[sailingdog]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Yeah Dog - that was your statement and I now understand the clarification above. BUT - you're still making some "definitive" statements that, all things equal, don't quite make sense. For example:

1. Your bolded statement that a chute anchor "doesn't yield at all" doesn't make sense. The HWS books I've read say that you do get 1-2 knots of leeward motion with a chute. Didn't you say that the JSD gives you essentially the same relative leeward speed (1-2 knots) - thereby "negating the need for steering and allowing the crew to drink heavily down below" (paraphrasing here) - again, like the chute? I do understand your point about the advantage of progressive loading of the JSD - and that makes a lot of sense. But not this other stuff.

2. Next, your statement "That doesn't even include the damage to the steering gear that can occur to a boat that is bow to seas." doesn't quite hold up either. First, this is only true IF the chute rode gets enough slack (as Genie mentioned) for the boat to "fall" back off a wave with enough force to damage the rudder. Though this assumption is certainly theoretically valid - I've not seen or read a lot of evidence that it's a widespread problem if the deployment is done correctly (which is another issue). Again, the chute technique IS in all of the HWS books I've read. And a lot of people seem to swear by it.

When the JSD isn't under a load, it effectively hangs straight down from the transom of the boat... since the terminal end is weighted... under varying loads, it will have the portion nearest the boat horizontal and then curve downwards. As it loads up, more of it will come under tension and horizontal, and it will straighten out loading progressively as more cones become actively involved in resisting the tension.

The parachute sea anchors are binary devices—either they're under load or they're not. The shock loading that occurs when a boat loads a parachute anchor is a sudden, one time thing, rather than the progressive loading seen with the JSD. Until the rode tightens completely the boat is free to move, unlike what happens with the JSD, where the rode is loaded to some degree all of the time.

Now that brings us to the original question above - which is still open - and which comes into play with your statement about the "serious damage" incurred if a boat is bow-on...

3. If the boat does NOT fall off the wave - and is effectively held in place with 1-2 knots of leeward motion - and is hit with a 20 knot breaking wave, which end of the boat takes that breaking wave with less serious damage?

If the wave hits the bow and breaks, the boat is far more likely to be rolled than if the boat is hit while lying stern to the breaking wave. This has been proven in USCG tank testing... Even if the cockpit is damaged a bit, the damage is likely to far less than if the boat is rolled.

As for avoiding breakers, it really isn't possible to avoid them intentionally. That only happens with great luck. However, if you read anything about the JSD on the website I've linked previously, you'd understand that the JSD is designed to help a boat survive a strike by a breaking wave. It would seriously help if you stopped trolling and actually went and did some reading on the Jordan Series Drogue website... which has a lot of good information you've obviously never bothered to read.