djlewis

Yow -- now I remember that discussion. I guess I really should read it in detail. Thanks.

Your observation about an optimal tradeoff makes sense. But looking at the Zsolt video, I see an incredibly smooth blade trajectory which, it seems to me, is an important part of his stroke's effectiveness. So there is no pause or "kink" in his stroke at all, just a smooth "shape". If that's so, the the issues become what is the optimal "shape" (including the placement with respect to the water). There's probably also an invisible aspect of shape, namely the varying forces of hands on the shaft, as driven by forces in the body.

Watch this video http://www.superiorsurfsystems.com/a/j/component/content/article/25-video-blog/80-paddling-with-zsolt-szadovszki-a-demonstration-of-kayak-stroke-technique and if you can copy his stroke exactly you won’t need anything else.

Looks really nice to me. But I have question about that video, Leon.

It's hard to be sure without slowing it down, but it looks to me like Zsolt is *not* burying the blade fully before it travels backwards.

If so, does that mean I was taught wrong (which is quite possible) or is that feature particularly for wings? Looking at how smooth his stroke is, I am inclined to believe that burying the blade should indeed take a back seat to the overall dynamics. Fully burying before any backwards motion might interrupt the smoothness and efficiency -- put kind of a kink in the motion.

Make any sense?

--David

I'll leave the reports to others. Here are some pictures...

Complete set -- http://djlewis.smugmug.com/Kayaking/NSPN/NSPN-Solstice-June-22-2013/30133837_vJTC7w

And two samples -- Our fearless (level 3) facilitator briefing us on the beach...

Part of the the usual large solstice paddle fleet at the level 3 lunch stop on S. Gooseberry...

Yes, you need to argue that there's a perceptable difference, especially when viewed from a bouncing kayak. The link says:

“While the exact time of the full moon theoretically lasts just a moment, that moment is imperceptible to casual observers. The moon will appear full a couple of days before and after the actual full moon most will speak of seeing the nearly full moon as "full": the shaded strip is so narrow, and changing in apparent width so slowly, that it is hard for the naked eye to tell in a casual glance whether it’s present or on which side it is.”

If I may presume, I believe MForti's point was exactly that -- the "full moon" effectively extends for for "a couple of days" so his personal preference for Sunday was not in conflict with the concept of "full moon paddle" even though it did not occur at "the exact time of the full moon". So he had made all the argument needed. At least that's how I understood it. Shall we bet on it?

probably -- two of us.

As advertised, it was mellow. David, Judy, Pablo and I were not bothered by the traffic jams delaying some participants, a couple of high speed ferries that passed within 2 miles of our group, the perfect weather, tiny waves, and the wind that helped us on our return against the imperceptible tide. No frustration on the lack of chocolate covered cherries at lunch.

Who knows? Maybe 9 miles with lunch at Georges.

Great discussion on retirement since I seem to be only one foolish enough to continue working.

Thanks for a great paddle David, Judy, and Pablo.

Al

Yes -- nice paddle. Thanks to Al for posting, Judy & Pablo for participating.

I get 7.5 nautical miles for the trip, with the circuit of Georges. Since Al likes statute miles, that's about 8.5.

--David

I'm a likely participant -- sounds like the perfect mellow paddle to finally start my season (with obeisance to the Goddesses and Gods of the Sea -- may they not zing us for my presumptive chutzpah).

What time does it start?

What's the water temp -- shorts and t-shirt yet, or still wet suit?

Thanks. --David

FWS proposed delisting the gray wolf across the Lower 48 last week. I'm wondering whether someone has made a retaliatory strike ...

You'd think either of those would make news, and I don't see any. Probably just a server bonking with nobody on duty -- and that may be budgetary.

The web site for the Parker River / Plum Island Refuge is down... http://www.fws.gov/northeast/parkerriver/

in fact, the whole Fish & Wildlife Service likewise... http://www.fws.gov

Anybody know why? Please don't tell me it's budget cuts, the "sequester" etc.

--David

Whatever their biological age, it seems their emotional age was around 2 or 3.

From the 303 website:

"All About Vinyl

303 Products on Vinyl

An enlarged sideview of common vinyl fabric would show raw PVC (polyvinyl chloride) covered by a thin layer of plastic called the "topcoat". The topcoat is the part of the vinyl you can see and touch. To keep vinyl fabric soft and flexible, manufacturers add agents known as plasticizers to the raw PVC. A major function of the topcoat is to hold in these plasticizers, which otherwise would quickly evaporate. If the topcoat is damaged or degraded, plasticizers begin to escape leading to embrittlement/cracking/failure.

Protecting the topcoat, then, is the most crucial aspect of properly maintaining vinyl, and the subject with which vinyl manufacturers are most concerned. Vinyl manufacturers agree on and recommend the following. ""

since 303 restores the flexibility of rubber and vinyl materials (hatch covers for example). I'm sticking to my belief that it also contains plasticizers. But since the actual mixture is proprietary, it will have to remain a belief. http://xkcd.com/386/

best

Phil

If 303 contained plasticizers, wouldn't they mention it here, where they discuss plasticizers already in vinyl? There's a similar discussion about tires. BTW, your assumption that 303 restores the flexibility of rubber is circular reasoning, isn't it -- assuming what we are trying to establish. I think people's informal, anecdotal impressions hardly constitutes proof -- easy to be swayed by expectations. You'd really need a blind, controlled experiment -- two pieces of rubber handled exactly the same -- both exposed equally to UV, then one treated and one not, and then stored in the dark for a while so the 303 evaporates.

Meanwhile, the strongest circumstantial evidence that 303 lacks these properties is that the manufacturer doesn't advertize them. Why in the world would a manufacturer trying to market a product omit such important and attractive features if their produce really possessed them?!

I think non-petroleum silicone grease is a good candidate for restoring deteriorated ("dried out") gaskets and hatch covers. In fact, the 303 literature specifically says it does not contain silicone grease.

Anyway, feel free to keep practicing this ritual -- can't hurt, can it? Like rubbing a rabbit's foot. ;-)

• The right to navigate includes the right to conduct any activity involving the movement of a boat, vessel, float, or other watercraft, as well as the transport of people and materials and related loading and unloading activity

What the heck does that mean? Interpreted in "plain English" it seems to include landing, launching, exiting and entering your kayak as well a removing and loading gear.

Does that mean I can land, jump out, open a hatch, remove my lunch from the hatch and eat it (the lunch, not the hatch)? Eating lunch on the beach thus arguably "involves" unloading said lunch from said boat. To be sure, I can jump up every few minutes to move my boat a bit -- something we often do anyway when we don't pull it high enough on a rising tide.

The thing to remember about 303 is that it is not only a UV protectant for rubber, but also for vinyl, plastic, fiberglass, leather and even gelcoat! So why would it contain stuff -- plasticizers, conditioners (like silicone) -- especially for rubber. Those might in fact hurt materials other than rubber.

http://www.303products.com/media/pdfs/303-pamphlet-techfacts-2009_edited.pdf

http://www.303products.com/tech-facts-brochures/

Read the section of that brochure on tires -- 303 protects against UV and ozone -- but that's it.

Look, my only point is that there is no reason to put 303 on gaskets before summer storage. Much more important is to put the suit in total darkness. In fact, I'd say to put the suit in a totally dark place *always* when not in use, even in winter -- I roll it up inside a duffel. Otherwise, exposure to even mild light over days and weeks will do as much or more damage as 8 hours in the sun when paddling.

Well, if you don't put the suit in the dark, then I guess 303 is good to minimize UV degradation due to the length of time in non-dark storage. But it ain't conditioning the rubber, just keeping it from UV and ozone degradation in the first place.

I researched this a bit more, and I think that oxidation due to contact with ozone, in addition to UV exposure, also causes latex to "dry out". (I'm pretty sure it isn't actual drying, that is, loss of water or some kind of oil content.) Perhaps the ozone effect is what I intuitively meant by "chemical" oxidation. I don't know how quickly ozone-based rubber oxidation works, but maybe a coat of 303 does keep air, and therefore, ozone away from the latex. The question in my mind is even if so whether if it matters much, especially if you store the suit in a dark, confined place, like rolled up inside a duffel.

The other thing I ran across is that silicon grease *is* a latex conditioner, if it's without petroleum products. That's interesting, because winter kayak surfers use silicon grease on their face to protect against the cold air and water. I wonder if non-petroleum silicon grease would therefore be something to put on gaskets to do what many hope/think 303 does, apart from UV protection.

<Best solution is to use paddling gear as often as possible and wear it out before such damage can occur>

Quite right, too, Lawson-san! (Says he, who <may> have inadvertantly instigated this thread, although the Chief Whip -- I mean DL -- is only a month or two late...)

PS: I also suspect that there might be a danger of gaskets drying out, even when stored in darkness?

Thanks for stepping up, Godfrey K. Your case is working its way through the bureaucracy and you will be informed of your sentence in due time.

Meanwhile, that's pretty much my point. I'm sure Herr Doktor Professor Allen will have the ultimate truth, but I think that latex does not "dry out" -- it oxidizes, but only from external causes such as UV, but also chemical. Or at least, any spontaneous oxidation in the absence of such causes -- in a dark, dry place -- will be very very minimal and slow.

Ah, but 303 feels so virtuous on those gaskets -- make's 'em look all shiny and new. I just doubt it really does anything meaningful in the absence of UV.

As I said, there are rubber conditioners which will restore some of the lost functionality to deteriorated latex, but I don't know if you'd want them on a gasket that fits tightly around your neck. Anybody know? I once used one on the rubber roller in a printer and it worked well. It's just that 303 is not such a conditioner.

UV blockers are one form of antioxidants. Absorption of high energy light promotes one of two electrons in a stable pair to a higher energy state, which may allow it to react with oxygen depending on the electron spins. Sacrificial UV absorbers like sunscreen or 303 reduce this reaction. Sorry for the complexity, but I'm actually grossly simplifying it.

taking off the geek hat now

best

Phil

Ok, thanks for the geekery.

But the questions the others ask go right to the point. And I don't think it's as geeky as you fear.

Is there any point in applying 303 to the gaskets if you plan to keep the whole suit in total darkness until next fall?

I think not, because it's not chemical anti-oxidation that is happening here, but simply the blocking of UV from causing oxidation of the latex, by -- as you put it -- the 303 molecules unselfishly sacrificing themselves to block/neutralize UV. If there's no UV, then there's no need to block it.

But is it UV really -- or how much? My tale is this... I once (long ago) left my drysuit on a hanger in an indirectly lighted area -- light, but not direct sunlight. Result -- rotten gaskets in the fall, when I took it off the hanger and tried to use it.

So now I put it in an opaque duffel bag in a dark closet, and the gaskets do just fine. And I don't put 303 on them, because, as I said, there is no UV to block.

Someone -- I won't say who -- recently posted the phrase "303 antioxidant" in a message here.

I believe that 303 is a "protectant", and has no anti-oxidation properties, whatever those might be. Let's look at the product spec, at

http://www.303products.com/303r-aerospace-protectant.html...

Key Benefits

• Keeps treated surfaces looking new
• Prevents fading and cracking
• Restores lost color and luster
• Powerful UV blockers
• Anti-Static, repels smudges, dust, soiling and staining
• Matte finish with no oily and greasy residue
• Easy to use, simply spray on and wipe dry

Looks to me that 303 is primarily a UV blocker, and that accounts for "Prevents fading and cracking" and "Keeps treated surfaces looking new". The property "Restores lost color and luster" is, in my experience, a temporary effect of rubbing something slightly oily on latex, and is not the same as restoring deteriorated latex.

I know lots of folks attribute other features to 303 apart from preventing damage from UV/sun exposure, like rubber "conditioning", but it seems like those are not actual properties of 303. There are things such as rubber conditioners (which you can look up), which *may* recondition rubber and/or prevent deterioration even if there is UV exposure. Whether you'd want those on your neck is up to you.

Just an old bugaboo of mine. Sorry for any controversy that might ensue.

--David

Wow, Ed Markey is a Greenland roller? Who knew. I'm voting for him! Will he help me with a butterfly roll?

Such a clever title, John. Congratulations!

I usually wait for kindle too these days, to keep from adding to already overstuffed bookshelves. But I'll make an exception here.

BTW, I see third parties are already offering new and used copies for as much as a $50 markup. Makes me realize that a lot of the aftermarket for books is kinda scammy -- amazing when you realize that Amazon lists almost everything available clearly sorted by price.

funny thing is the example sheetbend is using two lines of the same size. My understanding is that the square knot is better for that and that the sheepsbend was used for lines of differing size?

best

Phil

The sheetbend works well with lines of different color as well as different size.

--David

PS -- seriously, I think the sheetbend is considered better than a square/reef know for all splicing applications. I can't speak for wrapping birthday gifts, however.

Yes, I know all that, dear Michael; but tie them both, next to each other and then make a close inspection...you'll see what I mean!

(I had my "knots and whippings" badge as a Boy Scout, aeons ago!)

"The sheet bend is related in structure to the bowline."

A little hard to see since they are oriented oppositely along two axes, but I think Herr Doktor Professor Sir Godfrey, Knight of the Round Hull is correct...

I'm not sure, but this looks hard to load and unload. Perhaps this is an easier solution http://www.dickssportinggoods.com/product/index.jsp?productId=11317207#BVRRWidgetID

Yeah, it is a bit tricky to load and unload, especially for a 50# long boat. If alone, you put the kayak on the floor against the wall behind, pick up one end and secure the strap, then the other end. Finish by rotating the boat to go bottom against the wall. With two people, each can secure their own end while holding it. One trick is to latch the webbing in advance, so all you have to do is slide the loop over the bow or stern.That might also suffice for one person carrying a short boat, but I haven't tried it.

But hey, unless you have some kind of hoist -- and now we are getting complex and maybe expensive -- any system requires manual effort to get the boat up to the level of the holder, whatever it is. Yes, the step of securing the straps adds a complication over just dropping it into some kind of cradle. But we are kayakers -- so we are clever and resourceful, and accustomed to tricks, stupid and smart!

--David.

I use this (or something like it) -- just straps hung from supplied screw hooks -- no fancy cradles, struts or what-have-you.

Seems a bit overpriced based on the simple materials, but it works. The only possible drawback I see is that there is nothing to keep the boat away from the wall, fence or whatever is behind it. But kayaks are tough enough, and you aren't going to play pendulum games with it. For one boat bought new, I did hang the big sheet of bubble-wrap that it came with on the wall behind.

Scott -- is this what you've got, or did you rig something yourself?

http://www.amazon.com/Harmony-3-Boat-Hanger-Set/dp/B003N8AL3M

Maybe you folks already knew this, but one of the recent nor'easters blew a breach in South Beach - the beach south of the Chatham light. The means that it's possible to do a circumnavigation of Monomoy again with out a portage.

For those of you who might contemplate it - a circumnav of Monomoy takes a bit of planning - the currents run pretty fast at the southern end, and there's a shoal with a drop off that creates a fairly strong rip.

But unlike before South Monomoy and South Beach got connected, you now need to coordinate the current around the tip of S. Monomoy with the current in the new cut.

I see from this picture -- http://b.globe.com/VXkLIh -- that the new break is about where the channel comes in between Stage Harbor and N. Monomoy, which makes sense.

Doing a quick check of the current and tide tables for a clockwise circumnav, I get that max ebb around the end of S. Monomoy is about 40 minutes before high tide in Chatham harbor. So if you give yourself three hours to get from the new break to the tip of S. Monomoy, you'll be exiting the break somewhat before mid-rising-tide, which means you'll be against the current in the break, perhaps near its max.

So, the questions are: how strong is the flow in the new break and what's the timing with respect to the tides? Even if you are against the current, can you just push through and/or hop eddies? Also, being closer to high might be good if it is shallow.

Did I do that right? Somebody want to check it and do a counter-clockwise timing?

--David