Bob Perry

My newest project

Recommended Posts

Small world. Pano, I do not carry an SSB, even though I make over some big passes and I'm riding Ride the Rockies again this year. Yes on Garmin, however.

 

Kim, 285m is a big day. I ride a few centuries every year, but never anything close to that. Next weekend is the White Rim in Canyonlands. 100 miles around Island in the Sky on the mountain bike.

 

Bob, those bikes are all carbon, well almost.

 

 

 

IMAG0570%201_zpsf9qb1y4q.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LasaL

When I worked for Carter I rode 32 miles a day on a $97 bike. I wore my work clothes and averaged 55 minutes a trip depending on the Little League games that were in progress as I rode home. I finally broke down and bought basket clips and shoes. I put those clips on. I put the shoes on and I took off like a shot. I came to the first stop sign and could not get my shoes out of the clips and I feel over.

Oh yeah, I'm cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny :)

 

32 miles a day is a good commute. that shit gets you in shape.

 

I fell over at a stop light the first ride on clipless pedals.

 

You know, no clips and straps, cleats on the bottom of shoes that engage the pedal.

 

They were Sampson pedals, and Look pedals had just come out. The Sampsons were terrible, I bought the Look pedals a couple weeks later.

 

Carbon FRP has totally changed bikes. That road bike is under 15 lbs. Kim's quiver of bikes is mouthwatering. But, he needs a mountain bike!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lasal:

I bought my son Max a carbon fiber bike 23 years ago. I forget the brand. He was 15 years old. He rode that bike until he was 20 and some one stole it. It was a very good bike.

 

I had clips on my shoes and I found they helped a lot. But I was just a commuter trying to save money on gas. I was not into the gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's my "audax" bike, sorry for the bad photo

 

2012-10-20112835_zpse06ec957.jpg

 

Kim, 285 miles in a day is pretty impressive, it takes me about 24hours to ride this far away on a flattish course on a good day. I've never been a racing cyclist, I started cycling when I couldn't combine anymore work, family and rowing. In the previous post, I put was in bracket for my cycling as I need to do more, I DNFed the last PBP (lack of time to train is my excuse) and I now struggle to go out. Motivation will come back... Your offer is very generous as I dream of sailing on FL but I have wife and children and live nearly on the other side of the planet. Not this year, may be one day, I would like to, if I was single I would already be checking flights! From the photos I've seen of the puget sound, the cycling must be great. During long distance events, here in Europe, we often see people from Seattle, they have a very recognisable blue Jersey and tend to be strong and self reliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see the Colnago properly outfitted with Campag.

I am a Campy guy, I have tried the other brands and I just keep coming back to Campy.

 

I even have one of those massive Campy wine cork screws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small world. Pano, I do not carry an SSB, even though I make over some big passes and I'm riding Ride the Rockies again this year. Yes on Garmin, however.

 

Kim, 285m is a big day. I ride a few centuries every year, but never anything close to that. Next weekend is the White Rim in Canyonlands. 100 miles around Island in the Sky on the mountain bike.

 

Bob, those bikes are all carbon, well almost.

 

 

 

IMAG0570%201_zpsf9qb1y4q.jpg

 

HEY, I did Ride of the Rockies a couple years ago. That climb up to Grand Mesa was a kick, and the down hill to Montross was to die for, never touched the brakes for like 40 miles!

 

(I have ridden dozens of centuries and double centuries over the years. I still ride, but this morning I rowed on the erg.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny :)

 

32 miles a day is a good commute. that shit gets you in shape.

 

I fell over at a stop light the first ride on clipless pedals.

 

You know, no clips and straps, cleats on the bottom of shoes that engage the pedal.

 

They were Sampson pedals, and Look pedals had just come out. The Sampsons were terrible, I bought the Look pedals a couple weeks later.

 

Carbon FRP has totally changed bikes. That road bike is under 15 lbs. Kim's quiver of bikes is mouthwatering. But, he needs a mountain bike!

I have a mountain bike, I have other bikes beyond that photo, when you are an ex racer and you get old and fat you buy lots of bikes. I ride them all. I actually sold my track bikes, wish I still had them. Hell, I wish I still had all of my previous bikes. There were dozens of them. I even still have my Velokraft VK-2. If you know what that is, you are for real.

 

I see a Cruising Anarchy cycling rendezvous in our future, but you guys might have to wait up for this old guy (me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's my "audax" bike, sorry for the bad photo

 

2012-10-20112835_zpse06ec957.jpg

 

Kim, 285 miles in a day is pretty impressive, it takes me about 24hours to ride this far away on a flattish course on a good day. I've never been a racing cyclist, I started cycling when I couldn't combine anymore work, family and rowing. In the previous post, I put was in bracket for my cycling as I need to do more, I DNFed the last PBP (lack of time to train is my excuse) and I now struggle to go out. Motivation will come back... Your offer is very generous as I dream of sailing on FL but I have wife and children and live nearly on the other side of the planet. Not this year, may be one day, I would like to, if I was single I would already be checking flights! From the photos I've seen of the puget sound, the cycling must be great. During long distance events, here in Europe, we often see people from Seattle, they have a very recognisable blue Jersey and tend to be strong and self reliant.

HEY!! I have always wanted to do PBP!! Maybe I should start training and come visit you in 2019, that's the next edition right? I will be 71 then, can you stand to ride with an old guy? (As a former serious racer I am reasonable safe in a pace-line.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

71 years old people have finished PBP, if you are in, I will do it with you. I will also train hard before so that you can take my wheel during the hard moments.

 

As long as I finish in time, I'm happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Grand Mesa is a good climb. I literally passed Lance Armstrong on it last year because he was riding slow with a buddy. I'll take it.

 

Kim, if you want to ride RTR this year I can get you an entry. I don't have hotel capacity, but you could camp or I could point you to a company that might have rooms. If you don't know them already I'll introduce you to Ron Keifel and Nelson Vails and you can talk road and track racing.

 

 

I'm all for a PNW cruising anarchy bike ride. Never ridden there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am 42.

 

Yes, there are nice rides to do In France. Italy, Spain, Wales, Ireland and Scotland are also good cycling grounds amongst others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am 42.

Oh great, he is younger than my kids!

(I will have to train extra hard!)

 

How hilly is PBP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is about 10 000m ascent for 1220km. In my books, that is rolling. Every edition some people do it fixed gear. It is nothing like the Alps.There is one very flat part during the first night and one bit around the 400km mark with relatively steeps but not too long hills. There is a long but easy climb at about the 550km mark. Then same thing in reverse on the return leg.

 

If that makes sense to you, it is just a bit too hilly to be tandem friendly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it that Pano was all bent out of shape when I did some thread drift on the origami site but he's happy to drift away on this thread? Start a biking thread Pano or you'll sound like a hypocrit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, that's a 20 posts drift without personal attacks not a ugly 200 posts drift!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what you just said. But you whined about thread drift on the origami site and now you think it's fine. Two faced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm....

 

posting pictures of bicycles even....

 

who would derail the discussion like that....

 

only the French....

 

existential point....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with thread drift. I'm all for it. I have a problem with someone who whines and cries about it on one thread and lectures me about it then engages in it on another thread. Hypocritical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone remember the thread that had the string of pics of boats with tillers that wrapped around the mizzen mast?

I have done a detail for that for my lug mizzen and I want to compare it with what the old timers did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 or 200, rules are rules, unless you don't mind staying on that perfect broad reach once in a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob, read this again the main reproch was not about thread drift : http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=172650&page=12#entry5293118

 

I won't get involved in yet another pointless argument. Call me an hypocrite if you want (one more personal attack), I will let readers decide for themselves if I deserve it and we won't have to go through yet another serie of tedious posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't talking about one post Pano. You whined on about it several times. It was your "theme". It's not a big deal, just odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't talking about one post Pano. You whined on about it several times. It was your "theme". It's not a big deal, just odd.

 

Quote where I was talking of thread drift then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I won't get involved in yet another pointless argument."

 

Hegel would like that.

 

Pano, what is that giant bag on your bike for? Were you camping? We put our food in our jersey pockets here in America. Fenders are rare too. Only for commuting or touring really. SSB?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone remember the thread that had the string of pics of boats with tillers that wrapped around the mizzen mast?

I have done a detail for that for my lug mizzen and I want to compare it with what the old timers did.

 

Bob, it's in the 'cool boats' thread, on page 63. See if this link works:

 

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=144942&page=63

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I won't get involved in yet another pointless argument."

 

Hegel would like that.

 

Pano, what is that giant bag on your bike for? Were you camping? We put our food in our jersey pockets here in America. Fenders are rare too. Only for commuting or touring really. SSB?

 

I am not a ham so no SSB. This was a 200km self reliant winter ride and the bag is for waterproof and warm clothing + food, it is open so appears bigger than it is in reality. On a 200km summer ride I would have a smaller bag, the fenders are here because once you've spent 48 hours with a wet ass and cow poo in your face it passes you the habit of riding fenderless. I do "randonneuring" which is fast touring hence the slightly unusual bike.

 

@Bob You are right not to waste your time I was being a bit evil with you, the search function doesn't return a single post where I use the word drift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your bike is nicely kitted out. The wet cow pie problem sounds shitty. That happens a little mtn biking where they graze cattle here, but we do a pretty good job of keeping cows off the roads.

 

So, I do wonder whether the Carbon Cutters will get SSB radios. Does the retro aspect of the design include the nav station?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pano:

So? Use another word. You can do it. There are many ways you can say "drift" in English. Work on it.

 

Not interested. I don't really mind thread drift, and I can't remember complaining about it. I mainly remember being not happy about the thread being derailed, group of people ganging up on one person, useless arguments and points being made repetetively.

 

I am not interested in another argument, I will stop, feel free to have a last jab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-906-0-92469200-1461123242_thumb.jpeg

 

Dipping lug- more powerful, absolutely humbling. A perfect sail, but so demanding....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

attachicon.gifimage.jpeg

 

Dipping lug- more powerful, absolutely humbling. A perfect sail, but so demanding....

 

Like sailing a flute.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Except flutes sink pretty quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of them- I've been messing around with the idea of a canoe with a plank, but trying to contain the usual hull twisting by coupling the mast and seat fulcrum, which limits the type of single sail rig you can use. So I started fooling around with a proa configured plank canoe with a dipping lug rig. The canoe in the pic had one bi directional surface piercing foil (thanks to Tom Speer), and the dipping lug was in effect an air rudder- when the seat goes one way, the sail goes the other. The sheer power of this high aspect dipping lug was really intimidating, and on a light narrow hull like this led to a lot of capsizing during the dip while shunting. The obvious solution is to go back to athwartship hull symmetry, but with a plank, things will get a bit complex during a tack or gybe. Just have to figure out massive stability with light weight and small wetted surface. :lol:

 

But I really encourage anyone to try a dipping lug. Sophisticated simplicity in a postmodern interpretation. A 'normal' rig, while more immediately controllable seems miserably underpowered. On a modern keelboat with a power halyard and downhaul a dipping lug would be magic.

 

Just for fun, a dipping lug on the aft mast of this project could shorten or get rid of the boomkin- and give the crew something to do. Don't know how it would work as a steadying sail....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a dipping lug and ease of handling :lol::lol::lol:

 

Not Automatic, that's for sure!

 

On the other hand, if you tied the downhaul and the sheet tight so the sail was flat, how much different than a standing lug riding sail would that be? Easier to strike too...

 

I suppose you could rig a 1/4 model on the beach and test it? PVC tubing, blue plastic tarp and some duct tape might do the trick. Destruction testing. Yum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul:

My plan is to get a NZ sailmaker involved who would hopefully have some lug experience. My client seems lie the type who would enjoy some experimentation. We don't have to make any hard decisions on this for a long time.

Say Hi to Lorrie for me please. Did you get my letter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P. Ed:

That's a great source. Thanks. I will save that and in time check it out. The green boat looks to have it nicely worked out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul:

My plan is to get a NZ sailmaker involved who would hopefully have some lug experience. My client seems lie the type who would enjoy some experimentation. We don't have to make any hard decisions on this for a long time.

Say Hi to Lorrie for me please. Did you get my letter?

Yup. See PM.

 

BTW, Don Yager did the dipping lug sail for the canoe. He also does other 4 sided sails. KIller drifters too. I have one on Amati

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fall:

You are very welcome. It is my pleasure. I do enjoy showing off my design efforts. I get a bit tired of hearing, "It's all about you!" No, it's not about me. It's about my work. I can' help it if they are connected.

 

Going back to the yard on Thursday to meet with Rusty Rutherford from Harken to go over the final hardware selection. I have known Rusty for a coon's age and he is very easy to work with. I'll get more photos at that time.

 

Well Put Bob!

 

Thanks for this week's dose of "Cutter Crack"!

 

Enjoy the yard!

 

fs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The modern version of the dipping lug would be a boat with a mast well aft, an overlapping Genoa, and no main.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sailman.

Nautical Quaterly 3.

Lots of pages about Circus maximus, the antithesis to the old Joshua's Spray. Love them both.

post-32003-0-43504500-1461205408_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw a new hunter 31 at the dock. Even had some good stuff on her. The chainplates were super

solid bolted to the outside of the hull. I have a lot of friends, struggling with older

plastic boats

with internal chainplates bolted to rotten plywood bulkheads a constant source of deck leaks

the source of the rot. On wooden boats the chainpleates ran a

long way down the topsides,to get ahold on the softest material ever used to build a boat out of.

With fibreglass being so much stronger there is no need for that.

Thoso super solid chainplates held up the flimsiest rig imaginable

with swept back spreaders and no backstay of any kind,

She also had super solid stanchion bases, some of the best I have seen on any plastic boat

on the

short, trip wire stanchions and flimsy plastic coated wire lifelines. That's as yotty logical

as bright yellow,high visibility sea boots, so rescuers can see your feet

when you are up to your neck in sea water

your neck in sea water.

The bow roller was as flimsy as they could make it.

Hmmmm. Your poor opinion of wood ('...the softest material ever used to build a boat out of) surprises me. I'm presently working on an 1894, 3-skin kauri monocoque sloop which suggest 'soft' is not a problem at all. I think 122 years - and still going strong may be compelling proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

I guess you people have never heard of the skin boats built and used by some peoples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

I guess you people have never heard of the skin boats built and used by some peoples.
I have. And the birch bark ones they sunk over winter to keep from drying out too much. Heck I was body surfing two weeks ago. No harm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

I guess you people have never heard of the skin boats built and used by some peoples.
I have. And the birch bark ones they sunk over winter to keep from drying out too much. Heck I was body surfing two weeks ago. No harm done.

Birch bark might be classified as wood. Skin not so and I believe it to be softer than wood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

I guess you people have never heard of the skin boats built and used by some peoples.
I have. And the birch bark ones they sunk over winter to keep from drying out too much. Heck I was body surfing two weeks ago. No harm done.
Birch bark might be classified as wood. Skin not so and I believe it to be softer than wood.
Skin probably is softer. I wonder what the relative density and toughness is. There is a nice Aleutian kayak at the Denver art museum and another along with lots of related artifacts at the Denver Natural History museum. One artifact is a seal skin float for harpooning whales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

 

 

There is wood, and there is wood. Nothing soft about white oak. Of course, many of the so-called softwoods are...wait for it...soft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some tropical hardwoods are softer than most softwoods. However, I have some purpleheart (it is indeed bright purple) that sounds like ceramic when you strike two pieces of it together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balsa, by definition, is a hardwood. Yew a softwood. Good old english language, huh? Never inconsistent... much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Yes Wood is far better; for rafts, but we are not dealing with rafts here.

There's something to be said for inherent buoyancy even in a displacement hull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

I hate agreeing with BS, but I definitely can't imagine a softer boat building material than wood. Clearly it worked very well though for umm 5k years or so.

Like skin they used the only material they had.

The saying goes "If old time boat builders had had modern materials, they would have used them."

I've heard that before, though with specific reference to CF and steel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Yes Wood is far better; for rafts, but we are not dealing with rafts here.

There's something to be said for inherent buoyancy even in a displacement hull.

 

 

Then don't build your boat of lignum vitae or ironwood. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balsa, by definition, is a hardwood. Yew a softwood. Good old english language, huh? Never inconsistent... much.

 

You have to admit that it is pretty consistent in its inconsistencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

 

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

 

Last I checked, wood was less dense than water which could have some theoretical advantages for a vehicle that's supposed to float. Not sure about steel, I'll have to look that up.

Yes Wood is far better; for rafts, but we are not dealing with rafts here.

There's something to be said for inherent buoyancy even in a displacement hull.

 

 

Then don't build your boat of lignum vitae or ironwood. ;)

 

Noted!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of Aussie hardwoods are similar or higher density than water. Ironbark sinks, and a few of the gums are around .9 specific gravity. Bloody hard and strong though. From recollection most gums are stronger than most oaks, and grey ironbark was highest of all common structural timbers used in Australia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my memory the difference between a hardwood and a softwood is the method by which they reproduce and has nothing to do with the density of the wood. Could be wrong just something I remember from uni a few decades ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my memory the difference between a hardwood and a softwood is the method by which they reproduce and has nothing to do with the density of the wood. Could be wrong just something I remember from uni a few decades ago

Correct. It's actually seed structure which determines the hard/soft wood classification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my memory the difference between a hardwood and a softwood is the method by which they reproduce and has nothing to do with the density of the wood. Could be wrong just something I remember from uni a few decades ago

 

I was taught that hardwood was deciduous and softwood was evergreen or conifer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a 40 year old "woody",yacht that is , no glass just a few good old trees ,no rust ,no osmosis, no electrolysis , sure she is always needing attention but don,t they all.

Skip Novak sums it up very well when he described his yacht as "well used" when it was critiqued as somewhat scruffy by a wealthy super yacht owner..

I like a very broad range of craft and specifically ones that are well used.

Brent I have never had any issues with chain plates attaching to the softest material to build a yacht as you previously banged on about.

Actually I tell a lie, I had to rid myself of a set of rapidly decaying mild steel ones when I gave her a bit of a post purchase birthday.

Hey, you show us yours and I will show mine.

Yacht that is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

From my memory the difference between a hardwood and a softwood is the method by which they reproduce and has nothing to do with the density of the wood. Could be wrong just something I remember from uni a few decades ago

 

I was taught that hardwood was deciduous and softwood was evergreen or conifer.

 

 

That's mostly true, the exception being Larch.

 

Softwood come from trees with needles whereas hardwood come from tree with leaves. Also the structure of the wood is different, hardwood have big vessels that you sometimes can see without magnification. Hardwood are more evolved than softwood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

From my memory the difference between a hardwood and a softwood is the method by which they reproduce and has nothing to do with the density of the wood. Could be wrong just something I remember from uni a few decades ago

Correct. It's actually seed structure which determines the hard/soft wood classification.

 

Angiosperm vs. gymnosperm. Covered seeds vs. naked seeds. There are outliers in every classification system. But yes, broadly speaking, the hardwood/softwood division is conifer/evergreen/needle trees vs. deciduous/leaf trees. There are hard (dense, slow-growing) softwoods and soft (spongy, fast-growing) hardwoods. The two categories of trees appear to be unrelated, an example of parallel evolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

From my memory the difference between a hardwood and a softwood is the method by which they reproduce and has nothing to do with the density of the wood. Could be wrong just something I remember from uni a few decades ago

Correct. It's actually seed structure which determines the hard/soft wood classification.

 

Angiosperm vs. gymnosperm. Covered seeds vs. naked seeds. There are outliers in every classification system. But yes, broadly speaking, the hardwood/softwood division is conifer/evergreen/needle trees vs. deciduous/leaf trees. There are hard (dense, slow-growing) softwoods and soft (spongy, fast-growing) hardwoods. The two categories of trees appear to be unrelated, an example of parallel evolution.

 

 

Wiki sez

 

 

The flowering plants (angiosperms), also known as Angiospermae[4][5] or Magnoliophyta, are the most diverse group of land plants, with about 350,000 species.[6] Like gymnosperms, angiosperms are seed-producing plants; they are distinguished from gymnosperms by characteristics including flowers, endosperm within the seeds, and the production of fruits that contain the seeds. Etymologically, angiosperm means a plant that produces seeds within an enclosure, in other words, a fruiting plant. The term "angiosperm" comes from the Greek composite word (angeion-, "case" or "casing", and sperma, "seed") meaning "enclosed seeds", after the enclosed condition of the seeds.

The ancestors of flowering plants diverged from gymnosperms in the Triassic Period, during the range 245 to 202 million years ago (mya), and the first flowering plants are known from 160 mya. They diversified extensively during the Lower Cretaceous, became widespread by 120 mya, and replaced conifers as the dominant trees during 100 to 60 mya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some tropical hardwoods are softer than most softwoods. However, I have some purpleheart (it is indeed bright purple) that sounds like ceramic when you strike two pieces of it together.

Have you ever heard of zitan wood? It is also purple and very, very valuable. It was used by Chinese craftsmen to build exquisite furniture and works of art.

It is a very heavy wood [i have heard it is the densest of all wood] and very very hard, making it perfect for intricate carving. I was told in China that it takes 300 years for a zitan tree to grow to 6" in diameter.

It was supposed be extinct but I have heard rumors that some new stocks have been found in India.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My googling tells me that zitan is red sandalwood and there is still some growing wild. I don't seem to be able to find density or other mechanical properties, bullshit websites about essential oils and witchcraft seem to pollute any search with sandalwood involved.

Purple heart has a listed dry specific gravity of between .76 and .9. In comparison, red and grey ironbark, bluegum, spotted gum, and red Aussie mahogany are all denser. Ironbark is also about 30% harder on the Janka scale. Those tree species listed above are very common in Aus, and make up a pretty large portion of native bush around here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worked a lot with Red Locust, Purpleheart and Greenheart in the Caribbean. All are pretty nasty for your lungs and even sweaty cuffs and beltlines. There is a reason the bugs won't eat that stuff even in the tropics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

From my memory the difference between a hardwood and a softwood is the method by which they reproduce and has nothing to do with the density of the wood. Could be wrong just something I remember from uni a few decades ago

Correct. It's actually seed structure which determines the hard/soft wood classification.

 

Angiosperm vs. gymnosperm. Covered seeds vs. naked seeds. There are outliers in every classification system. But yes, broadly speaking, the hardwood/softwood division is conifer/evergreen/needle trees vs. deciduous/leaf trees. There are hard (dense, slow-growing) softwoods and soft (spongy, fast-growing) hardwoods. The two categories of trees appear to be unrelated, an example of parallel evolution.

 

 

Wiki sez

 

 

The flowering plants (angiosperms), also known as Angiospermae[4][5] or Magnoliophyta, are the most diverse group of land plants, with about 350,000 species.[6] Like gymnosperms, angiosperms are seed-producing plants; they are distinguished from gymnosperms by characteristics including flowers, endosperm within the seeds, and the production of fruits that contain the seeds. Etymologically, angiosperm means a plant that produces seeds within an enclosure, in other words, a fruiting plant. The term "angiosperm" comes from the Greek composite word (angeion-, "case" or "casing", and sperma, "seed") meaning "enclosed seeds", after the enclosed condition of the seeds.

The ancestors of flowering plants diverged from gymnosperms in the Triassic Period, during the range 245 to 202 million years ago (mya), and the first flowering plants are known from 160 mya. They diversified extensively during the Lower Cretaceous, became widespread by 120 mya, and replaced conifers as the dominant trees during 100 to 60 mya.

 

Interesting. My wood reference books have them as completely separate evolutionary lines, perhaps sharing a common ancestor amongst the mosses. But those are older studies, written in the seventies and eighties. DNA techniques (esp. the 'molecular clock') are overturning quite a bit of evolutionary biology.:) What they are doing is actually quite similar to methods of linguists in the early 19th Century who tracked phonetic mutation overlay, e.g. Grimm's Law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot about skin boats. Although even those are framed with wood or bone. I think I'm ready to return to the original topic for awhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a coupe of pictures of the lay up for the bow sprit on the cutters in SA. Wish we could get back to following the build here. Bob, do you have any other recent shots. Sure do miss following the build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bob got sick of the negative garbage being posted and is plenty busy anyhow, so he took his bat and ball and went back to designing instead of explaining 'the client wants it' over and over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus, BS was hyping up the build quality of a Hunter for Christ's sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bob got sick of the negative garbage being posted and is plenty busy anyhow, so he took his bat and ball and went back to designing instead of explaining 'the client wants it' over and over again.

 

Yes, apart from posting El Jefe's log he's taking a break from CA. We all need to do that from time to time. I once went away for about six years.

Bob and I and a few others too stupid to learn new tricks have been hanging around SA since 2002 or so. It seems every couple of years there's a bunch of new recruits who are all bright and bushy-tailed and ready to tell us all about the Real World as they see it. And people wonder why there is a core group that circles the wagons every time the noobs come charging over the hill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't believe I've been hanging out here since 2005.

I don't even have a keelboat anymore! Just a Sunfish and a neighbor with a Hobie at the cottage. He loves to go out but can never get anyone to go with him, so there's that at least.

 

Shit, even my OPB ride got sold! I should be gearing up to deliver it from Crowleys to NW MI right about now. There are black flies out there that will starve over this...

 

 

Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't believe I've been hanging out here since 2005.

I don't even have a keelboat anymore! Just a Sunfish and a neighbor with a Hobie at the cottage. He loves to go out but can never get anyone to go with him, so there's that at least.

 

Shit, even my OPB ride got sold! I should be gearing up to deliver it from Crowleys to NW MI right about now. There are black flies out there that will starve over this...

 

 

Oh well.

You always have a spot on FRANCIS Austin, but you have to come out here to occupy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She doesn't fit in the plane's overhead?

Ok then. I'll put myself in the overhead.

 

Now that you mention it, Francis Lee would be a perfect Chicago-Mac boat. It's usually a drifter with white knuckles thrown in every now and again.

I could see her ghosting the fleet and you only need 3-4 days of provisions.

 

When I was a kid, they got so becalmed in fog, I could hear them talking all night.

The next morning, someone called out, "How far are we from shore?"

 

I went down to the beach and threw rocks from the beach into the fog because I couldn't see them and fog makes sound go weird.

 

After a few tosses, they said holy shit we're close to shore and fired up, dropping out of the race.

Turned out they were hung on the 2nd bar all night. Good thing it's just soft sand. They had plowed themselves a little channel and backed right out.

A lot of boats dropped out that year, which was great for me since we have a navigable channel to our deep water inland lake.

 

Got to check out a lot of cool boats.

 

And, that's thread drift!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's Bob? I was hoping to ask him about boom vangs and show him pictures of my new Ferrari.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites