Stealth mode - New Generation Ropes

[Seaworthy Lass]

Give me a sec and I will get the camera out. It is too dark to take an iPad photo.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Photo 1 shows “interlocking loops”. Photo 2 shows the right loop cow hitched to the left.

I did not retie anything to go from 1 to 2. All I did was to dress 1 by pushing the peak of the right loop over.

There will be a minute’s delay between the two photos loading, as I can only attach one at a time on the iPad.

SWL

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Photo 1 shows “interlocking loops”. Photo 2 shows the right loop cow hitched to the left.

I did not retie anything to go from 1 to 2. All I did was to dress 1 by pushing the peak of the right loop over.

There will be a minute’s delay between the two photos loading, as I can only attach one at a time on the iPad.

SWL

What do you know!


How glad I am that I did not angrily insist and then stubbornly defend my what is now obvious mistaken view of this, as so many people on here do


Thank you for the valuable and enlightening and humbling lesson, oh Great Knot Guru :bowing:

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

What do you know!


How glad I am that I did not angrily insist and then stubbornly defend my what is now obvious mistaken view of this, as so many people on here do


Thank you for the valuable and enlightening and humbling lesson, oh Great Knot Guru :bowing:

You’re welcome.

Don’t you just love ropework! It’s truly an “adventure into unlimited space” .

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Fi2010

Drew,


How on earth did you acquire our original report? The pdf version of 152 located on our current website doesn't list the name of the space capsule. Your link does list the capsule's name. So wondering if our website has a glitch. We know sometimes a web page can revert back to an older version. Websites are funny like that. Unless you went to a site which stores past websites. That makes more sense.

Google. Pulled it up, glanced at it, recognizing I had read it before. But years ago.


Since they were focused on sea states 1-3, really little to do with storm management. NASA actively tries to avoid landing a capsule in a full gale or huricane (Can you even imagine? That would suck, having most a planet to choose from.)

[thinwater]

I find it fascinating that we can still learn new stuff about ropes. You would think knots would have been pretty well settled 150 years ago, but materials change.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by thinwater

I find it fascinating that we can still learn new stuff about ropes. You would think knots would have been pretty well settled 150 years ago, but materials change.

Yes, the slippery new ropes are making us re-examine knots. What held snuggly in rough hemp can just slide as if coated with butter when tied in some of the hi-tech materials.

One big bonus with single braid UHMWPE is that it is super easy to splice. In recent decades splicing has tended to be left to professional riggers, but the ease of working with ropes such as dyneema means there has been a revival of interest.

[Fi2010]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Google. Pulled it up, glanced at it, recognizing I had read it before. But years ago.


Since they were focused on sea states 1-3, really little to do with storm management. NASA actively tries to avoid landing a capsule in a full gale or huricane (Can you even imagine? That would suck, having most a planet to choose from.)

Yes, NASA's goal is to recover the 16,917 pound (dry weight) capsule in calm seas. However, they want to prepare for "what if". NASA successfully deployed a 6 ft. Fiorentino para-anchor in 9 ft. seas with a wave period of 6 seconds. The chute stabilized the capsule and cut the drift rate in half.

We used a no-stretch rode and weight to maintain tension in the system, which also maximizes drag from the chute. We believe our rigging setup reduces the need for larger chutes. Of course, vessel design and intended use do play a role in changing up size.

The average para-anchor recommendations from other companies for said vessel ranges from 12 - 18 ft. There is a difference between companies.

[thinwater]

^^ Not to be too blunt, but the report is off topic and falls in the catagory of "claiming a higher authority" by name dropping NASA. In the context of storm management, the report is correct, but not relevant to the questions.


Testing of these things in survival storms on small yachts is horribly difficult. There aren't many data points and every case is different. Has the value of a JSD as an airbag been over-sold? Yes, I think some puffing has clearly taken place. I think there is little question people have biases (watch Fiorentino's drogue test video--it contain clear tester bias and lopsided testing, though the numbers are honest and have been confirmed).


But I don't have a dog in the fight and I don't sail offshore anymore. I follow these threads just to see if there is new engineering. I'm seeing both real progress and changes that may not be progress. The use of a knot, for example, was way off the reservation. Lighter weight is bad Dyneema is probably good. I'm not sure that Dyneema requires more weight (yes it is lighter, but is also has FAR less drag moving through the water at an angle--the math says there is little difference in sink rate).


Cheers! It's just a water cooler conversation, after all.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by thinwater

. . . Cheers! It's just a water cooler conversation, after all.

Well, speak for yourself! Next week, God willing, I set out on my 11th transit of the North Sea. Some of us do venture far offshore, and the question concerning drag devices is far from academic, or, in other words, far from a "water cooler conversation".

[Breaking Waves]

thinwater

>> I follow these threads just to see if there is new engineering.

The interesting thing is there is large opportunity for new investigation, but no-one is doing it. Jordan is certainly not canon law for series drogue design (although he at least did do some simple engineering calculations which is more than most other parties have done) - there is significant opportunity to explore number, size, and design of the elements. Just for instance - There is strong suggestion that a 'few element drogue' is easier to handle, more versatile, and has the same storm benefits of the many element drogue, but no-one has really examined it. Length is also an open question - what is optimal for what conditions and for 'general purpose'. As you have noted wave lengths are variable even at one point in time in a storm, and in open ocean they can be rather long. Previously this was not really computationally possible, but we are probably at the point where this all can be examined in simulation pretty well. We know much more about the real world distribution of storm state waves than we used to. Would be an interesting grad project for one of the interested parties to sponsor.

>>The use of a knot, for example, was way off the reservation.

Yea, it sure was. Completely unacceptable.

BTW, just as an aside - for whoever it was who said there was not an inch of Dyneema aboard GG boats . . . . take a look at the pics of the at-sea rig lashing on VdH's boat (was photographed as he crossed the finish line). You might see some meters of dyneema lol

[Fi2010]

Originally Posted by thinwater

^^ Not to be too blunt, but the report is off topic and falls in the catagory of "claiming a higher authority" by name dropping NASA. In the context of storm management, the report is correct, but not relevant to the questions.


Testing of these things in survival storms on small yachts is horribly difficult. There aren't many data points and every case is different. Has the value of a JSD as an airbag been over-sold? Yes, I think some puffing has clearly taken place. I think there is little question people have biases (watch Fiorentino's drogue test video--it contain clear tester bias and lopsided testing, though the numbers are honest and have been confirmed).


But I don't have a dog in the fight and I don't sail offshore anymore. I follow these threads just to see if there is new engineering. I'm seeing both real progress and changes that may not be progress. The use of a knot, for example, was way off the reservation. Lighter weight is bad Dyneema is probably good. I'm not sure that Dyneema requires more weight (yes it is lighter, but is also has FAR less drag moving through the water at an angle--the math says there is little difference in sink rate).


Cheers! It's just a water cooler conversation, after all.

You’re the one who brought up the report.

What’s relevant is the use of a low stretch rode, which kind of goes along with some of the good points Seaworthy Lass is making regarding rode. We mention the weight, because we think that’s a valuable point as well. Maintain Rode Tension in the system and everyone’s equipment performs better, not just Fiorentino.

Not seeing the bias in the test video that you claim. Very clear how weight placement made everyone’s equipment perform better. We even list the prices and have an easy to follow comparison chart on drag. Several of the drogues had more holding power and were cheaper than our drogue. This kind of open and honest testing doesn’t give us an edge.

When you conducted your comparison test for Practical Sailor why didn’t you deploy the actual drogues built by the manufacturers? Is deploying home-made look a likes a fair comparison? Especially since the drogue you favored was the only manufactured drogue tested and the rest were models.

Maybe next time when you conduct a test you can use the actual products and list the pros and cons of each. Such an article would be well received.

[Fi2010]

Breaking waves,


Matt Rutherford has a lot of experience deploying drogues and sea anchors in heavy weather. Rutherford is a very interesting, unfiltered character. Although he favors our company, Rutherford clearly has no issue saying he's going to rig his equipment differently. As we always say, "its personal preference." #4 on the list: https://reddotontheocean.com/matts-blogs/

Rutherford also has a podcast somewhere else detailing the JSD with a well know sailor...a JSD promoter. Not sure were to find it. You can always send an e-mail to Rutherford and find out. Here's Rutherford's contact info: Contact – oceanresearchproject

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Fi2010

You’re the one who brought up the report.

What’s relevant is the use of a low stretch rode, which kind of goes along with some of the good points Seaworthy Lass is making regarding rode. We mention the weight, because we think that’s a valuable point as well. Maintain Rode Tension in the system and everyone’s equipment performs better, not just Fiorentino.

Not seeing the bias in the test video that you claim. Very clear how weight placement made everyone’s equipment perform better. We even list the prices and have an easy to follow comparison chart on drag. Several of the drogues had more holding power and were cheaper than our drogue. This kind of open and honest testing doesn’t give us an edge.

When you conducted your comparison test for Practical Sailor why didn’t you deploy the actual drogues built by the manufacturers? Is deploying home-made look a likes a fair comparison? Especially since the drogue you favored was the only manufactured drogue tested and the rest were models.

Maybe next time when you conduct a test you can use the actual products and list the pros and cons of each. Such an article would be well received.

Please. I should not respond, but I will share a few facts.

NASA. Read post 82. NASA. There have been other Fi2010 references to NASA. There is nothing wrong with the study and I did not imply that there was, only that it is not related to survival storms. No problem.

Bias. Throwing the JSD off the back, intentionally, in such a way that it tangled twice. This is in obvious and known conflict with the instructions and is an apparent example of both poor seamanship and bias. I encourage the readers to view the video; it is a good video with a lot of good information. I posted above that the data was correct. I have never said that the Shark was not a good drogue. It is. It is very solid and I have no criticism of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4l3CbgUCU8&t=494s

PS. I did NOT bring this up, you did. I did deploy manufacture drogues and the proof is in the article. Three (Galerider, Delta Drogue, Paradrogue) are clearly shown in the water and the others are in the photos, in the background, on deck. I assume you did not actually read the article? I just reviewed the PDF to be certain, PS Sept 2016, pages 13-16. Do your homework be for you make false accusations. I also deployed smaller models, to confirm size-to-drag relationships. There were no surprises and the full-scale data was reported. None of my data conflicted with Fiorentino data, to my understanding, except for slight experimental variation. Additionally, I made it quite clear, and you earlier agreed, that size and drag vary with size and are not critically important drogue selection criteria. The Small Fiorentio was the only major manufacture that declined participation. No problem. The Shark was listed as "recommended." I don't understand the actual complaint. This is a red herring complaint without basis.

https://www.practical-sailor.com/iss...e_12074-1.html
----

I really do like the Shark and I appreciate that Fiorentino has long experience. I don't think these sort of attacks help. Let me repeat; the Shark is a good product that is well through out, robust, and easy to deploy. There.

[Fi2010]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Please. I should not respond, but I will share a few facts.

NASA. Read post 82. NASA. There have been other Fi2010 references to NASA. There is nothing wrong with the study and I did not imply that there was, only that it is not related to survival storms. No problem.

Bias. Throwing the JSD off the back, intentionally, in such a way that it tangled twice. This is in obvious and known conflict with the instructions and is an apparent example of both poor seamanship and bias. I encourage the readers to view the video; it is a good video with a lot of good information. I posted above that the data was correct. I have never said that the Shark was not a good drogue. It is. It is very solid and I have no criticism of it.

PS. I did NOT bring this up, you did. I did deploy manufacture drogues and the proof is in the article. Three (Galerider, Delta Drogue, Paradrogue) are clearly shown in the water and the others are in the photos, in the background, on deck. I assume you did not actually read the article? I just reviewed the PDF to be certain, PS Sept 2016, pages 13-16. Do your homework be for you make false accusations. I also deployed smaller models, to confirm size-to-drag relationships. There were no surprises and the full-scale data was reported. None of my data conflicted with Fiorentino data, to my understanding, except for slight experimental variation. Additionally, I made it quite clear, and you earlier agreed, that size and drag vary with size and are not critically important drogue selection criteria. The Small Fiorentio was the only major manufacture that declined participation. No problem. The Shark was listed as "recommended." I don't understand the actual complaint. This is a red herring complaint without basis.

https://www.practical-sailor.com/iss...e_12074-1.html
----

I really do like the Shark and I appreciate that Fiorentino has long experience. I don't think these sort of attacks help. Let me repeat; the Shark is a good product that is well through out, robust, and easy to deploy. There.

In post 82 we were referring to NASA’s independent report on sea anchors and drogues, not report 152. We get the mix up.

It’s clear in the video that all the drogues were tossed off the back of the sailboat in the same manner. In the second JSD deployment, Zack Smith noticed the JSD rode was about to snag on the bag so he helped with the deployment. Not seeing any bad intent.

What you’re omitting is why Smith is tossing the equipment from the back of the boat. Smith is recording the initial shock loading generated by the drogues when they first inflate. It’s why Smith is rushing back to the load cell readout to observe the number fluctuations. Your highest load cell readout numbers always occur during the initial deployment. Same with storm deployment.

With the JSD or any other drogue, you typically fake the rode in a bag. The test video is not about instruction on how to use the storm drogues. Primarily for the purpose of measuring loading and how much each drogue slows the sailboat for comparison purpose.

Proper seamanship instruction is located in the Teresa Carey video. Some of the JSD instruction shown by Smith doesn’t exist in any of the JSD handouts or videos. Smith is relying on past experience deploying the JSD to fill in the missing details and to keep things as simple as possible. What Smith doesn’t show is the JSD deployment bag, which is a more recent addition.

And yes, it’s true, you’ve never made a claim “the Shark was not a good drogue.”

We believe a true drogue comparison is when you deploy only manufactured drogues. Drogues actually designed for heavy weather use. It’s how Practical Sailor conducted past tests.

Fiorentino never declined participation in your comparison. We’ve always contributed product when Nicholson or one of his associates have asked. We’ve been involved with two other PS comparisons. The e-mail exchange between you and our company and with PS editor Darrell Nicholson back our claim.

We think you said it best in an earlier post, “Cheers! It's just a water cooler conversation, after all.” So lets move on to something else.