Pintail

<Accordingly, my 18-foot sea kayak is registered and titled in Florida> Titled? How, pray, do you address your kayak, then, Sir Leon? Is it Mister Kayak or Miss -- I mean: Ms.? ("Curiouser and curiouser", as Alice once said)

Where are those two spots, do we know (do <you> know, Inverseyourself?) I want to know -- especially that beautiful little wave in first part. No -- <both> of them!

There is one aspect on which no one has touched: that of bracing. Forget, for a moment, that this race was staged between a proper kayak (Leon's QCC) and some obese specimen of an SOT (whatever that might be!) and imagine it, if possible, designed into a real kayak. What would happen in rough water or any sort of substantial waves? Answer: it would topple/capsize -- no bracing available! Every stroke with a real paddle is a brace -- not so? -- regardless of which plane the movement of the blade and this is simply not there for John Doe-Paddler when he is busy working his triceps and quadriceps as he pedals (not paddles). So change the title of thread, Leon, to Peddling v Paddling? (Likewise, change that man's name to John Doe-Pedaler)

Like Dan F, I started to take the survey (participate in?); but soon realized that I could not answer objectively since I had never even heard of "Meet Up" (Funny: I had told KevinB that I was interested in the group that <he> started but must have missed something, because I was unaware of that Meet Up message board -- before looking at that site, I had <no idea> of what it was). Anyhow, without experience of Meet Up, I cannot see how I can answer informatively. Neither do I see the point of changing now -- how is it seen to be (possibly) an improvement? I would be heart-broken if all the history buried somewhere in the archives of this website were to disappear. Is it a matter of being cheaper to manage or something like that? (We have always had money in the bank) Until someone can enlighten me, I shall be set against change, I daresay.

Andy, far be it for me to try to discourage you; but <when> is this going to be of practical use to you? I doubt you would be able to take any sort of bearing with accuracy in anything but a calm sea, for one thing -- and, for another, if you have done your homework before getting on the water, then why should taking accurate bearings be important? Kayaking is of limited range, as a form of transport in daily terms (well, how far can you paddle in a day?), so how accurate is accurate enough? As for bearings needed to avoid collision, a rough bearing is all that is needed by mark-one eyeball, surely? In other words, it is one thing to navigate on a sailing yacht offering the luxury of a chart table or the flight-deck of an old B707; quite another to try navigation from the precarious perch of a heaving kayak, which (in my opinion) is why navigation (for us) needs to be a practical, abbreviated business. I admire John Huth's encouragement to make ourselves familiar with not getting lost (and, in any case, I have already passed exams in practical and plotting navigation); but us lot are hardly ever out of sight of shore and hence my assertion that our navigation is mostly of the seat-of-the-pants sort -- so why make matters more complicated? By the way, one should get used to using the term "magnetic" after taking any sort of bearing -- that fellow in the second video did not -- to remind one's self to add or subtract variation when plotting...

I don't understand or follow your reasoning at all, Inverseyourself...apologies! In any case, the River Cam is <very> languid and slow-moving, due to the flatness of that part of the country -- I know it, I assure you. Does it have any bearing on the question? I don't know, honestly...it will take a Leon to explain it to me! (And you always know when he has time on his hands: his academic questions and hypotheses abound -- in winter-time!) ;^)

Curiously, in the UK, the old adage is to do with shepherds and not sailors...thus "Red sky at night, shepherds delight; red sky in the morning, shepherds warning..."

Gene, a word of warning (this is of course subjective) -- avoid "Sex Wax", commonly used by surf-boarders, I think: it gave me blisters, when I tried it. New England Small Craft always sold a good one...(cannot remember the brand name, though). Last poster wrote: "I had a way to slippery..." and I <assume> meant "I had a way-too slippery..."? I suppose that that is what "texting" does to you? It took me a few moments to work it out. Oh, dear...

Oh, dear, Suzanne: this is going to be a very tough decision to make...

#10 for me! (#4 sounds quite wet-fart-like" to my ears! How do I know...?) ;^)

Regarding "the myth" of red lighting (and BMW, I think, use it in their cars?), I can tell you that Cessna dropped red cockpit lighting about forty-five years ago and replaced it with white, rheostat-controlled lighting. That should be worth considering... Who on earth reads maps (sorry: charts) at night? In fact, who goes anywhere at night? Shouldn't mortals be tucked up tight in their beds? If anything is needed, perhaps a small-size glow-stick underneath one of those detachable compasses that are held in place with bungees. Surely you only need your compass heading? Oy, vey...

Interesting, very interesting... Re this comment, however: <...all the instantaneous addition of mass is perpendicular to the orientation of the frictional surface...> This is surely wrong: when running forwards and jumping into said conveyance, there certainly <is> a forward component...Phil? Anyhow, I was always under the impression that Jack and Jill went up the hill...for a spot of...how's yer father? ;^)

Ed, I emphatically do not wish to appear argumentative; but it is hardly amazing -- can you think of <any> musical instrument, the manner of manufacture of which has greatly changed? Violins are made in <exactly> the same way they have been made, these past four hundred years. (Pianos -- perhaps, yes, in the case of materials used for the frames) (Oh, and some brass instruments that have gained valves) Has Mr. Hazard <officially> retired, now?

We-ell, Sir Leon: those cars were ridiculously under-powered and he probably never used to get above 45mph...? Now I am a non-bow-line type, myself (except occasionally, for a long trip); but I say each to his or her own taste. Personally, I do usually have two straps holding the boat on the front bar of my rack and then the loose ends are lashed to the bar, thus obviating any <reliance> solely on the actual buckle (though I have never had any problem with one, in nearly twenty years of carrying boats on the roof -- those springs have all been coated with silicone grease) Neither am I in the slightest bit concerned about the roof-rack coming off the roof -- my car has fore-and-aft rails within the roof to which the rack is firmly bolted, which is the strongest and most reliable system of which I know. The crossbar clamps cannot come off. Marc, I hope you have been well-entertained in this thread, which seems to have caused all sorts of long-forgotten names to crawl out into the open again...I also reckon you can quite easily devise a slip-knot to go around your monkey's fist? It'll be fine! No need to be overly-scientific... (Here's looking at you, BrianN! Greetings, old bean)

...and he is not the only kayaker among them, Paul! There are three or four who paddle.

<...which 303 product should I use? There appear to be several> What you need is 30350 Aerospace Protectorant, dark(-ish) blue label. Most boating shops stock it.

Well-said, Suzanne. I defer to you!

Greg, welcome. I understand from where you are coming; but, frankly, for the money being asked for that Solstice, you are not generally going to get into any composite boat. You would <like> a Tiderace or P&H boat; but you will be nowhere near their secondhand value at that sort of money (I'm afraid). A used Cetus might be found for around 1600 (go into the sold section of the classifieds and have a look and keep a regular eye on the classifieds on Paddling.net). Now: should you buy the Solstice to do up for re-sale? Problem: boats are simply not selling at present -- some of us have had a hard time selling ours of late. I never thought the Current Design kayaks as being as well-built as most British boats (subjective view, this: I have only had Brit ones, myself) and perhaps this particular design <is> rather dated? Modern boats seem to have more rocker for playfulness; but you know all about that, paddling a Skerray (I have one of those, myself, too! Lovely boat! As much rocker as a Pintail; but because of its generous girth, once you get it <right> up on edge, the ends come way up out of the water and thus allow it to turn on a tickie -- sorry, a dime! Perfect boat for rock-play) If you can buy it for 400, go for it -- as a boat on which to learn repair work, knowing you might own it for a while; but I do not see it much as a step-up from what you have. Speed is not so important: any respectable group will travel at the pace of the slowest participant. I suggest that you join NSPN and come along on some trips with us! There is plenty of summer remaining...

Peter, you have a PM from me, myself...

Lucky you: I always thought Cushing to be private property?

I see you are quite right, for there it is in my Oxford, too! Well, you learn something every day -- I would have expected it to need an apostrophe. However, the need for an abbreviation still amuses me -- four letters need shortening? Same thing with "yak" -- saving <two> letters? Oy, vey! Apologies: I retract the original complaint.

I realize I am a day late, BigBird; but was the minimum speed limit a problem? Quote: <...Anywhere along the MA Pike...> Secondly (lookout: language police at work, this time): a "pike" is a type of weapon for spearing your enemy or perhaps even removing their head! Perhaps you meant " 'Pike" with an apostrophe? Or, better, turnpike? (It's exactly the same thing with members who write about their "yaks", when I am sure they do not mean an Asian beast of burden) That woman who wrote "Eats Shoots and Leaves" started this -- bless her heart!

Granowitz-san, I wonder during what time-frame you were at the cove? I must have arrived around mid-day, paddled and hung around until around 1730...

Well, <any> day on the water is a good day -- of course -- but this day (Tuesday 18th) was good because of warm (no, hot!) sunshine and swells in which to play along the edge. I was working all along Folly Cove, then towards Halibut Point (think "haul about" and you have a clue as to the real naming process), then turned around, thinking to go back to the cove from which I had started in order to put in some practice, when I thought for an instant that I saw a kayaker, far seawards. I stared hard at the spot; but...nothing! Then...something very dark, moving quickly in the water; then another. Fins: tall dorsal fins -- and lots of them! The penny dropped: there was an enormous school of dolphins seawards of my position (I was about two hundred yards offshore, between Halibut and Folly, but closer to the former). There appeared to be dozens of them, perhaps hundreds, covering an acre or two, at a guess. One nearby lobster boat turned to follow their progress -- observing and not engaged in fishing (too many souls on board) -- and there was one other small fishing craft following them. I estimate that some of them came within thirty yards of me and I even saw one of these turn a complete somersault, high out of the water -- exquisite! It took about ten minutes for the entire lot of them to pass and they seemed to be moving further out to sea, northwards. They were gone as quickly and quietly as they came; but they entirely made my day! Now: species? I am thinking these several (Can anyone indicate which ones are most likely to be seen hereabouts?): Atlantic Spotted (Stenella frontalis), Short-beaked Common (Delphinus delphis) or simply the Common Bottlenose (Tursiops truncatus). I do not think they were Atlantic White-sided (Lagenorhynchus acutus) because no yellowish-tan marking towards the rump and tailfin. The one that jumped out of the sea left an impression of spots on the pale part of its undersides; but it was only a fleeting moment during which I saw the whole animal. Perhaps it was, after all, an Atlantic White-sided? Maybe the "spots" were just water streaming off it? The dorsal fins were big and erect, the animals looked very black on the dorsal surfaces. I wish someone could shed some more light on this exciting encounter for me...

Yesterday, being my day-off, I paddled out of the cove, as is my wont. I had been watching the line of cumulonimbus that stretched seawards, seemingly parallel with the south-west/north-east axis of the northern side of Cape Ann. It seemed to me that, with recent prevailing winds being westerlies/southwesterlies, that the line of storms would pass by, harmlessly: mistake! I realized I needed to get off the water, when I was playing along the shore near Folly Cove, and made my way relaxedly back to the cove. Five minutes after I beached, the nearest cell of activity (putting out substantial lightning between sea and cloud) seemed to turn right and come straight into Lanesville! It was short-lived; but I reckon the wind blasted through there at around 50kt! The surface of the water was whipped into a white sheet, reeds were flattened for the duration (a few minutes, only) and an 18' Hobiecat was turned over... As suddenly as it came through, it departed, leaving torn branches and, apparently, one tree downed, just above the cove -- perhaps the result of one lightning strike that sounded to have been very close-by! I wonder if John Huth is around and reading? The line of squalls -- or one cell in the line -- really seemed to change direction. Is it <possible> that there is any correlation between lightning strikes (causing -- we know -- localized very high temperature and therefore, presumably, lower resistance?) and direction of storm movement? (I <hope> John is reading this...)