Brian Nystrom

Brian,

I wonder, in regular T rescue, what is the preferred positioning in respect to incoming waves. Is the rescuer holding the other kayak and facing the incoming wave? (my guess) or should he have his back to the wave with the rescuee facing the wave?

It seems to me that this can go either way, though I've had victims freak out at the sight of an incoming wave. Perhaps the best situation is the have the rescuer facing the waves, so they can give reassuring warnings about incoming waves. It's also easier to absorb breaking waves on your back that with your chest, so I would tend to put the victim in that position, since they may not be as experienced in dealing with conditions.

The hardest part of rescues in conditions is maintaining the proper orientation to the waves, as the boats will tend to broach, which puts you in a dangerous position. Ideally, you'll have a third boat available to put you on a directional tow to keep the boats oriented into the waves until the rescue is complete. This is also critical if you're near the surf zone, since you don't want to drift into it. The third boat can prevent this and potentially even move you into calmer water.

After my first try I now find sculling slightly intimidating to do it again. I think I might wait for a pool session.

Is there a preferred order of competency techniques to learn?

For example:

1. sculling

2. greenland roll

3. euro roll ... and so on ?

Sculling and bracing techniques are prerequisites for learning to roll ("gateway skills"), so learn them first. I suggest learning low bracing, high bracing, deep high bracing (capsize until you're submerged on your side, then brace back up), sculling and deep sculling (sculling while laying on the surface of the water) before you attempt to roll. Essentially, what you're trying to do is gradually learn to recover from deeper and deeper capsizes, which ultimately is the second half of a roll. The first half, capsize and setup is pretty easy.

Sculling techniques can vary dramatically, as standard Euro technique is designed to keep you out of the water using short, fast, choppy strokes, whereas Greenland sculling is always done while laying on the water, either on your back or chest, using longer, slower, smooth strokes.

A standard Greenland roll is really little different than a Palawta (sp?) roll or extended paddle roll with a Euro paddle. This is arguably the easiest roll to learn, as it's not strenuous and doesn't require precise timing or dramatic hip action.

IMO, not only would this rescue NOT work in rough conditions, it would be dangerous. The reasons are:

- At NO point does the rescuer have a firm grip on the victim's boat. Laying across the hull without something to grab onto may be stable, but it's NOT secure and in rough water, it's quite likely that the rescuer would lose his grip and capsize.

- Having the victim crawl up on the rescuer's deck just makes the above problem worse, as it makes the rescuer's boat less stable and subject to the effects of the victim if he should lose his balance.

- Dragging a boat that far across one's deck and keeping it there for any length of time is an invitation to injury. One good wave and the rescuer could end up with a face full of kayak and/or get slammed onto his aft deck by the boat. Having the victim on the rescuer's foredeck prevents him from leaning his boat toward the victim's boat and using gunwale to lever the victim's boat out of the water. He has to lift it up and across, which is strenuous and could result in injury.

- The rescuer must maneuver between the victim and his boat. That leaves the victim at least momentarily without any support or conact and also makes him prone to drifting away from both boats. There is also the possibility of the rescuer hitting the victim with his boat, which would be pretty likely in waves.

- On every kayak I've seen, the foredeck is higher than the aft deck. That means that the victim will probably have to pull himself higher out of the water to get onto the foredeck of the rescuer's boat than he would to get onto the aft deck of his own boat. What's the point?

In contrast, a standard T rescue is fast, has minimal time with the victim's boat on the rescuer's deck, creates a very stable platform with a firm grip on the victim's boat, requires less maneuvering and never leaves the victim without support or contact with a boat. Even on a boat with no decklines, a T rescue would be more secure. It's also a technique that's been "battle proven".

Considering that this rescue doesn't offer any obvious advantages over a traditional T rescue (speed, ease of execution, stability), I don't see any payback for the increased risk involved. Essentially, this seems to be a solution in search of a problem, just another flatwater trick that would be worse than useless in conditions.

Suz, thanks for revealing the "secret"; it's so interesting to read about the inner workings of these moves. You must need really good firm contact between knee/leg and boat. I think I might be too loose. I've also heard the advice to practice using a paddle float. Florrie

I have a somewhat different take on this. The key to being able to scull/balance brace easily is in arching your back and keeping the hull as flat on the water as possible. You have to actively rotate the boat away from you, since if you allow the boat to roll toward you, it will push you under. The idea is for the boat to support as much of your weight as possible (basically from the hips down). You need to keep your head back as well (flat to the water), as lifting it will cause you to sink. If you look at photos of people balance bracing, you'll see that the boat is relatively flat on the water, their back is arched and their face is just above the water.

That said, the boat and how it fits your body are critical components. The best situation is a boat with a low aft deck and a relatively wide coaming at the hips, both of which help you to keep your body as low to the water as possible.

Ahhh...I see a legend in the making.

From this day forward, folks will whisper tales of "The Ghost Kayak of Lanesville" around their campfires...

They will pay homage to the "Brave Elizabeth" who risked life and limb to reach said kayak, only to find it... *gasp*...EMPTY!

Please tell me this now legendary kayak is not a Swifty!

Thanks, I'll give the fiberglass cleaner a try, but they may be too far gone for that. I took another look at them and they are getting pretty soft with little chunks pulling off.

The velcro is brilliant Ernie... Never would have thought of it and that's probably what I will end up doing.

John

While that definitely is a good idea, you need to have something solid to stick it to. If the saddles are gooey or they're falling apart, the Velcro is not likely to stay stuck. If you wax them or coat them with any type of preservative, you'll also have adhesion problems. If you can clean them with a solvent as was suggested and get them down to a solid surface, you should be OK. If not, you'll need to try something else.

I agree that they're probably breaking down and IMO the easiest thing to do is to cover them. Linda made some covers for our racks from fleece and elastic and they've held up for several years.

Brian:

As I recall you also have an AA and based on my 2004 version it also started with or got an arched back deck along the way. As well as a day hatch which is a PITA at times. It seems folks have speculated and swapped pictures of hull changes in the AA as well and often in a confusing manner. I wonder how many molds there are and what the unintended variations might be from boat to boat. Arched deck is one thing, variations in hull shape might be something else.

Yeah, the AA seems to have had at least three major variations, though the change around '95 seems to only have been to the deck, adding the arch aft. I think that's also when they switched to a cable skeg, but I'm not absolutely sure.

AFAIK, the Pintail has only had two hull versions and the deck changes were made at the same time the hull was changed, so there are really only two versions of the boat.

Of course, with both boats there are individual variations that were custom made for customers with various pump, hatch, compass recess and deck fitting arrangements.

When the Pintail came out it was probably compared to the Romany (same Anas Acuta origin). Depending on market reception and comments, maybe they felt the need to tame it a bit? And after two iterations, they came out with the Avocet, which maybe a bit closer to the Romany? Just speculating…

Well, they did make the new version more Romany-esque, with fuller bilges, an arched aft deck and the option of a keyhole cockpit, but the boats are still very different in look, feel and performance.

My husband Bob C has a 1991 Pintail, which I guess is a Classic. It doesn't have a day hatch, has an ocean cockpit, and rope skeg. It also has beautiful lines, but I think that's a Valley characteristic.

Great boat, fun to paddle, and a real rock/surf hound.

I second Christopher's opinion about Brian Nystrom knowing his Valley boats...

Deb M

I think Deb and Bob have hit the jackpot. Linda and I both have '93 Pintails and IIRC, the earliest ones I've seen have been '91's. That's hardly definitive, but it should be pretty close. Then again, it seems unlikely that they would come out with a boat in '91 and redesign it in '95 (and not for the better IMO).

Time is your enemy. If the boat is in a location where it can readily be seen and accessed, it's just a matter of time until someone comes along who is willing to make the effort required to steal it. While you can certainly try to secure it better, insurance is probably your best answer. Check to see if it was covered under your homeowner's policy. If not, see if you can get a rider on the policy to cover your next boat.

The Eddyline took some heavy hits this past trip. The boat is made of some kind of high grade plastic that at 1st looks like other composite boats.

Cleaning it up, scrubing it up, the other day I see that I have a pretty deep divot with a bit of a crack leading from either side it.

It's all pretty small and not taking on water, but I figured given "Murphy's law" sooner or later it will take another hit right at that same spot.

I'm wondering does anybody do small repairs like that around here ?

Usually with plastic I would be tempted to drill a small pin hole on either end of the crack to stop it from spreading and maybe a drop of epoxy to fill the holes, but with the deep divot and being a boat I don't think that would be the thing to do.

thought I would ask some advice.. or a person who is good with that sort of thing...thanks

The first thing you should do is to contact Eddyline and get their recommendations. Your boat material is akin to polycarbonate and it can be repaired using a variety of materials. You can bond similar material to it with methyl methacrylate and perhaps it would be possible to dissolve plastic in it to make a filler paste (maybe there's something like that on the market?). Epoxy will bond to is just fine, but you'd need to tint it if you want to try to hide the repair.

Ed,

You're right that drawing the line between responsible and irresponsible is difficult. However, I don't think anyone is trying to suppress people from having "adventures" in the back country. When it comes to drawing the line, there are a lot of factors to be considered:

- Did the person have appropriate experience and skills for the activity?

- Did they have appropriate equipment and the knowledge to use it?

- Did they leave instructions and a route plan with anyone?

- Were the predominant weather appropriate for the activity (freak, sudden weather shifts excluded)

- Did they act properly when problems occurred or did their actions make rescue more difficult/time consuming?

- Was a rescue actually needed?

- What caused the need for a rescue?

Obviously, an activity that would be an extreme risk for one person may be a cakewalk for another, so you can't simply state that a particular activity is irresponsible or that anyone engaging in it is negligent. That's one reason that I expect that many, if not most of these fine cases will end up in court, though it would probably be more efficient to have expert arbitrators decide what's fair.

Jeff,

The reason that the CG and other military organization don't - and shouldn't - charge for rescues is that their costs are paid for with federal tax dollars. As you said, they often regard rescues as training for more "serious" missions. State agencies are another story entirely, especially in NH.

<<snip>>

$260K is not small potatoes and in NH the governor does not spend that much on a couple of lavish parties. That is why NH has one of the lowest total tax rates in the country vs. places like CA. Note how now CA is in a serious financial jam and NH is not.

<<snip>>

I absolutely acknowledge that NH is one of the most frugal of states...it is a pretty good example for others. I merely point out that states move big numbers around, and $260k is very very small on that scale.

To wit: NH unrestricted revenue for FY2008: 1.98 B$ (that is billion, not million)

(about 30% from business taxes, much of the rest from various luxury taxes)

NH spending...about 21.5% on genl government, only about 15% on education.

21.5% on "general government"? Are you sure there wasn't carpet there?

(hot dog stands make great photo ops for frugal politicians, but 21.5% of state spending is a lot of money).

I think they can afford to set aside a quarter million to rescue souls - stupid or not...especially as they make a lot of revenue actively attracting folks to their outdoors.

Jeff,

While $260 isn't much in relation to the STATE budget, the cost of rescues is paid for by NH Fish and Game, which is a grossly underfunded agency. It receives no money from the state, with all of it's funding coming from hunting/fishing/trapping licenses and a few other fees. The money spent on rescues is a huge burden on the department and I absolutely support them levying fines where appropriate in order to recoup rescue cost. The amount of the fine in this case is eye-opening and I suspect that it was done as a way to make an example of this case and hopefully make people think twice about doing something stupid in the backcountry. I would be very surprised if they didn't settle for a considerably small amount, as it's going to court.

Let's not get all PC here. The bottom line is that he died because he was irresponsible. He had a PFD, but didn't wear it, despite the fact that he couldn't swim. I hate to see anyone die needlessly and his death was his own fault, plain and simple. Sometimes the truth hurts, but that's life. It's too bad that the article didn't state that if he had simply been wearing his PFD, he would have survived. I'll bet his girlfriend doesn't paddle without hers on again.

So the perimeter of the tapered area should be slightly larger than the larger quarter sized cloth patch?

Exactly.

And finally (probably a dumb question) can I apply both layers on the outside at the same time ? or do I have to wait for the first to cure ?

Definitely apply them at the same time. The best way to do it is to apply the first layer, then apply the second without adding more epoxy. Just push it into place with a fingertip (gloved) or a paintbrush and let the epoxy that's there wet it out. That way, you end up with a better glass-resin ratio. Also, don't be afraid to add more glass if it seems appropriate. Most repairs require 5-6 layers of 6 oz glass or 3-4 layers of 9 oz glass to equal the original glass thickness. Again, this is great practice for doing larger repairs.

A couple of other tips:

- Although I prefer to use epoxy for repairs, for something small like this using polyester resin makes the process simpler, since it's completely compatible with gelcoat and it cures faster than epoxy.

- When you buy your gelcoat, make sure to get "finish" or "waxed" gelcoat. The more common "laminating" gelcoat won't cure in the presence of air. Although with a small repair on a smooth surface like this, it's easy to seal off the repair with Mylar or polyethylene film, when you're doing larger repairs on more challenging surfaces like keels and hard chines, it can be a real hassle to get a good air seal. Having finish gelcoat on hand is a major convenience.

I got some advice on fiberglass repair and checked out David Nystroms site.

I didn't realize that my uncle David had kayak repair pics on the web, too.

I think I could manage the repair. However before I get started I thought I would ask for further advice. The hole is very small; below a certain size is there a better way to do a repair like this ? (someone suggested just sealing it with 5200, but I want to do the right thing).

The pic looks like pretty significant damage, albeit to a small area. To fix it properly, you're still going to have to remove all the damaged material and taper the outside of the the gelcoat and glass as you would for a larger repair. Reinforcing a small area like this from the inside is easy. Once you've done that, cut a couple of pieces of glass using a quarter and a nickle as patterns, then epoxy them in place. Once it's cured, clean it and apply gelcoat over it. Sand, buff and you're done. One advantage of doing this is that you'll learn valuable repair techniques on this small repair, so you'll feel more comfortable when the time comes to do a larger one.

I don't have any good place on my kayak to attach a cable, so I really have to use a Lasso.

You're seat doesn't have cheek plates that you could run a cable behind? I'm not questioning your use of lasso cables (I have some and they work well) but with most boats you have the option of running a cable behind one or both cheek plates, then around the rack. It's a cheaper, if less convenient solution than lasso cables.

Ok. Let's say that the seat is bearable but I'm still wondering about the backrest...do you think that filling the gap with foam or some inflatable bag is a way to go ?

If you go the foam backrest route (a good idea, IMO), you only need to make it 6-8" wide. There's no need to fill the entire space behind the seat.

Me? I put my trusty untethered blunt-tip Gerber River knife on the PFD shoulder in 2000 when I got the PFD and it's still there. It has unjammed countless skegs, tightened RDFs, spread its share of peanut butter and even cut a couple of lines in non-emergency situations. I've used it as a screwdriver far more than as a knife.

In general, I find that rescue knives I've tried (my own and those off others' vests) have surprising difficulty cutting through a typical 1/4" or 3/8" tow rope. I mean, it's a lot of sawing, not the imagined slice through butter. Just had the experience last weekend on Bangs Is.: a borrowed knife could not make a dent on abandoned twisted nylon 1/2" rope using the straight side of the blade. The serrated side worked after hacking and sawing back and forth about 10-15 times. Conclusions: most knives are dull or become so, rope is far tougher than you'd think, and serrated blades are better rescue devices.

From what I've seen the popular Gerber River knives have the worst edges out of the package. It appears that they actually plate the blade after they sharpen it, which prevents rust, but results in a dull, rounded edge. This is odd, since in general they make quality knives that are very sharp when you buy them. The River Knives absolutely must be sharpened before use, otherwise they're just plastic-handled pry bars.

With any knife, you should check the edge periodically - even if it hasn't been used - and touch it up if necessary. If it's not shaving sharp, it's not sharp enough. And no, I wouldn't suggest that you test a serrated blade by trying to shave with it.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q209waterproofgroup/

This review covers several waterproof cameras. For those of you who like to read the last chapter first the conclusion is that the Canon D10 gets first place and the runner up is the Pentax Optio W60.

None of them has an optical viewfinder, which makes them all worthless, IMO.

I can't get into the whole "knife in a PFD pocket" thing. I regard a cutting tool the same way I regard my radio, if I REALLY need it, I'm not going to have the luxury of fumbling around unzipping a pocket with gloves on and opening a knife (or pulling one from a sheath). IMO, it needs to be on the outside, accessible with one hand, either hand. However, I don't carry a knife as I prefer a rescue hook for safety reasons. I've had tethered sheath knives come loose and flop around and I won't put myself in that position ever again. Forgoing the tether is not an option either, as a knife on the bottom of the ocean is obviously worthless in an emergency.

FWIW, I do carry a folding knife, in a drybag, in my day hatch with my food. Gotta be able to spread peanut butter, right?

Cables, tools and such are available and most marine suppliers. For the best prices on these parts and tools, check out stores that cater to commercial fishermen, as they seem to have much lower prices than the national boating chains.

IIRC, United Divers in Somerville is one of the more popular local places for seal replacement.

"Stupid is as stupid does"