Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA10928; Thu, 14 Sep 1995 21:46:18 -0700 Return-Path: <justin@booza.mcm.com-DeleteThis> Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uucp2.netcom.com) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP ($Revision: 1.36.108.11 $/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1S) id AA058420373; Thu, 14 Sep 1995 21:46:13 -0700 Received: by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) id VAA10556; Thu, 14 Sep 1995 21:31:17 -0700 Received: from crenshawu.mcm.com by guava.mcm.com (5.x/SMI-4.1) id AA27194; Thu, 14 Sep 1995 21:18:59 -0700 Received: from booza.mcm.com by crenshawu.mcm.com (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA19515; Thu, 14 Sep 1995 21:18:57 -0700 Received: by booza.mcm.com (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA26036; Thu, 14 Sep 1995 21:18:57 -0700 Date: Thu, 14 Sep 1995 21:18:57 -0700 From: justin@booza.mcm.com-DeleteThis (Justin Gordon) Message-Id: <9509150418.AA26036@booza.mcm.com-DeleteThis> X-Host-Id: booza To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Subject: Re: Re[3]: "Mission control, we have a problem" X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
No, it was my mast track base, which was some hybrid built for me at city-front
out of a mistral base.
The problem with two bases is that it would really mess up your tacking.
Justin
> Justin: Was it your Chinook base bolt that broke?
>
> - Matt
>
> _________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
> > Date: Thu, 14 Sep 1995 09:55:17 -0700
> > Errors-To: listserv_err@jr.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
> > Reply-To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
> > Originator: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
> > Sender: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
> > Precedence: bulk
> > From: "Jim Murdy" <jmurdy@sj.aishd.com-DeleteThis>
> > X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
> > X-Comment: Windsurfing Discussion Mailing List
> >
> >
> > It might be overkill, but a separate, spare base
> > (nut,bolt,universal and cup) could be left in the track. the
> > base plate could be cut down to a smaller diameter to save space,
> > on the idea that it is like the emergency small spare tires.
> >
> > there of course would less track adjustment, but it could be
> > repositioned depending on whether the main base if forward or
> > aft.
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
> > Subject: Re: "Mission control, we have a problem"
> > Author: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis at SJ-Internet
> > Date: 9/14/95 9:34 AM
> >
> >
> > > I'm still perfecting a safety line between the board and the rig to
> > > prevent this catastrophe from happening.
> >
> > Do let us know what you come up with. All of my attempts at using
> > some type of safety line to hold the rig to the board in case the bolt
> > from the hourglass to the cup breaks have been unsuccessful due to rig
> > rotation. This technique would work for someone who makes every jibe,
> > and whose net rig rotation at the end of the day is less than one
> > revolution. Unfortunately, I am not in the above category.
> >
> > What I have so far:
> >
> > 1) Line from board mast track to star base. This will keep rig
> > attached board in case the base itself comes off the board. I have a
> > spare base nut in my safety pack to help reattach the base to the mast
> > track
> >
> > 2) Webbing on the hourglass in case of hourglass failure
> >
> > 3) Tie excess downhaul line to mast base cup in case the cup to mast
> > extension clip/attachment fails.
> >
> > Now all I need is some way to cover myself in case the hourglass to
> > cup bolt breaks and I'll have the board-rig separation issue covered.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > BobP
> >
> >
> >
> > -- Bob Prevett (prevett@esd.sgi.com-DeleteThis) Silicon Graphics Computer Systems
> > (415) 390-5315 M/S 2U-923
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:30:14 PST