Point of Sail

We've all seen the graphic below, in some form. The right side shows the point in terms of apparent wind (direction indicated by a flag on the boat), and the left side shows the true direction, sometimes indicated by waves. The right side is traditional. 

First, the obvious "error." Directions are all in terms of apparent wind, except for close-hauled. And the first thing we see, right at the top, is a 90-degree no-sail zone based on true wind, not apparent wind. An agreed-upon misrepresentation. The actual apparent wind when close-hauled is more like 26-35 degrees, depending on conditions and the boat, so the chart cheats on that one.  Why? Because the term close hauled does not tell us where we are going, which apparently matters. 

The second problem is that of clarity. On most boats, basing it on apparent wind makes sense, we think. That is what you trim for. But in the case of a performance catamaran sailing close-hauled, if we simply bear off 10-30 degrees, boat speed doubles, the sails don't really need re-trimmed, though we could crack the sheets a few inches for best speed. We are now sailing at 80 degrees to the true wind. The apparent wind has moved aft a little (not much). But as far as the chart is concerned, we are still close-hauled, in terms of sheet position
 and apparent wind. Bear off a few degrees more (90-100 true), we crack the sheets just a little (the traveler is still centered), and soon we find ourselves sailing at 18 knots with the apparent wind little different than it was close-hauled. A slower boat, on the other hand, is clearly on a close reach. 

If we turn another 45 degrees and put up the (flat) chute, the apparent wind is still well forward of the bow, between a close reach and a beam reach, but we are sailing over windspeed, the main is still sheeted close, and the traveler down only 6 to 12 inches. In fact, we seldom sail deeper that this. The apparent wind is never aft of the beam, so strictly speaking, we never sail on a broad reach or down wind. That seems odd, since that "close reach" is our fastest VMG downwind course.  A slower boat, of course, will have the wind aft of the beam, the boom well-eased, and will use the vang to keep the boom down. Coincidentally, this catamaran does not have a vang; it doesn't need one.

----

On my first beach catamaran (faster than the roto-molded beach rental stuff they sell now) I learned to call courses by the true wind direction.  My second boat, a turboed Stiletto 27 (saw 24 knots once, not surfing), was just as fast. Both were faster than the wind on any reaching course. Through several more boats, I have kept this nomenclature. So have my multihull-sailing buddies. 

• Windward/Close Hauled. The same either way. As high as you can go with good speed.
• Beam Reach. True wind on the beam, sails pretty tight, going fast.
• Broad Reach.  True wind on the quarter, apparent wind on the beam to well forward. Maybe a chute, with the traveler down a little. Maybe a jib, Barberhauled out and forward and the traveler well down.
• Dead-Down-Wind. Main and jib are wing-and-wing. There is no reason to sail a course between wind on the beam and wing-and-wing, because the flow does not attach and they are all slower than dead-down-wind, wing-and-wing. 

 

 

Next I sailed a cruising cat (PDQ 32/34, but it was also turboed, much faster than the condomarans you see creeping around (I never pushed it past 14 knots, but I think there was a good bit left). My current ride is a Corsair F-24 MKI trimaran, slower than the first two, but faster than the PDQ (I've seen 16-18 knots with the reacher many times).

 ---

But even if I transitioned to slower boats, and even when I'm sailing with reefs I don't need and going slow, in my head I still use the same true-wind-based nomenclature system. It relates to where I'm going in relation to the wind, not how I've set the sails, and that makes more sense to me. I know how to set the sails for best speed.

To each his own. I've always found the apparent wind-based system misleading in both the close reach and broad reach realms.  To me, it's a beam reach when the true wind is striking the beam, whether we're well trimmed and moving or sitting still. For example, I'm sitting still, with sails out and flogging. The apparent wind is on the beam. As I sheet in and the boat accelerates, and without turning one degree, I will go through beam reach, close reach, and very nearly close hauled without changing sails or course. What do I tell the helmsman? "Keep the true wind on the beam" or "beam reach." The latter seems simpler. A close reach means nearly close hauled. A broad reach means apparent wind on the beam for best downwind VMG. Obviously, if I mean a compass course, I can say that, but more often the rule is "broad reach, as she goes," meaning keep the wind on the beam and the sails drawing as set. Since we never sail a broad reach based on apparent wind or downwind, what use are those terms to me? None.

---

I guess I'm wrong. To me, this is more clear.

Birthright Citizenship

 I can understand the feeling that citizenship should mean something (I'm not sure how much--we'll come back to that). However, it should not be a political football, which it surely is. My question is, notwithstanding marriage and naturalization, what makes someone a citizen?

Your parents were citizens. Perhaps they were granted citizenship by naturalization or marriage, but that is clearly the minority case. You presume you are a citizen because you presume your parents are citizens because they .... As you see, this goes on and on. The naturalization process began in 1790, and the visa process began in 1917, but both have gone through many iterations. Records are lost. Many simply never went through the hoops. Slaves were imported, and the records, once they got here, are unreliable. I'd take a wild guess that at 80-90% of the people here couldn't prove anything, and that it would present a considerable expense to many of those that could (genealogy research).  Is the ability to do or fund or research a condition of citizenship? I think not.

An enormous practical problem. Unsolvable, in any practical sense, I think.

Assign a future cut-off date to birthright citizenship.  Still a huge practical problem, but not so different from voter logs and social security.

But what right does a country have, really, to restrict citizenship? The Americas were found by the First People, and they worked for it. Then the others came and stole it in a murderous fashion.every land, every where, in every corner of the world, was taken at the point of a sword. No fairness. I don't feel that I'm entitled to this place than those who would come and join us. As far as the "my ancestors built this land," that's a stinking pile of malarkey. Everyone's ancestors built something or didn't build something, but that wasn't you. The American dream, after all, is built on what YOU can do. Let other people build their history. And by the way, we need the help. The real measure of citizenship is did you work for it? But how do we measure "work?"

 I get the problem of wide open boarders. You need a valve.  That can and is done by regulation, not amendment. 

A hornet's nest.  An amendment will not happen. We can't get 2/3 to agree it's Tuesday. And if it did happen, it would have to be detailed to be fair. But details change as societies change, and the details should not be subject tot the whims of political winds. In today's (and the future) environment, every syllable would be measured not by fairness, but by voter count.  

---

 We have the 14th amendment because of the most ghastly act of civil rights violation the world has ever seen; about 12 million in the transatlantic trade alone, plus all of their descendants. It's not just quietly going away. 

The 14th amendment has become a fundamental and positive characteristic of the United States, just as the Constitution is our bedrock. Birthright citizenship is something we should be proud of. It doesn't need fixed. 

Dolphins near Deale

 When I began sailing 40 years ago, dolphins were something you only saw on the ocean or the very lower Chesapeake Bay. In the last 5 years they've become commonplace all the way up to the Bay Bridge, and farther. The last two times out I've had company, sometimes so close you hear them breathe,. 

 A change in water temperatures? I don't see why that would matter, given their range. A change in the migration patterns of the food supply, possibly temperature-influenced? Maybe, but fish populations have always been cyclical.  

 

Not enough information to say. But fun. It seems they are around most on days where the wind is light and the sailing dull, so the company is appreciated.
 

Coating Concrete -- the Reflecting Pool

rev 6-27-2026

 In my career, I've been involved in quite a few large concrete petrol tank containment coating projects, new and refurbishment. I've been involved in coating concrete wastewater tanks. Occasionally, something went wrong. I'm not guessing.

 There are many things that can result in peeling, all preventable.

• The concrete was not dry. Concrete absorbs water, and in the ground like that, takes considerable time to dry. They rushed it. (The prior contractor refused to bid because they felt the timeline was too short.)
• Incompatible with previous coating. The prior coating was asphaltic, and for the pretty blue polyurethane to stick, it would have required complete removal. I bet they missed some patches. If they missed a lot, there will be a lot of pealing. I'm guessing, he wanted pretty blue and 
• Asphaltic coatings don't come in pretty blue. Mostly, they come in black. But Trump insisted.
• The contractor, selected by a no-bid (corrupt), no due diligence process, is a pool contractor, not an industrial coatings contractor, and he was not familiar with asphalt coatings or how they are applied. 
• The prior contractor refused the bid because they did not have a pretty blue product they considered to be compatible with the prior coating. 
• Assorted application errors. Incorrect mixing is common. This would also explain patchy peeling.

Maybe all of these. It does not have to be one thing. Poor contractor engineering supervision is the common thread. And rushing.

The repairs are going to be very expensive. Lots of surface prep. They should probably remove the entire coating and start over. A real screw-up. I know, I've seen it before. Trump needs to own the whole thing. He picked the contractor.

By the way, scratching it with a knife is not a cause. If I key the paint on your car it won't peel. That's just dumb and defies the plainest common sense. Just a blatant misdirection play rooted in untruth. Obvious. Not surprising. Better to just own the problem and fix it. I would respect that. It's not uncommon for concrete re-lining jobs to go sideways when they are rushed, and this one was unrealistically rushed by an inexperienced contractor. The older the concrete, the more likely. 

 --- 

Also, to add enough peroxide to make a difference in a 50 million pound pool of water (which is also constantly exchanged with Potomac river water through the tidal basin--separate subject) would require at least 10 ppm as peroxide, or about  50 x 10 x (1/0.12) = 4200 gallon jugs of peroxide. A few gallons from the water's edge changed anything. It would require a tanker load. Several of the wastewater plants I work with have bulk tanks because the get it by the tanker. No one buys jugs. Just ridiculous. Someone must have been yelling at the poor guy to "Do something!"

Kayak Boarding

 I love kayaking from my F-24, but my one knee, injured badly in college, is getting worse. If it's choppy, I could use a little help. 

 This was the original concept. An arm that would give me something to do "dips" with. I steer the kayak between the hulls from behind, close to the port ama, with the cockpit just behind the cross beam. I push down on the gunwales, just enough to scoot my butt up on the deck of the kayak, and then use the port ama and the assist arm to press up enough to get my feet fully under me. From there, if you have good balance, it is a simple matter to stand up and step up. It's a little more complicated in waves.

 

The final version looks like this. It was welded from a salvaged IKEA bedframe, and padded with strips of exercise room foam tile glued on with Barge Cement (heavy duty contact cement foe shoe repair). It just hooks over the beam, slipping between the laces.  Folds for storage, less than 1-pound. A morning welding project. 

 

 

 

Is the Choice Between Roll Bar and Non-roll Bar Anchors Necesarily Binary?

 A roll bar is just a righting mechanism. Non-roll bar anchors can have wings that go pretty high.

 

 

 

So, when do wings become a roll bar?  Unsurprisingly, this rolls upright just the same as a roll bar. In fact, the wings are probably a little taller than they need to be.

 

Why would this possibly be better?

• Grass and trash can slide up and out, rather than become trapped.
• The turning action is better, because the wings are canted slightly inwards.
• The drag is slightly less, thus deeper burying is possible.
• The upwards levering of the toe is less because the useless mid-section is removed.

Downsides?

•  Not as strong. High strength steel is a must.
• Slightly more complex manufacture. 
• It does not solve the roll bar fit problem.
• Could more easily snag the rode unless well buried. 

Just brainstorming with you. 

 

Pausing the Gas Tax

Wow. We found free money. Note: I am socially very liberal and financially very conservative.

First, the obvious. The money to fix roads has to come from somewhere. Gas taxes. Debt. The general fund, which probably means debt. 

Interestingly, this has bipartisan support. The reason, obviously enough, is that politicians are cowards. Mid-terms are coming, and the general rule is "it's the economy, stupid." You don't want to get blamed for well, reality. Running up the credit card is always easier. 

 Reality is hard to sell. Wars have consequences. Spending has consequences. I' not sayin' a balanced budget is always the healthy answer. That's a long discussion, and there are complex answers. But sometimes it seems we just don't try. Lies are easier.

Marking Rode. Chain or Nylon.

 Chain is easily marked with paint. For yacht chain, a cardboard box helps.

 

Marking Chain 

 

As for rope, latex paint works just fine. It does not weaken the rode. Even if the paint chips a little, the rope is still conspicuously stained. The box trick still works. 

 ---

 Don't overmark the rode. If you have a windlass, a long mark 10 feet before the anchor gives notice it is close. Otherwise, the first mark can be at the least rode you would ever use, about 50 feet for most sailors.  After that, it's not precision math; every 25 feet is more than enough, perhaps 50 feet. The fewer marks, the less there is to remember.

Chesapeake Area Galvinizing

 Anchors and chains could last nearly forever, but the galvanizing wears and corrodes away.  The minimum is rather high (300-600 pounds, depending on the amount of cleanup), but if you have a large anchor and long chain, you might make the minimum. Combined with a dockmate, you should have enough.

 

Baltimore Galvinizing. $0.50/pound for prep if rusty (like old chain) $0.50/pound for galvanizing, $300 minimum. A couple of anchors and a few hundred feet of chain will get you there. https://www.baltimoregalv.com/

 

We're Getting Older

 In 2017 industry prognosticators projected that the average (mode) owner would be about 65 by 2025.

 

 

In 2024 the average median age was 60, and the average mode was ... 64. If you look at how the average has moved 20 years older in 20 years, I think that means it's us guys. 

 

 So what happens when we age-out, and it looks like the big hits start in the next 10 years? It's obvious why DIY magazines like Good Old Boat collapsed, and why every other boating media outlet has moved on-line and to selling big boats. People have the disposable income, but they're just not spending it on boating. I get that. It's kinda dumb.

 I hear that West Marine is discussing chapter 11.  I see more empty slips. Oh well. I'm still having fun.

A Slow Rockfish Season

 I don't think I've ever seen so few boats out on opening day. Only one out of Deale, and I saw a lot of long faces. None out of Chesapeake Beach, or possibly I missed it. Very few private boats, no more than 1-2 visible within 10 miles, most of the time.  

The population is way off, as low as it was during the closure years in the early 80s. You can only keep one fish, 19-24 inches. No fun. I'm guessing no good fishing for 7-10 years. Really, I guess it's been 15 years since I rated the fishing as good. 

I'd hate to be in the charter business. I guess I need to take my trolling gear off the boat, and just sail and kayak. Oh well. Maybe the summer spot fishing will be good, but I'm not that into it.  Sounds like freshwater will be the thing. I'll be 65 in a few weeks, so the license just got cheaper. Time to get a lifetime freshwater licence, I think. Just $25.

 

 Not worth going out for Rockfish, not for a while, in my opinion. Let them recover.

 

 

Even More Anchor Testing

 The long version (over 40 pages) will, I believe, be in Practical Sailor.

 I built a 9-pound version, suitable for my F-24 MKI. Today I tested it in sand and mud, and it exceeded expectations. It easily held the same 500 pounds in the ooze/mud that 35- 45-pound anchors have in prior testing. It set every time, it reset every time, and came up pretty clean.

 It fills my need, replacing an Excel and Northill.

 

 Alloy Excel #1 on the left, 9-pound Chesapeake anchor on the right. All it cost was some welding rod, since I have a lot of scrap.

  

 Rolling in. In practice, it always lands right side up, just because of the balance. But I tipped it a few times, just to be sure.

 

------

 

I coated mine with industrial polyurethane. I parkerized first, then two coats, then post cured at 170F for 8 hours. It's holding up well and makes the anchor slippery. But galvinizing would be better, I just didn't have nearly enough to make the minimum (my 9 pounds vs. 600 pounds of new anchors minimum).

 

 Baltimore Galvinizing. $0.50/pound for prep if rusty (like old chain) $0.50/pound for galvanizing, $300 minimum. A couple of anchors and a few hundred feet of chain will get you there. https://www.baltimoregalv.com/

 

Replacing the water tube.

 About 1/4-mile from the dock the motor began to overheat. I nursed it back to the dock, stopping occasionally for it to cool. I took the motor home, removed the lower unit to replace the impellor (it had been some years), ad found the water tube had brooken loose at the top. The brass dezinced and it snapped off, so no water to the motor. 

 A little head scratching and Googling later, I determined that the powerhead had to come off to replace it. 

  

It comes up into that notch on the right, held by a grommet I removed. the pee hole is visible lower right.

 It seems like everything has to come apart. Covers. Controls.Reconnecting the shift bar is the worst part. 

 Run like a top now. 

 

More Anchor Testing

 It finally got warm enough to spend a day on the water, in-and-out of a kayak, and generally getting wet.

My modular testing system provides for over 100 possible combinations, but thankfully, many were eliminated early on as dead-ends. The convex fore-aft and convex toe-to-heel flukes disappointed; they did not penetrate the firm base layer well. Small differences in angle matter, but testing can be confined to combinations that showed promise. The Claw, Guardian (pivoting fluke), and Mantus anchors were tested as known reference points, since we have tested these at the same locations before.

So which combination is showing the most promise in layered Chesapeake mud? 

• The Guardian is VERY strong (>200 pounds, probably 500 pounds but we stopped at 200 pounds) when it reaches the firm layer, but in mucky areas it set less than half the time and never reset.
• The Claw never achieved anything we could call a "set." typically holding was 15-25 pounds, or less.
• The Mantus did well when it reached the firm layer, which was about 75% of the time. Holding was typically 80-120 pounds. If it did not reach the firm layer, holding was 35-45 pounds. 
• The odd looking split toe, no-roll bar anchor to the right is the winner so far. It set over 90% of the time, and holding was 120 to >200 pounds when it did. Getting it out of the bottom was a chore.  When it didn't reach the firm layer, it still held more than any other combination.

Why? I'm guessing at these things, based on testing in other configurations:

• The high shank helped it get deeper, through the muck. The Mantus penetrated a little more reliably with this shank too.  No-roll-bar seems to be an asset in muck.
• The roll bar did have a small advantage resetting in sand.  Let's not throw the baby out with the bath--except for very deep muck, it is likely the superior design. 
• Sharp toe. The split reduces the angle of the point. The Knox anchor (also split toe) is sharpened to a chisel instead of a point, and that is what we tested first, and it did well, about the same as the Mantus. Then we welded on a point and performance increased dramatically. 
• Angle. The fluke angle is a few degrees greater than the Mantus. We tested the Mantus with a greater angle, but it did not penetrate as well. We  tested the split-toe with the same angle as the Mantus, and it did well, but when we increased the angle it did better. The exceptional penitrating properties of the slit toe better tolerate the steeper (stronger) angle.
• They all set like lightning and securely in sand. The hold is over 50x the anchor weight (except for the Claw). All reset reliably except for the Guardian. If sized for mud, sand is not a problem.  

 

There are many more fine points. There will be a long (series?) of article in Practical Sailor covering all of this, but that is the gist of it.  

 The next step is to make a full-size version and test that all over this summer.  

  

 

Soil Types

I'm often told the Cheaspeake mud is like clay, but it's not clay. Mostly, it's fine sand and silt, with 10-25% organic content. The samples I have examined have relatively few particles small enough to be considered "clay," the shapes are wrong, and the mud lacks plasticity (you can't form it, for example, roll a snake between your hands). Mostly, it is a high-organic sandy loam. The high organic load makes it sticky when wet.

The beach areas are in the fine to medium sand range, with low silt and organic levels, but considerably higher than ocean beaches. The sand particles are intermediate in angularity and sphericity, with typically better holding than mid-Atlantic ocean sand, and better holding than coral sand. The only bite is that the sand can be thin, over impenetrable mudstone (set your anchor HARD to find out).

 Locations vary, of course. 

 

 

Mud Buckets

 

The Excel always came up clean, and the Hybrid MKI  did better than the scoops most of the time ...

  

 

... But not always (The Mantus was cleaned off--they were about the same). The crown is lower than the Excel (120 degrees vs. 90 degrees), which may increase fouling. The edge flange is wider, which improves setting and penetration of layered soils, but increases fouling. I'm thinking the next trial may be closer to the Excel crown angle (maybe 100 degrees) and an intermediate flange width. Both have a similar toe downturn. 

 

 

 

 The Knox set and held well, but it always came up clogged. The wings are as bad as a roll bar, and it seems that the high shank merely creates more space for mud and trash to accumulate. The split toe certainly does not improve release.

 

 

Anchor Testing

rev. 3-17-2026

 But different this time.

 Since I have become a competent welder, I've decided to break anchor performance down, one component at a time. Yes, they are interrelated, but it's where you start. The idea was spawned by having a number of Mantus M1 Dinghy anchors left over from testing. They are modular, coming apart quickly for storage under the seat of your jet ski. But even larger anchors, of many brands, have transitioned to bolt-together constructions to reduce shipping costs.  

I've started testing:

• Multiple sizes, from 4" to 9" fluke length.
• High, medium, and low shanks (Delta vs. Bugel vs. Oden).
• Multiple roll bar and wing options. 
• Multiple fluke shapes, including curves side-to-side and front-to-back. 
• Multiple fluke angles.
• Multiple crown (the joint between the shank and fluke) positions. 
• Shaping (streamlining) of edges on flukes and shanks.
• Fluke point angles. Down-turned toes.
• Split toe flukes (like Fortress and Knox).
• Sand and typical Chesapeake layered mud.

 

A whole fleet, with more than 100 possible combinations. 3-17-2026

 

What have I learned so far? A few things. 

• The most important variable, by far, is the fluke angle. A few degrees steeper, and it doesn't set at all in firm bottoms. A few degrees less, and it sets easily but doesn't hold as much.  The usable range is probably as narrow as 24-32 degrees.
• Shank shape and height, attachment method, crown position, and fluke shape, within a surprisingly wide range, make very little difference, as long as the fluke angle is correct. Some room for optimization. Balance can matter with a roll bar, and is vital without.
•  Chesapeake mud is more complicated than I thought. In open areas, exposed to tides, the loose stuff is washed away, and the bottom is more uniform (unless it is slate washed free of all sediment). However, in the creeks, leaves and detritus from run-off lay down a compost layer every fall, resulting in a mushy even semi-liquid layer that is too light to consolidate. Then comes the underlying clay, which is covered with oyster shells from centuries ago back when the Chesapeake was perhaps the most productive oyster grounds in the world. The challenge is super soft mud, which won't hold beans, over a layer that can be hard to penetrate without the right anchor and technique. Traditional answers have been either a really, really big anchor, or to let the anchor "soak" for 20 minutes,  sinking down through the soft stuff, followed by careful setting into the underlayer, which may or may not work, depending on the anchor type and setting method details (it's not just drop and back down).

Time to make some more models!