Subject: [harryproa] Re: rowing a vis
From: Mike Crawford
Date: 12/16/2012, 10:17 PM
To: harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au
Reply-to:
harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au

 


  I got a Norseboat 17 for just those reasons.  Two good oars, a nice rig with a good SA/D, salty lines, and a mast I can raise and lower on the water (or at least drop the mainsail into the cockpit simply by releasing two halyards).

  Who needs an outboard!

  Then:

  1) I had to row into 25 knots of wind when I found I couldn't make any headway or tack because the former owner had raked the centerboard back, moving the CLR so far aft that the boat wouldn't come about (I found this out a few weeks later).  The only thing that saved me was a meager trolling motor built into the early models.  That plus frenzied rowing.

  2) Five miles out the wind died earlier than usual, and earlier than predicted, and I had to row against the ebb tide for over two hours.

  3) When going out to meet my wife on an island, I had to head out against six knots of wind and 1 1/2 knots of tide coming in to the inlet.  With the rig up, the 17'-er could only make about 50' to 100' per tack across the 1/4-mile inlet.  There wasn't enough flow over the centerboard to make a good foil to resist leeway, particularly because most of the wind was up high and the sail wasn't.  But with the sail down, there was so much windage that, going against the current and the wind, I made 1' to 2' per stroke.  It took me all afternoon to get out there.


  There's something to be said for being able to pull a cord and just get home if the wind or the tide would make skulling either difficult or impossible.  Or alternately, for arriving back at the mooring without being covered with sweat and mosquitoes.  Not that one wouldn't want a redundant human-powered alternative.

  Granted, I've got a current in my harbor, and a long way out to open water, so I'm biased.  But I've still grown to appreciate not having to power a craft on my own.

        - Mike


Peter Mirow wrote:
 

Hi Fedor,

Interesting point. However, I see it from another angle: ... or maybe not quite, since I take you're advocating for the skulls.
But sseing it from the skull users, I don't think the point is the "unreliability" of the engine. 
It is rather that; the sculls won't fail, don't make noise, don't stink, won't cost, and will keep you fit - as a bonus.
To be honest, I'm surprise at the small amount of sailors who prefer engines...


__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Visit Your Group
.

__,_._,___