Re: UPDATE re Coyote Crisis

From: Kirk Lindstrom (kirk_69@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis)
Date: Thu Jan 28 1999 - 14:02:43 PST


Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com (opus-fddi.hpl.hp.com) by jr.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA216011703; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:15:04 -0800
Return-Path: <kirk_69@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis>
Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA167091682; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:14:42 -0800
Received: from dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.10]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id OAA03129 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:14:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id QAA25964 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 16:03:56 -0600 (CST)
Received: from sji-ca9-104.ix.netcom.com(209.109.236.104) by dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma025751; Thu Jan 28 16:03:14 1999
Message-Id: <36B0DE83.C32DE066@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:02:43 -0800
From: Kirk Lindstrom <kirk_69@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
Subject: Re: UPDATE re Coyote Crisis
References: <36B0D1BD.A5606084@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------FD6AFDD4D5E9CE07592EF99F"

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

My delivery came in blank and yet my "sent folder" has text.
I'll try again and I appologise in advance if you are getting this
twice.

It is ALREADY a royal PITA (pain in the arse) to get out to the wind for
us folks
that sail sinkers or float to our knees type boards. I suppose we can
get to 3rd
Ave and take some of those unused parking spaces. Shouldn't be a
problem now that
I work for myself and can get there at 1PM to get a spot...

No matter how you slice it, it seems site wise we are losing quality and
quantity this year.

Kirk

Eyes4Hire@aol.com-DeleteThis wrote:

> I have been reading the EIR and it will take a while to fully digest.
>
> The study basically assumes that loss in wind speed must exceed 10% at
primary
> windsurfing launch and transit areas to be significant and then
concludes that
> speed loss is at a maximum of 10% and less than 10% in many areas.
>
> It seems like the wind tunnel study has 105 foot tall buildings
putting up
> wind shadows not all that much bigger than the existing buildings put
up in
> some scenarios. Does anyone know how high and how high above the
waterline the
> existing buildings are?
>
> The big issues will be:
>
> 1) Is their methodology correct
>
> 2) Is a 10% loss (or more?) significant or not? It seems like a 10% in
wind
> speed has about a 50/50 chance of forcing one to rig up to get out
since we
> tend to re-rig to a new sail size for each 20% change in wind speed.
>
> Peter

--
best regards
Kirk Lindstrom
Editor Suite101.com - Personal Finance and Investing
http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/investing
==================================================================
 http://www.netcom.com/~kirk_69/home.html
 http://www.netcom.com/~kirk_69/Finance.html

Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="kirk_69.vcf" Content-Description: Card for Kirk LindstromContent-Disposition: attachment; filename="kirk_69.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit




This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:34:59 PST