > > >yet other Rhodes 22's claim to be able to carry full sail up to
20
> > knots?
> > > > > >This means that; somehow, these other Rhodes 22's are able to
stand
> > up
> > > > > >against a heeling force that is [20]^2 / [15]^2 = 1.78X the
heeling
> > force
> > > > > >that knocks my Rhodes 22 down on its rail.  I don't think so!
The
> > more
> > > > > >likely explanation is incorrect wind speed estimation.  Since I
use a
> > > >hand
> > > > > >held anemometer and calibrate every year, I believe my data.
Again,
> > get
> > > > > >yourself an anemometer, measure the wind speed, & show me your
data.
> > We
> > > > > >can
> > > > > >argue until the cows come home, but I won't believe your
anecdotal
> > > >examples
> > > > > >over my own data.  I think you will be surprised how much you are
> > > > > >overestimating the wind speed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Roger Pihlaja
> > > > > >S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
> > > > > >
> > > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >From: <R22RumRunner at aol.com>
> > > > > >To: <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > > > >Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 9:22 AM
> > > > > >Subject: [Rhodes22-list] Bullshit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dear Roger,
> > > > > > > The next time you are in this area, stop in and let's go
sailing.
> > > >Until
> > > > > >then,
> > > > > > > Bullshit is not an appropriate term to be used on this list.
You
> > bring
> > > > > >the
> > > > > > > rum.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Rummy
> > > > > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >__________________________________________________
> > > > > >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > > > > >__________________________________________________
> > > > > >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > > > >
> > > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > > Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to win
$1000!
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>http://msn.careerbuilder.com/promo/kaday.htm?siteid=CBMSN_1K&sc_extcmp=JS_J
> > ASweep_MSNHotm2
> > > > >
> > > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > > >
> > > >__________________________________________________
> > > >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
>
> -- 
> ___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list