Re: Re: Dynafiber booms

From: Ken Poulton (poulton@zonker.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis)
Date: Thu Nov 17 1994 - 11:14:09 PST


Received: from zonker-fddi.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA20434; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:14:12 -0800
Return-Path: <poulton@zonker.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
Received: by zonker.hpl.hp.com (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA18071; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:14:09 -0800
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:14:09 -0800
From: Ken Poulton <poulton@zonker.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
Message-Id: <9411171914.AA18071@zonker.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
Subject: Re: Re: Dynafiber booms


> I disagree. It will take more than one year to overcome the product defect
> issues that were present in pre-94' models.

If you're referring to the Fiberspar booms, they went to a completely new
head. The difference has been dramatic. They can't be judged as
reliable as models that have been unchanged since 1990, but that's
part of the price for up to date equipment.

> There is no room for error on the
> water..and we already bring enough error to the water as humans.

Actually, that's the beauty of booms... they come in pairs. I've sailed
in on each of my 6 broken booms ("only" 4 were Fiberspars).

> Lastly, imagine yourself floating in a strong ebb tide,outside the
> Golden Gate Bridge, only 1/2 hour on the water, 5.0 conditions, 2:00
> PM, and your BRAND NEW 'Wave' mast broke at the base....would you
> endorse this product? would you buy this product again???

Broken masts are much more serious (been there, done that, didn't much
like it). But shit happens, and in this sport, shit happens a lot. One
failure does not show anything about the reliability of a product.

Ken "3.5 hours in the water but still using Fiberspar" Poulton
poulton@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis

"... and let's be careful out there!" -- Hill Street Blues



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:28:22 PST