In a message dated 99-09-23 14:20:36 EDT, you write:

Ahoy there Dick,

A couple of the TWL scientific staff have suggested that the practical speed
of a trawler can be increased through the addition of feathers.  I must admit
to feeling some degree of responsibility for this, having introduced the
subject of ducks to the list a while ago.  So before you bought a ton of
feathers for your next bottom job, I thought I should double check.  After
all, the essence of the scientific method is to verify a theory by
experiment.

The first part of my work entailed a few dry dock (dry duck?) observations.
Tempting a threesome of mallards out of the pond with bread, I observed their
underwater lines.  The main observation was that these ducks were a full
displacement design, definitely not semi-displacement or planing.  The shape
of their little buttocks, sweeping in rounded lines to their pointed little
sterns, and their complete lack of squared-off transoms made that clear.
Placing a ruler on the ground, and observing them when they re-launched,
allowed me to estimate their waterline length with confidence.  I put it at
11 in, close to Don Dodds' original estimate of a foot.

The second part of my work involved actual speed measurements.  To do this, I
adjusted my sliding door so that the width from frame to frame was 68 inches,
exactly the same as the distance between two porch posts.  In this way I
could sight along two parallel lines formed by the door frames and posts.  I
would wait until a duck swam by, and time how long it took for him/her to
cover 68 inches.  My objective was to observe their practical cruise speed.
I had no interest in their top speed.  I wanted them in trawler mode.

The wind was calm.  The pond was smooth, no chop.  I hunkered down and
waited.  The cold, hard weight of my stop watch feel reassuring in my hand.
It took a bit of patience, but I got some good measurements.  I timed four
ducks.  All four were in trawler mode, not rushed, looking around and
enjoying themselves. They came in at 3.8, 3.9, 3.9, and 4.2 seconds.

A bit of math shows that their speeds were 0.88, 0.86, 0.86, and 0.80 knots,
for an average of 0.85 knots.  Taking a waterline length of 11 inches, the
theoretical hull speed for these ducks would be 1.28 knots.  Disappointing
results indeed for fully feathered hulls!  They were only cruising at 0.89
times the square root of their LWL in feet.  You can draw your own
conclusions, but I am feel obligated to suggest that the Dodds Postulation is
seriously flawed.

Now some listees may think to themselves that perhaps old Browne doesn't have
enough to do, but consider the legal bills that George would face if a major
boat builder were to launch a new line of feathered trawlers based on list
advice, only to find that that advice was unsubstantiated.  Besides, it was
raining on and off today -  can't work on the boat.

Scientifically yours,

Paul Browne
Boatless in Tampa

We gotta get this guy a boat - quick - Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-trawler-world-list@samurai.com
[mailto:owner-trawler-world-list@samurai.com]On Behalf Of
PBrowne900@aol.com
Sent: September 26, 1999 3:35 PM
To: trawler-world-list@samurai.com
Subject: TWL: Duck Speed

In a message dated 99-09-23 14:20:36 EDT, you write:

Ahoy there Dick,

A couple of the TWL scientific staff have suggested that the practical speed
of a trawler can be increased through the addition of feathers.  I must
admit
to feeling some degree of responsibility for this, having introduced the
subject of ducks to the list a while ago.  So before you bought a ton of
feathers for your next bottom job, I thought I should double check.  After
all, the essence of the scientific method is to verify a theory by
experiment.

The first part of my work entailed a few dry dock (dry duck?) observations.
Tempting a threesome of mallards out of the pond with bread, I observed
their
underwater lines.  The main observation was that these ducks were a full
displacement design, definitely not semi-displacement or planing.  The shape
of their little buttocks, sweeping in rounded lines to their pointed little
sterns, and their complete lack of squared-off transoms made that clear.
Placing a ruler on the ground, and observing them when they re-launched,
allowed me to estimate their waterline length with confidence.  I put it at
11 in, close to Don Dodds' original estimate of a foot.

The second part of my work involved actual speed measurements.  To do this,
I
adjusted my sliding door so that the width from frame to frame was 68
inches,
exactly the same as the distance between two porch posts.  In this way I
could sight along two parallel lines formed by the door frames and posts.  I
would wait until a duck swam by, and time how long it took for him/her to
cover 68 inches.  My objective was to observe their practical cruise speed.
I had no interest in their top speed.  I wanted them in trawler mode.

The wind was calm.  The pond was smooth, no chop.  I hunkered down and
waited.  The cold, hard weight of my stop watch feel reassuring in my hand.
It took a bit of patience, but I got some good measurements.  I timed four
ducks.  All four were in trawler mode, not rushed, looking around and
enjoying themselves. They came in at 3.8, 3.9, 3.9, and 4.2 seconds.

A bit of math shows that their speeds were 0.88, 0.86, 0.86, and 0.80 knots,
for an average of 0.85 knots.  Taking a waterline length of 11 inches, the
theoretical hull speed for these ducks would be 1.28 knots.  Disappointing
results indeed for fully feathered hulls!  They were only cruising at 0.89
times the square root of their LWL in feet.  You can draw your own
conclusions, but I am feel obligated to suggest that the Dodds Postulation
is
seriously flawed.

Now some listees may think to themselves that perhaps old Browne doesn't
have
enough to do, but consider the legal bills that George would face if a major
boat builder were to launch a new line of feathered trawlers based on list
advice, only to find that that advice was unsubstantiated.  Besides, it was
raining on and off today -  can't work on the boat.

Scientifically yours,

Paul Browne
Boatless in Tampa