The date is set

[Minnewaska]

Originally Posted by chrisncate

Well, it's all moot anyway.. after all: vessels under sail have the right of way...

I read this as sarcasm that they will ignore the right of way.

However, you do realize that the barge actually has right of way over a sailing vessel? If they run you over, you will be liable for scratching their barge.

All the best with the motorless thing. But it isn't just a motorless plan, it's a motorless plan on voluntary public display. You will have to accept some criticism or don't engage the public at all. Ask any priest, performer or politician.

[Dirtboy]

This is a crazy idea.

Thank the universe for people willing to try "crazy ideas!" Nothing was ever advanced by folks who didn't try. CnC are the type of people I admire. They aren't foolishly venturing into the world. They have studied the problem and found solutions that work for them. Folks with less imagination, confidence and/or courage may not understand. Should they find some of their ideas aren't working, they've got the ability to change.

One can tell from their political ideas that they are open, "free thinking" types, not slave to rigid concepts. This open mindedness will come in handy when novel solutions are called for.

My take on things: You have a boat best suited for open water. Deep keel and no engine is a difficult (not impossible) task in many waterways. That set-up would be difficult here on Florida's Gulf Coast as we have many narrow spots in the ICW with extreme shoals on either side. You may find sailing outside far more comfortable than inside. It's been years since I read the Lynn and Larry's books but I recall watching the weather was a large factor in their safe travels.

Good Luck to you both; Livin the dream ...........

DB

[chef2sail]

I am sure once Chris will see that manuevering in the narrow canals of the ICW will either put himself and mate at risk, or risk his boat which he has worked so hard to resurect, he will reconsider and adapt his plans just as he has in bringing the boat back to life when he faced challaneges which he had not expected.

On the other hand he may be able to accomplish this task of going motorless in a calm methodical slow way just to prove the nay sayers here wrong.

Dave

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by chrisncate

Well, it's all moot anyway.. after all: vessels under sail have the right of way...

::deadpan::

davidpm


Jay Fitzgerald... I have all three books... and I think I've re read every page at least a hundred times.. from using the solid fuel heater as a smoke bomb maker against rude jerks in an anchorage, to sculling (or faking a scull), to general life philosophy.. Jay is quite an individual. I kind of use his books as a general manual as a jumping off point for what we want to do... everyone here should read his works, even if not interested in actually doing it like this. I like him vastly more than the Pardeys (I like them too though)..

Chris,
Not taking sides in the larger debate about enginelessness, here. Just pointing out for you and others that sailing vessels in narrow channels DO NOT have the right of way over vessels restricted in ability to maneuver, which by definition includes barges and their towing vessels.

[JonEisberg]

Originally Posted by chrisncate

In this hypothetical, would a stern anchor not work for a quick stop as the tug and it's cargo go by? Why would you recommend an intentional grounding?

That could work in certain situations, of course - but what I was thinking of were some of the tightest spots one might encounter a large tow... bljones has it right, even a stern anchor might not necessarily prevent being sucked away from the bank, or swung into or close to the barge, and putting your boat aground seems a surer way of making sure she stays put during the pass...

When one travels the ICW after a while, one cannot help but be highly impressed by the level of skill, and general courtesy, of the guys who drive these big rigs... I never cease to be amazed at some of the spots they squeeze through... And they'll generally try to help other boaters out as best they can, but in many cases something like "slowing down" really isn't an option for them... Hell, half the time they're literally dredging the channel anyway, and really require considerable way on or momentum to maintain control - and even "slowing down" still doesn't do all that much to negate the hydrodynamic forces of the moving displacement of so much water in such confined places...

But, I doubt you'd bother with the Alligator-Pungo canal, anyway... As I'm pretty sure I've already mentioned in the previousl thread, going the Pamlico Sound route inside Hatteras would be the MUCH preferred way to go in a boat without an engine, IMHO... Indeed, even for those who just prefer to sail over motoring, as well, when the weather is right...

With the right planning and communication, it's possible to avoid these kinds of encounters, to a certain degree, anyway... I simply raised the subject as being one many people are a bit taken aback by on their first trip on The Ditch, most people having no prior experience being so close to a large tow in tight spots... As I've said before, I think the biggest challenge to doing the ICW without an engine would be dealing with the bridges, anyway... And, they're far more difficult to avoid...(grin)

[BubbleheadMd]

Originally Posted by chef2sail

I am sure once Chris will see that manuevering in the narrow canals of the ICW will either put himself and mate at risk, or risk his boat which he has worked so hard to resurect, he will reconsider and adapt his plans just as he has in bringing the boat back to life when he faced challaneges which he had not expected.On the other hand he may be able to accomplish this task of going motorless in a calm methodical slow way just to prove the nay sayers here wrong.

Dave

Heh heh, this is what I'm betting on. The boat looks so sweet, and the last thing I'd do after working my a$$ off, is put the boat at risk.

I understand the whole engineless desire, I just don't understand the desire to do most of the ICW that way. Too much risk, too much work, too little reward.

But like it's been said, it's his boat, his money, his dream, and he has shown the capacity for change once he realizes the obstacles.

[wingNwing]

As Jon said, the barge/tugs we've met on the ICW have invariably been courteous and professional. Hail them on VHF 13 and they'll do what they can (within the limits of their vessels) to work with you. Better yet, have Cate hail them. Unfair, but the reality is that they seem to respond better to a (knowledgeable) female voice than a male voice. Might as well use that to your advantage.

[chrisncate]

I've had it.

I have said over and over that we are not planning the ICW motorless, that if and when we do go south, I might put the o/b on (or have even installed a diesel by then), that we may not even go "inside", etc etc etc.

Enjoy the thread, I won't be participating in any more discussions about the effing ICW - motored, motorless, whatever. I'm done - have at it people.

Edit - to wordy, and this thread has ruined my day.

[LandLocked66c]

Originally Posted by wingNwing

Might as well use that to your advantage.

Waving at them topless works too! Not you though, Chris...

[dabnis]

Originally Posted by chrisncate

I've had it.

I have said over and over that we are not planning the ICW motorless, that if and when we do go south, I might put the o/b on (or have even installed a diesel by then), that we may not even go "inside", etc etc etc.

Enjoy the thread, I won't be participating in any more discussions about the effing ICW - motored, motorless, whatever. I'm done - have at it people.

Edit - to wordy, and this thread has ruined my day.

Chris, on 4-21-11 you posted: "Ok, NOW I'm asking about doing the ICW motorless " Perhaps that may be why I & others thought you might be planning to do the ICW motorless? Just a thought?

Dabnis