[Public-List] Boom Vang sizing help

Sat Nov 17 10:06:57 PST 2018

Gord ;
 Two questions:
What size dyneema ?
Do you use a small winch or simply "two six HEAVE".
(and some day I want to hear your theory on why the navy came up with that phrase )

Cheers,  Rod

-------- Original message --------
From: Gordon Laco via Public-List
Date:17-11-2018 11:13 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: Alberg 30 Public List -- open to all
Cc: Gordon Laco
Subject: Re: [Public-List] Boom Vang sizing help

Hello James -

We use 10mm (3/8”) line in SURPRISE’s vang.  We have a block on a bale on the boom, and another bale also bolted through the mast’s heel and run the rig between them

We have a piece of dyneema running 2:1 from the bale up to the single block on the boom and about 1/3 of the way back down.   Hauling on this we have a 3:1 tackle comprised of a single block with becket at the end of the dyneema, and a double fiddle block with a cam cleat shackled to the mast bale down at the bottom.  This tackle is the one with the 10mm braided polyester line

This gives us 6:1 on the vang, which serves well.   I’ll send you a photo off list.

Gordon Laco
426 SURPRISE

> On Nov 17, 2018, at 11:03 AM, James Cowhey via Public-List <public-list at lists.alberg30.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I want to replace the useless 2:1 vang on Mo Cuisle (#56).  I think maybe it was used only as a preventer by the PO.  I’d appreciate any suggestions on sizing of blocks and line for a working vang.  The boat has a Boomkicker already installed.  I think 50mm blocks with a MWL of 800 to 900 lbs should work.
>
> James Cowhey
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Nov 12, 2018, at 11:21 PM, Martin Privette via Public-List <public-list at lists.alberg30.org> wrote:
>>
>> This whole deal is very sad...keep your chin up...sail on.
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:30 PM Gordon Laco via Public-List <
>> public-list at lists.alberg30.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Michael,
>>>
>>> I’m looking forward to finding something fun to write about... like the
>>> Misery Trip that didn’t happen this year
>>>
>>> G
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Nov 12, 2018, at 10:20 PM, Michael Connolly <crufone at comcast.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Gord,
>>>> You had mentioned in your first rendition of events that you were
>>> satisfied with the net result of the hearing because it gave the "offender"
>>> an opportunity to redeem himself. Certainly honourable on your part. Seems
>>> to me that you have your answer. His aggressive behavour off the race
>>> course in not accepting the hearing results indicates to me that his
>>> prevalent attitude continues to be one of anger and confrontation. He
>>> appears fixated on proving his superiority by bullying those around him.
>>>>
>>>> In my experience the best avenue to stop a bully is to figuratively
>>> punch him in the face...…………………………..expel him from the club.
>>>> So sorry this seems to be so blunt. I believe he will remain the same
>>> all the way to his grave. "Dyed in-the-wool" so to speak.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the up-date.
>>>> Michael
>>>>> On November 12, 2018 at 9:37 AM Gordon Laco via Public-List <
>>> public-list at lists.alberg30.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I promised George Dinwiddie that I’d provide follow up on events
>>> involving our club’s overly aggressive member, the fellow we were in the
>>> collision with in September.
>>>>>
>>>>> In brief recap, in his most recent incident he tried to jam himself
>>> between two starboard tack boats sailing nose to tail when he was on port
>>> tack, colliding with us in SURPRISE in the process. We were the second
>>> starboard tack boat. The club decided this most recent in a long series of
>>> incidents was provocation enough to issue a Rule 69 charge, and in due
>>> course there was a hearing. The hearing found him guilty and issued a 12
>>> month suspension from racing on Wednesday nights, but allowed him to race
>>> in our weekend distance races. The weekend races have less traffic and
>>> would offer him an opportunity to demonstrate an attitude adjustment. There
>>> was a warning that the next transgression might lead to a life-time ban.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here’s what’s happened since then.
>>>>>
>>>>> Our member has combed the rule book and the proceedings of the hearing,
>>> and determined that he was notified incorrectly of the hearing, and that he
>>> was subsequently notified incorrectly of the decision of the hearing board.
>>> Based on that he is appealing his ‘conviction’ to higher yachting
>>> authorities. If his hearing is deemed valid, and is heard by the higher
>>> yachting authority, two things can happen.
>>>>> the club’s proceedings may be deemed valid, and the penalty upheld
>>>>> the club’s proceedings may be deemed invalid due to the errors or
>>> irregularities our member claims, in which case the penalty is overturned.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In the former case, we proceed and he has a chance to redeem himself.
>>> In the later case, the club needs to decide if it’s going to start again by
>>> laying the charge, then holding the hearing again, this time taking steps
>>> to avoid the claimed irregularities. There will be a new deliberation and
>>> presumably new results.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or, the club can decide they are fed up with the time and energy being
>>> devoted to this members problems, and not bother to lay further charges
>>> under the rules, and just rescind the membership of this person under the
>>> clubs own rules and bylaws. Basically ‘if you can’t play nicely, go and
>>> play somewhere else’. The difference between a club-based suspension and a
>>> Sail Canada based ban is that the later is international. Apparently any
>>> suspension under Rule 69 that is longer than four weeks needs to be
>>> published internationally and is applied internationally.
>>>>>
>>>>> If this person beats the Rule 69 penalty, and the club decides it’s fed
>>> up with him and revokes his membership, that is in effect the end of racing
>>> for him anyway because there are no other clubs running races within 30
>>> miles of us here on Georgian Bay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any way one looks at it, I don’t think anything good will come of this
>>> for the person in question. I’ve been asked if I would be willing to
>>> testify again should the club find itself in the position of re-doing the
>>> Rule 69 hearing. I said I would.
>>>>>
>>>>> How tiresome.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gord
>>>>> #426 Surprise
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> These businesses support your Association:
>>>>> http://www.alberg30.org/st
>
> _______________________________________________
> These businesses support your Association:
> http://www.alberg30.org/store/A30supporters.html
> Please support them.
> _______________________________________________
> Public-List mailing list
> Public-List at lists.alberg30.org
> http://lists.alberg30.org/listinfo.cgi/public-list-alberg30.org

_______________________________________________
These businesses support your Association:
http://www.alberg30.org/store/A30supporters.html
Please support them.
_______________________________________________
Public-List mailing list
Public-List at lists.alberg30.org
http://lists.alberg30.org/listinfo.cgi/public-list-alberg30.org