--- In harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au, "petermirow" <petermirow@h...>
wrote:
>
> I agree, with the points regarding the benefits of the leepod.
>
> As for recovery in case of a capsize, I tend to favour the ama
> flooding idea. Having heavy equipment like engine and anchor tackle
> to ww would probabely sink a completely flooded ama. Need to choose
> non very buoyant building technique. Denser material would fit
better.
>
> Once having sunk the ama, the crew would be able to retrieve a
> halyard or running backstay to lever the ama up again, on the other
> side. Using the mast as lever. Using fenders and other buoyant
stuff
> as fixed point. Maybe a dedicated rightening buoy. A reasonable
> reduction on the running backstay. In this case the leepod would
even
The problem with self-rescue, or even assisted rescue, is that the
conditions that capsized the boat in the first place are the
conditions you will have to survive for a period of time until rescue
can be attempted. The HP is designed not to be capsizeable except in
situations that would sink a similar mono, one supposes. Look at
Richars Wood's current dilemna. His boat never capsized, yet it
hasn't been found, last I heard. The chance of then righting had it
floped over is not great.
Anyway, no harm in having a sound plan.
Yahoo! Groups Links