Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10
Boat and Hardware Modification / Re: My new gas tank hatch cover
« Last post by brackish on Today at 04:59:14 PM »
Wound up getting stung the second I rattled that cover on the way up.

LOL, Been there done that, one of the reasons for the new hatch.  On the port and starboard hatches if I haven't been to the boat for a while, I'll lift them with the boat hook with a can of spray at the ready, however not possible with the OEM fuel locker cover. 

If I remember to do it regularly and I mean about every four to six months or so, rubbing a dry bar of Irish Spring soap on the underside of the hatch covers seems to keep them away.
Com-Pac Sailors Lounge / Re: Eclipse report.
« Last post by tmw on Today at 04:02:50 PM »
I travelled to Kentucky to visit my mother, and we drove into the path of full totality.  I completely agree, partial eclipses are nothing compared to a total eclipse.  Henry described it well.  Partial eclipses are like cloudy days, but the total watching the corona for a couple minutes is worth it. 

Our area didn't get very dark, as the surrounding clouds reflected a lot of light into the area (similar to just after the sun goes down).  But watching that corona... that was nice.

CP-33/35's / Re: CP 33 / CP 35
« Last post by spsexton on Today at 02:19:29 PM »
I did a little digging into the USCG vessel database for CP33s and CP35s. Here's what I came up with:

Com-Pac 33
- 10 hulls built, from 1990-1993 (model year of boat)
- Hull #1: built Aug, 1989
- Hull #10: built Jul, 1992

Com-Pac 35
- 23 hulls, built, 1993-2006 (model year)
- Hull #1: built Aug, 1992
- Hull #23: built Jan, 2006

This is all based on HINs found in the USCG database.
Com-Pac Sailors Lounge / Re: Eclipse report.
« Last post by HenryC on Today at 01:57:36 PM »
90% coverage don't cut it, Brackish.

Partial eclipses, where the moon doesn't completely cover the sun, are quite common, they don't even bother reporting them in the papers or on TV.  I've seen about a half dozen of them, and as you say, they are interesting but not particularly mind-blowing.  Besides, they are usually still bright enough that you can't see them without protective gear.  Unless someone warns you about them, you don't even know they are going on.

I saw one partial driving home, and when I looked over at the setting sun, I noted it had a big bite taken out of it.  Another time, I was on a boat, lying on a cockpit bench, and when I looked up the partially eclipsed sun, shining thtough an overcast AND my sunglasses became visible.  Interesting, but not if you've seen it before.

But once the sun is totally blocked out, the sun's atmosphere, or corona, is plainly visible.  It's relatively faint and pale, easily washed out by the glare, so it is only visible when the sun's disc is totally blocked.   The result is like a great eye in the sky, with the moon being the pupil, and the corona being the iris.  Even when you know exactly what it is, the resemblance still blows you away.  I can see how primitive peoples completely freaked out when they saw God's Eye staring down at them.

The way to watch it is using eye protection until the sun completely disappears, THEN drop the filter and look at it naked eye.  Take my word for it, there is no photo, movie, textbook diagram, classroom demonstration whatever that can prepare you for it.  Like I said, I perfectly understand the whole drill, I've studied this phenomenon intensively, but nothing, absolutely nothing, prepares you for totality. I got all the "profound" and "dramatic" I could handle.

In fact, for the last few weeks, I was afraid that the sight I'd been waiting for all my life to see would be a big let-down, a great disappointment.

It wasn't.

PS.  I too,  noticed the phenomenon of clouds "disappearing"  when seen through the filter.  We had clouds Monday too, and we could see their shadows with our eclipse glasses, but I suppose the thinner ones that don't block the sun out completely are faintly illuminated by the fierce sunlight, but the filter makes them disappear.  Fortunately, by the time totality arrived the sun was in a clear, cloudless part of the sky.
Boat and Hardware Modification / Re: My new gas tank hatch cover
« Last post by AislinGirlII on Today at 01:39:26 PM »
Looks really nice. Hinging cover has got to be easier than the OEM one - I had a couple of wasps flying out from under mine, and it was real fun trying to slowly lift it off so I could peek and check under it. Wound up getting stung the second I rattled that cover on the way up.
Com-Pac Sailors Lounge / Re: Eclipse report.
« Last post by brackish on Today at 01:03:56 PM »
Good report HenryC, I only wish the impact had been as profound for me.  My first profession approximately fifty years ago was an oil and gas code welder and still having my hood and appropriate shade lens I cleaned it all up, stuck it on my head and went out to see the eclipse.  During our peak time the sun was behind some clouds, but it was clearly visible with the welding hood on almost like the lens filtered the clouds.  Maybe you can comment on the physics of that.  At any rate I was at about a 90% coverage zone so I was not willing to see it at all without the protection of the hood.  With the hood on it was not all that spectacular, neat and unusual but not nearly as dramatic as the enhanced pictures that have been available.
Boat and Hardware Modification / My new gas tank hatch cover
« Last post by brackish on Today at 12:40:05 PM »
Hopefully it will end the mashed fingers and slipped disks from "unbinding" the OEM cover.  Ready to install after I choose another completely unsatisfactory finish for this and the rest of my teak, currently all cleaned up and awaiting that decision.

I still have to add a couple of brackets for removable gimbaled drink holders and a SS t-nut for the cockpit table to lock to, but that after finishing.  If I don't like it I can always go back, it is completely reversible to the drop in fiberglass cover.
we will be attending the lake monroe mess about in southern indiana this sept.  just wondering if any other compac 'o nauts will there.
Com-Pac Sailors Lounge / Re: A confession and introduction.
« Last post by AislinGirlII on Today at 12:12:31 PM »
Keith I too bought a Coronado 15 years ago thinking it would be a fun solo boat when we rented cabins on  camping trips to local state inland lakes. And it was, in light winds! Too big a handful for me alone when the wind got up. During Hurricane Gustav it got bounced around on its Harbor Freight trailer and holed by a trailer bunk. I repaired the 12" hole for practice, but the hull was too delam'd and beat up to trust after that.

(betting as part of your repairs you had to replace the bulkhead under the mast step.. I sure did...)

Oh, don't worry there's a 12 step program available, as authored by my wife..she administers it this way.."If you go within 12 steps of another boat I swear I'll beat you with a tiller". Since at that time there was a Chrysler C26, The Coronado 15, a Cal 21, and a freebie Rhodes Bantam, I couldn't deny my I have the ComPac 23 only..
I don't know any more about the recent collision of USS McCain with a merchant vessel this week than you do. I just have a few very brief and possibly flawed press reports.  But I have also learned that there have been four similar incidents in the last nine months (three collisions and a grounding) and it is only natural to wonder if they are not totally unrelated accidents.  Although the prime cause of the accident may have been the fault of the other vessel, a Navy destroyer is fast, maneuverable, fully manned by trained sailors at all times, and studded with sensors and technology. It should have seen this coming and gotten out of the way.  I know that, it was my job when I was a sailor. The McCain incident seems very similar to the recent USS Fitzgerald tragedy.  What is going on? Even the Navy has seen it fit to relieve the Admiral commanding the 7th Fleet.  With authority comes responsibility and accountability. 

We won't know more until all the facts are out, but I can speculate.  I believe these accidents are the result of an over-reliance on technology and the resulting degradation in the training and experience of seamen.  This is a topic I often bring up here, but bear with me; I believe it is relevant to all mariners, even weekend sailors like us.

I was a QM on a missile destroyer in the late 1960s, a navigation technician on the underway bridge watch, so I was involved in many similar encounters.  We had radar and electronic navigation back then too, but it was only an addition to traditional seamen's skills that went back to the age of sail.  The technology was meant to assist, not replace, the old methods.  Our equipment gathered data which we plotted on the chart, but we drew lines and measured angles on paper just like the old timers did.  We had situational awareness.  I am going to stick my neck out and say these recent accidents are the result of our failure to rely on traditional skills and procedures.  We are losing the knowledge, and those of us who have it aren't practicing it often enough to keep it sharp.  We are losing that sixth sense that tells us when we mark down a course or bearing; "Wait a minute, that just doesn't look quite right,  I better check it again."  Only experience and training can give you that.  And only experience and training gives you the confidence to act decisively in a crisis situation when things start happening fast and data and communications are contradictory and garbled  After all, our equipment may be functioning perfectly, but if we don't trust it we will hesitate and make mistakes. 

On my recent trip to view the solar eclipse, my companion and I drove from Durham, N Carolina to our hotel at the eclipse site in Columbia, SC.  Things went smoothly on the road and we relied on the auto GPS to navigate straight to our destination.  There were no problems.

But on the way back, the roads were crowded, it was dark, there were accidents and construction delays, and soon there were Interstate traffic jams and police activity, people were tired, in a hurry and acting crazy.  We were forced to detour down side roads, and soon the limitations of the GPS became apparent.  Its data was out of date, and it had a few program (people do make mistakes when stressed!) glitches, probably exaggerated by our own fatigue and crowded conditions in a small sports car.  Soon we had to rely on "traditional" , low-tech methods.  Fortunately, my friend had a full suite of paper maps at several scales, prepared of our route and several alternates, and we were able to execute several Plan Bs when the electronics either failed, or sent us into yet another traffic jam. 

The GPS was a great convenience, but it was the paper charts that saved our lunch.  Electronics present information in a very dry and abstract way, and it takes a lot of training and experience to fully exploit its capabilities, and there are so many places where you can screw up.  And to properly train yourself in this  tech it is tempting to neglect the old traditional skills; setting up straightforward procedures, reading a map, using a compass, simple piloting and dead reckoning calculations, and not relying on just one source for your vital information.

I don't know what happened out there, and I grieve for the sailors and their families.  But I suspect at least some of these tragedies could have been avoided.
These may have been "radar-assisted" collisions.  Don't let them happen to you.  Every now and then, you have to look out of one of those little round windows.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10