Horizontal or Vertical?

1920px-Visitors_holding_capstan_bars_turn_the_capstan.jpg
The lady at the front in blue overalls is sand bagging.
Take her out & give her a good thrashing :cry: :unsure: :rolleyes:
 
The original post asked about the convention - not whether it was right or wrong, or even confusing. a supplementary question was "what is a horizontal windlass". The next 2 posts answered both questions.

Both the convention and descriptions are both logical and used consistently by both manufacturers and in general usage. The working part of a windlass is the bit that pulls the chain and that can be either horizontal or vertical depending on the design. It is irrelevant whether the drive is horizontal or vertical as it can be either.

In your opinion. Which is worth no more than anyone elses. You must be a hoot at parties. I bet the girls queue up to listen to your mansplaining.

- W
 
Please explain to a non English motherlanguage boater the meaning of "sand bagging" (marine slang?" clearly nothing to do with some American boats). The very funny thing is her raised little fingers, as though the bar was a tea cup.

Can anybody answer the question about the double bar seats?
 
Please explain to a non English motherlanguage boater the meaning of "sand bagging" (marine slang?" clearly nothing to do with some American boats). The very funny thing is her raised little fingers, as though the bar was a tea cup.

Same as 'swinging the lead', ie pretending to work but not doing so.

Can anyone answer the question about the double bar seats?
Two speeds
 
Last edited:
There will be a vertical shaft connected by gearing to an anchor windlass below deck.

A thought about the two sets of holes. Is the top wheel fixed to this shaft, passing down through the deck, The lower wheel (the holes in use) is fixed to the capstan drum, in which case the people in the photo are doing nothing except posing.
 
A thought about the two sets of holes. Is the top wheel fixed to this shaft, passing down through the deck, The lower wheel (the holes in use) is fixed to the capstan drum, in which case the people in the photo are doing nothing except posing.
The lower holes are directly connected to the capstan drum.

The upper head is connected to the capstan drum through epicyclic gearing, which gives greater power, but at slower speed.
 
Last edited:
In your opinion. Which is worth no more than anyone elses. You must be a hoot at parties. I bet the girls queue up to listen to your mansplaining.

- W
Well it is NOT MY OPINION. I am just reflecting the terminology used by the makers of such equipment. There is a high degree of consistency which justifies the use of the word "convention". This was illustrated in post#2&3 and confirmed by other links in later posts. The only thing I have added is an explanation as to why that convention might be appropriate.

The original poster has consistently over the years claimed on here expertise in all things anchoring based on his 50 years experience. Hence my surprise that he was asking such a basic question. No rudeness was ever intended and his question was answered in a very clear and objective manner.
 
Well it is NOT MY OPINION. I am just reflecting the terminology used by the makers of such equipment. There is a high degree of consistency which justifies the use of the word "convention". This was illustrated in post#2&3 and confirmed by other links in later posts. The only thing I have added is an explanation as to why that convention might be appropriate.

The original poster has consistently over the years claimed on here expertise in all things anchoring based on his 50 years experience. Hence my surprise that he was asking such a basic question. No rudeness was ever intended and his question was answered in a very clear and objective manner.
Not by you!
I repeat that I have never claimed expertise "in all things anchoring" or indeed in anything. Come on, show me even one example.
I, and it seems, many others on here are not impressed by your assumed superior arrogant response to a civil question, which was trying to clarify something which several people have shown to have doubts about.
I realise from your demonstrated attitude, that I will never get an apology from you for your libelous and untrue statements about me, but hey ho, life goes on.
 
The lower holes are directly connected to the capstan drum.

The upper head is connected to the capstan drum through epicyclic gearing, which gives greater power, but at slower speed.

Thank you. So it's more complicated that I thought! I won't ask if the gearing also reverses the direction :unsure:
 
Please explain to a non English motherlanguage boater the meaning of "sand bagging" (marine slang?" clearly nothing to do with some American boats). The very funny thing is her raised little fingers, as though the bar was a tea cup.

Can anybody answer the question about the double bar seats?

Definitely an Americanism, on that few Americans know the actual origin of. It is a sailing term.

Actually, she is not sandbagging, she is loafing. Of course, there is no line on the drum.

In the American idiom, a sandbagger is a person that is better at something than they let on, such as a golfer that understates his handicap. A person who bets on billiards and pretends to be a beginner, until after the bet is set. Or a sailor with concealed modifications to his boat that either break or skirt the class rules. The last one is also a cheater.

Originally, sandbaggers were sailboats that used shiftable ballast (sandbags), huge rigs, and thus were faster than their length implied.

1920px-Chesapeake_Bay_Sandbagger_sloop_by_D_Ramey_Logan.jpg


Sandbagger sloop - Wikipedia
 
Definitely an Americanism, on that few Americans know the actual origin of. It is a sailing term.
...
Originally, sandbaggers were sailboats that used shiftable ballast (sandbags), huge rigs, and thus were faster than their length implied.
Count me as one of them! I'd encountered it in the rock climbing context, where a difficult climb might be given an easier rating.

Somewhat related to this are 5.9 routes in Yosemite (think... HVS 5a/b in UK parlance?), which were put up in an era when the scale was capped at 5.9 and no harder rating was available. They retain their original grades by tradition, but should be approached with particular caution.
 
Count me as one of them! I'd encountered it in the rock climbing context, where a difficult climb might be given an easier rating.

Somewhat related to this are 5.9 routes in Yosemite (think... HVS 5a/b in UK parlance?), which were put up in an era when the scale was capped at 5.9 and no harder rating was available. They retain their original grades by tradition, but should be approached with particular caution.
^^ Exactly! As an avid 40-year climber, a few local climbs come to mind. They were graded 5.9 in the original book, but are now consensus 5.11D. For years I thought they were just the hardest 5.9s around, wondering why they were so damn difficult for me. The author was either a traditionalist, or was carrying a heavy damn sandbag. Quite a few traditional routes are sandbags for the uninitiated.

At the opposite end of the spectrum are gym climbs with vanity ratings. I often hear "I can can climb 5.11 inside. The rock here is just weird." No, in fact you have probably never climbed harder than 5.9.
 
Top