Engineless anyone?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by belizesailor

Whlle the tall ships referenced did indeed make crossings without engines, they were towed into port powered tugs (at least in the later years of the golden era of sail).

Before the advent of power tugs the tallships were towed into port by crews rowing in longboats

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Before the advent of power tugs the longships were towed into port by crews rowing in longboats

Yes, thus my time frame qualifications.

The Spanish used to bring their Galleons up the Rio Dulce...geez what a feat that must have been!

[Sailmonkey]

Originally Posted by belizesailor

Yes, thus my time frame qualifications.

The Spanish used to bring their Galleons up the Rio Dulce...geez what a feat that must have been!

maybe bringing back the "press" for a cruising sailor to be able to muster the crew needed to do this is the way of the future!

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Sailmonkey

maybe bringing back the "press" for a cruising sailor to be able to muster the crew needed to do this is the way of the future!

If boat_alexander wrote the laws then this might be reality again! 😆

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Sailmonkey

maybe bringing back the "press" for a cruising sailor to be able to muster the crew needed to do this is the way of the future!

If boat_alexander wrote the laws then this might be reality again! Put all those engine using criminals to work! 😆

[model 10]

Originally Posted by belizesailor

The Spanish used to bring their Galleons up the Rio Dulce...geez what a feat that must have been!

The tide takes you way up the gorge, notice all the dead fish? Then the afternoon wind on the lake. So maybe not that bad?

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Guy

The tide takes you way up the gorge, notice all the dead fish? Then the afternoon wind on the lake. So maybe not that bad?

Against the current in the Cañon (gorge) though (even in dry season there is some current) so I doubt you would make any progress on the tide but....

On a good easterly wind, Ive come across the bar under spinnaker all the way to the canyon mouth, and then been able to sail a surprising amount of the Cañon. Did this on a cat that lost one engine (other was running and at the ready just in case for those tight spots in the canyon)

Once on the Golfette of course, if with the afternoon sea breeze then you can sail all the way into Lago Izabal.

So, yes, once they got up the canyon then even a not so weatherly galleon should have been able to sail.

The fish kills usually happen in dry season when salt water makes its way up the Rio. Its denser so is beneath the fresh water...thus dead fish (my theory anyway). These kills happen all the way into Lago Izabal...so either the salt or an oxygenation issue. Sea birds flock in around this time too to feed. Saltwater shrimp also follow the salt water and at peak of salt water ingress there are a few days of frenzied shrimping...the fishermen around Cayo Quemado (Golfete) net shrimp almost 24 hours a day.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Before the advent of power tugs the tallships were towed into port by crews rowing in longboats

And how many were wrecked because they couldn't claw off a lee shore? A big percentage of them.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Sailmonkey

So, do you have any idea what sort of
Hypocrite this turns you into? The materials to make that oar are highly noxious, are petroleum based and nowhere near carbon neutral (maybe if you use the oar for your entire lifetime, assuming it had a lifetime design cycle).

I'll actually defend Boat Alexander on this particular point.

Your argument is a bit like saying the nuclear power plants don't help with carbon emissions because of all the concrete it takes to build them. Yes, I've heard that argument made

BA's oar, and a nuclear power plant, use the petroleum and emit the carbon only once, and after that, are saving a lot of petroleum and a lot of carbon emissions for many years.

A carbon oar which makes rowing that much more efficient, is a very good thing from any point of view. Even if you have a "criminal" diesel engine

[Sauntress]

Yes. I sail without an engine and have done so for 25 years. The boat is a 28' gaff cutter built 1913 (not a misprint) and almost certainly would have started life without an engine. Which is why, out of curiosity, I removed the auxiliary to see whether I could manage. Naturally that improves your boat handling skills, and the boat in turn, freed of that lump of metal, the drag of the propellor and the hole in the rudder, likewise handles better. You have to be careful, but that, I would contend is normal seamanship, keep clear of the land, keep clear of shipping especially if the wind is failing, for then you are a sitting duck, learn all the tricks half forgotten, scandalising the main (I have gaff rig), heaving to, taking the way off the boat, picking up a mooring, bringing up alongside a quay, etc, etc. And it is FUN.

That is the best bit. It might be slow, it might be tedious at times, it might be hard work, but it is FUN.

For the record I have taken my boat, engineless, to Norway, Ireland, France, Belgium, the East Coast of England and now NW Spain.

No engine means a minimalist approach, no fancy electronics, solar power, LED lighting (or, better in northern climes, oil lamps). It also means that my hard earned cash goes into what makes the boat go and keeps her safe, her rig, her sails, her spars, her standing rigging, her running rigging etc

[Sailmonkey]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I'll actually defend Boat Alexander on this particular point.

Your argument is a bit like saying the nuclear power plants don't help with carbon emissions because of all the concrete it takes to build them. Yes, I've heard that argument made

BA's oar, and a nuclear power plant, use the petroleum and emit the carbon only once, and after that, are saving a lot of petroleum and a lot of carbon emissions for many years.

A carbon oar which makes rowing that much more efficient, is a very good thing from any point of view. Even if you have a "criminal" diesel engine

I don't really believe the argument I made either, but when saddled with a criminal diesel engine......well.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by Sauntress

Yes. I sail without an engine and have done so for 25 years. The boat is a 28' gaff cutter built 1913 (not a misprint) and almost certainly would have started life without an engine. Which is why, out of curiosity, I removed the auxiliary to see whether I could manage. Naturally that improves your boat handling skills, and the boat in turn, freed of that lump of metal, the drag of the propellor and the hole in the rudder, likewise handles better. You have to be careful, but that, I would contend is normal seamanship, keep clear of the land, keep clear of shipping especially if the wind is failing, for then you are a sitting duck, learn all the tricks half forgotten, scandalising the main (I have gaff rig), heaving to, taking the way off the boat, picking up a mooring, bringing up alongside a quay, etc, etc. And it is FUN.

That is the best bit. It might be slow, it might be tedious at times, it might be hard work, but it is FUN.

For the record I have taken my boat, engineless, to Norway, Ireland, France, Belgium, the East Coast of England and now NW Spain.

No engine means a minimalist approach, no fancy electronics, solar power, LED lighting (or, better in northern climes, oil lamps). It also means that my hard earned cash goes into what makes the boat go and keeps her safe, her rig, her sails, her spars, her standing rigging, her running rigging etc

Sauntress,

Would love to see pictures of your boat. I agree about the propeller and it's aperture--I glassed over the prop cutout on my hull during the build, and I believe it increases rudder efficiency and light-wind boat speed tremendously. I believe Larry Pardey put some kind of rubber flaps between the sternpost and rudder to improve flow between the two.
Do you scull? I'm still trying to perfect my oar without spending a fortune on ash to build a proper one.

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by Sauntress

That is the best bit. It might be slow, it might be tedious at times, it might be hard work, but it is FUN.

For the record I have taken my boat, engineless, to Norway, Ireland, France, Belgium, the East Coast of England and now NW Spain.

No engine means a minimalist approach, no fancy electronics, solar power, LED lighting (or, better in northern climes, oil lamps). It also means that my hard earned cash goes into what makes the boat go and keeps her safe, her rig, her sails, her spars, her standing rigging, her running rigging etc

Actually it isn't a lot of fun when the wind drops and the temp goes up to say 90-95 degrees.

If you have a small outboard though the fun is when you can cross 20 miles are so with the breeze in your face for maybe $2.09 which is the cost of a gallon of gas this week. (in those conditions) I have a 5HP 4 stroke outboard on my boat, and did this yesterday

I did 15 years engineless and although it is nice at times it's also best I believe to have some sort of small engine aboard especially if there are obstacles the tide can push you into such as bridges or shipping channels

[Sauntress]

The boat is called Sauntress, Google her and she will come up. Yes, I scull, with a long sweep over the stern, which is quite effective in still waters, but not otherwise. In answer to Thomm 255, we also have a small 2hp outboard and that, installed in the inflatable tethered alongside has, in its time taken us clear of the rocks (becalmed in the wrong place in the grip of the tide). Ben, if you are thinking of making a sculling oar/sweep you might like to look at the youtube stuff on the yuloh as a posible alternative. 95 degrees here (Iberian north coast) is at times the precursor of an out of nowhere savage onshore gale called the "galerna".

[thomm225]

A small engine sure is nice on days like these.....