6 ms·

one of the quickest ways to ruin the way an established boat plan 'swims' is by adding a tall rig after de-masting. it's extremely enticing to 'add more sail'

by serf 2y ago

one of the quickest ways to ruin the way an established boat plan 'swims' is by adding a tall rig after de-masting. it's extremely enticing to 'add more sail' to a boat in order to squeeze more speed out of it, or achieve easier lufting. turns out that marine architecture is a lot harder than one thinks at first glance, and just about everyone that tries to tweak specs afterwards does so in such a way that makes the boat categorically worse. (don't ask me how I came to realize this after many dollars spent)

TylerE 2y ago
This is true in many things. Most car mods make the car objectively worse unless you really need the niche thing the mod does - and even if you think you do, be really sure.
- clivestaples 2y ago
  I'm a full-time RVer and see this all the time with diesel trucks. The trucks get "deleted" and modded for more power and to disable the DEF system. Almost everyone I've known throughout the years begins having transmission trouble within months, especially after heavy load. A few swear by it. I've got a very expensive Cummins and I'm hellbent to leave it stock (and under warranty).
  - m463 2y ago
    I swear the older pre-def cummins engines got like 15% more mpg than the def ones. but RVs have been getting heavier too.
    - jabl 2y ago
      AFAIU modern diesels have lower combustion temperatures in order to limit NOx formation. I imagine this comes at a cost in thermodynamic efficiency. Similarly particle filters, catalytic converters and whatnot reduce efficiency via exhaust backpressure. So all in all, reducing non-CO2 emissions do come at a cost in CO2 emissions (or fuel consumed, if you like). Is it as much as 15%? No idea.. And is it all worth it? I'd argue yes, old-school diesel exhaust is nasty stuff.
      - TylerE 2y ago
        Exhaust back pressure is not an issue at all on diesels because they all run big turbos. As for your later point...I very much concur. I started masking (n95) during the pandemic, and haven't stopped. I have a... large number of health issues including several respiratory ones. Exhaust in general really is nasty stuff. I live in pretty quiet smallish (100k) town, and it can be bad enough around here with all the pollen, but I wasnt recently on a whirlwind trip through the north east that saw me visit the dense urban cores of DC, Philly, Manhattan, and Boston. The difference in odor on the occasions I'd take my mask off on the sidewalk were kinda shocking as someone not used to it.
        jabl 2y ago
        > Exhaust back pressure is not an issue at all on diesels because they all run big turbos. Not sure what you're arguing here. Isn't it quite obvious that resistance in the exhaust system means that the engine has to do more work to push the exhaust gases out; work that otherwise could be used to turn the crankshaft. Now of course a lot of that extra energy is wasted in any case, particularly if there's nothing like a turbocharger to make use of it.
        TylerE 2y ago
        Practically all diesels have turbos. You have literally have to go back to tiny tractor engines form The 60s to Find ones that aren’t. Turbos already provide a ton of back pressure. What’s downstream of that is pretty irrelevant
        12thhandyman 2y ago
        Ford and VW put a naturally aspirated diesel into their vehicles up until the early/mid 90s.
        TylerE 2y ago
        Absolutely none of which have DPFs or EGRs.
  - iamtheworstdev 2y ago
    the issue isnt that they disabled their DEF system or deleted their DPF or EGR, it's that they probably installed new ECUs or flashed new fuel maps or something and boosted the power beyond the torque abilities of the transmission attached. In a lot of diesel RVs the transmissions are normally good to 2,000lb-ft, but the engines can be pushed beyond that pretty easily.
    - Moto7451 2y ago
      My truck owning friends like to blow through transmissions at 50-60K miles by driving their trucks like sports cars and aggressively short shifting while on power. None of them do “truck things” so it’s always a head scratcher as to why they continue to do this.
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    The U.S. diesel tuning crowd seemingly never discuss air/fuel ratios. This is a huge mistake. Also it's important to understand how much torque your transmission is rated for and to not stray beyond it. It's possible to reliably extract more performance than the manufacturer supplied but you have to understand what you're getting into. Turning it up to 11 and "rolling coal" is gonna get expensive, and it's super dumb.
    - 12thhandyman 2y ago
      I disagree the diesel crowd doesn’t discuss air/fuel ratios but perhaps I’m misunderstanding something. Sizes and types of turbos, fuel pumps, injector nozzles are frequently discussed. I do agree rolling coal is dumb but most/many daily diesel drivers don’t like it either, have always seen it as kind of a high school thing.
      - jcgrillo 2y ago
        Maybe they've wisened up more recently but I've never seen an AFR gauge in a tuned diesel in the U.S., however they're as common as EGT and boost pressure monitoring elsewhere.
        potato3732842 2y ago
        You can infer the same information it would get you via boost and EGT and whether or not your exhaust visually indicates unburnt fuel. You also don't need super precise AFR in a diesel like you do a high strung turbo gas engine. Wide band O2 sensors are unreliably enough that they're kind of a pain to keep working accurately long term if you're not on a racecar maintenance schedule and if you aren't tuning things to those extremes you don't need that level of precision anyway. Basically it just kinda adds up to "not worth it" for street vehicles
    - potato3732842 2y ago
      Really depends on which crowd you're talking about. The "I bought a tuner" or "I bought a kit" guys don't care or know enough to care. Once you start talking about people who are reading turbo specs and whatnot people do very much care (because turbos and injectors are expensive and you want them both to be compatible so they get the most out of each other).
  - dredmorbius 2y ago
    DEF system: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid> (Emissions control, reduces NOx in diesel exhaust.)
  - potato3732842 2y ago
    Those people are outnumbered 100:1 by people who simply deleted their trucks when the relevant parts gave them problem and kept the power at stock levels. Those people don't have a reason to brag anything like the "muh 100hp tune" people do so you don't hear about them.
- AStonesThrow 2y ago
  In my final high school years, my parents gifted me a 1980 Corolla, and it became my experimental electronics lab for a while. I installed a pull-out stereo, a separate amplifier, various permanent and movable speakers, etc. I mostly had the pros installed them, but I was always tweaking things at the wire-harness level. I enjoyed my music EXTRA LOUD, with minimal distortion. And I had one of those basic aftermarket alarm systems. And there I was, constantly tripping the alarm for various reasons, and we lived in a safe neighborhood, so it was mostly an additional annoyance when I set it off, or armed it, or disarmed it: I was being super ostentatious. So my proudest DIY mod was to install a shiny toggle switch in the dashboard. The toggle switch had the sole function of disabling the alarm by cutting its power. So I basically handed it to the crooks who came along in a few weeks to steal all my cassettes. But honestly, I doubt that anyone on that block was sorry to see me separated from my music at that point.
- cameronh90 2y ago
  Most mods in recent cars seem to just undo some of the regulatory emissions controls in exchange for a bit of performance. Engines aren’t leaving much on the table nowadays. CPU overlocking is going the same way.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  It depends on the mod. Some mods are easily an improvement; new tires are probably a good example here, because automakers frequently install crappy tires at the factory because of some sort of deal with the tire company, and worse, replacement for that same model of tire end up being much more expensive than better tires in the same size, probably because many consumers mistakenly think they need the exact same tire. But yeah, most "enthusiast" mods are a waste of money and make the vehicle worse.
scrlk 2y ago
Sounds like the old maxim around boat ownership still holds: "the two best days in boat ownership are the day you buy it and the day you sell it" :^)
- fsckboy 2y ago
  the joke is, "the 2nd best day of your life is the day you buy your boat" which makes the listener think "2nd? oh, must be after your wedding/birth of child" and then you say "the 1st best day is when you sell it" rug pull
  - jjordy 2y ago
    We used say boat stood for. Break out another thousand
    - AstroJetson 2y ago
      A “boat buck” Is $1000. How much was the bottom paint? All up pretty cheap, 7 boat bucks. Boats are just holes in the water that your throw money into.
      - jcgrillo 2y ago
        Bottom paint is about $250/gal. It takes us about half a day to sand the hull and roll on a layer. My 40' sailboat can be covered with 1 generous coat with 1gal with a little left over. $7k for bottom paint must either be a huge boat, an expensive crew, or both. It's just not all that expensive if you're willing to put in a little effort.
        SOLAR_FIELDS 2y ago
        I’m no boat expert but doesn’t your statement imply some level of ease of dragging a boat out of the water to perform this operation? Something tells me that pulling a 40 foot sailboat out of the water, turning it over, painting it, and returning it into the water isn’t necessarily the most straightforward operation. A lot of complexity is probably loaded into “it takes us” and if we took a gander at the hourly rates of everyone involved in said operation as well as the upfront cost of the equipment to perform said operation as well as the safety measures required to execute the operation properly I feel like we would be a lot closer to the $7k number than the $250 number
aidenn0 2y ago
I've been sailing on a 13 meter long boat in 40 knot winds, and that mast looks to have more area than the total sail we had up. The moment the wind imparts on such a tall mast must be massive.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  They should make these masts retractable.
  - kitd 2y ago
    Or use a kite.
  - bell-cot 2y ago
    That'd only help if they'd retracted it before the storm hit. Given that they didn't undertake other, "lesser" preparations before the storm hit...
    - aidenn0 2y ago
      Eh, there's some nuance there; the shipbuilder claims they didn't properly prepare and the crew say they did prepare. The limited evidence so far seems to side with the crew.
  - nradov 2y ago
    Old wooden sailing ships had masts that were somewhat retractable in that the upper spars could be removed and taken down on deck. But this isn't really practical with modern aluminum or carbon fiber masts. And it would complicate the rigging.
    - jgwil2 2y ago
      If you have an axe on board, all wooden masts are retractable in an emergency.
sellmesoap 2y ago
Having a home designed (previous owner) world sailing vessel with a mast that is bigger then the original designer's spec. It made it around cape horn and has seen a lot of high latitude low atmospheric pressure no problem. I've heard it argued that a longer mast makes the boat more stable like a tightrope walker with a pole. I'm curious about how it went for you?
- psd1 2y ago
  Not GP or mech eng, but I suspect something similar to the following: Sail area ~square mast height Mast wind force under sail ~linear sail area Mast diameter ~square mast wind force under sail Mast wind force reefed ~linear mast diameter If that's right, then you're in quadratic shit. How much bigger was the mast, a metre taller or - like the Bayesian - tens of metres?
Log_out_ 2y ago
Broke boats and airplane owners club advertising?
potato3732842 2y ago
People have been successfully modifying vessels to better fit their uses for thousands and thousands of years. This wasn't even modified after delivery. It was built to order this way by the OEM. Everything has tradeoffs. Sometimes people go too far or choose the wrong attributes. You're making a mountain out of a mole hill.
- maxlamb 2y ago
  People have not been making vessels with 237ft masts for thousands of years. That boat literally had one of the tallest mast ever to exist on a boat. You combine the “extreme” nature of this boat with an extreme weather event and you get an extremely outlier outcome
  - randomNumber7 2y ago
    I did some resarch because i didnt believe your comment at first. It seems true, the preussen had a similiar height and was a really big ship. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preussen_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preussen_(ship) It shows how utterly insane the design of the bayesian was.
    - jabl 2y ago
      Materials science has advanced quite a bit since the Preussen though. Aluminum, or even carbon fiber masts, rod standing rigging, Dyneema (UHMWPE) ropes, etc., all add up and drastically reduces weight. Not saying the Bayesian design was or wasn't insane, I don't know, but my point is that it shouldn't be judged compared to what was done over 100 years ago.
  - potato3732842 2y ago
    It's only ~10% taller than the top end of stuff that was cranked out for commercial use 150yr ago. Forgive me for being unimpressed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Republic_(1853_clipper) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Republic_(1853_clipper) Yes, the yacht is a much smaller ship but it has half as many masts it's masts are aluminum, it has engines so it doesn't have to run sail in poor conditions to maintain control authority and benefits from 150yr of improvements to watertightness. I get that everyone wants to act smug because "everybody knows that you don't put big weight high up, hehehe, stupid billionares" but I'm betting that when the dust settles, the circle jerking dies down and the reports get published the end result will be the mast being a contributory factor (I'm betting on the reduction in righting moment rather than wind area) at best and that the outcome would not have been that much more unavoidable had the same other currently unknown errors been made on the other ships of the class. A modern ship in good state doesn't just sink in minutes from capsizing. Other stuff had to have gone wrong here too. These vessels are designed that you can spend all day burying the bow in wave after wave. A little dip of one gunnel into the water should not be catastrophic. TFA discusses this.
AceyMan 2y ago
I searched the interwebs for what 'lufting' is and found nada. The term is luffing for anyone who wants to look further into these things (as I do/did).

by serf 2y ago

TylerE 2y ago

This is true in many things. Most car mods make the car objectively worse unless you really need the niche thing the mod does - and even if you think you do, be really sure.

clivestaples 2y ago
I'm a full-time RVer and see this all the time with diesel trucks. The trucks get "deleted" and modded for more power and to disable the DEF system. Almost everyone I've known throughout the years begins having transmission trouble within months, especially after heavy load. A few swear by it. I've got a very expensive Cummins and I'm hellbent to leave it stock (and under warranty).
- m463 2y ago
  I swear the older pre-def cummins engines got like 15% more mpg than the def ones. but RVs have been getting heavier too.
  - jabl 2y ago
    AFAIU modern diesels have lower combustion temperatures in order to limit NOx formation. I imagine this comes at a cost in thermodynamic efficiency. Similarly particle filters, catalytic converters and whatnot reduce efficiency via exhaust backpressure. So all in all, reducing non-CO2 emissions do come at a cost in CO2 emissions (or fuel consumed, if you like). Is it as much as 15%? No idea.. And is it all worth it? I'd argue yes, old-school diesel exhaust is nasty stuff.
    - TylerE 2y ago
      Exhaust back pressure is not an issue at all on diesels because they all run big turbos. As for your later point...I very much concur. I started masking (n95) during the pandemic, and haven't stopped. I have a... large number of health issues including several respiratory ones. Exhaust in general really is nasty stuff. I live in pretty quiet smallish (100k) town, and it can be bad enough around here with all the pollen, but I wasnt recently on a whirlwind trip through the north east that saw me visit the dense urban cores of DC, Philly, Manhattan, and Boston. The difference in odor on the occasions I'd take my mask off on the sidewalk were kinda shocking as someone not used to it.
      - jabl 2y ago
        > Exhaust back pressure is not an issue at all on diesels because they all run big turbos. Not sure what you're arguing here. Isn't it quite obvious that resistance in the exhaust system means that the engine has to do more work to push the exhaust gases out; work that otherwise could be used to turn the crankshaft. Now of course a lot of that extra energy is wasted in any case, particularly if there's nothing like a turbocharger to make use of it.
        TylerE 2y ago
        Practically all diesels have turbos. You have literally have to go back to tiny tractor engines form The 60s to Find ones that aren’t. Turbos already provide a ton of back pressure. What’s downstream of that is pretty irrelevant
        12thhandyman 2y ago
        Ford and VW put a naturally aspirated diesel into their vehicles up until the early/mid 90s.
        TylerE 2y ago
        Absolutely none of which have DPFs or EGRs.
- iamtheworstdev 2y ago
  the issue isnt that they disabled their DEF system or deleted their DPF or EGR, it's that they probably installed new ECUs or flashed new fuel maps or something and boosted the power beyond the torque abilities of the transmission attached. In a lot of diesel RVs the transmissions are normally good to 2,000lb-ft, but the engines can be pushed beyond that pretty easily.
  - Moto7451 2y ago
    My truck owning friends like to blow through transmissions at 50-60K miles by driving their trucks like sports cars and aggressively short shifting while on power. None of them do “truck things” so it’s always a head scratcher as to why they continue to do this.
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  The U.S. diesel tuning crowd seemingly never discuss air/fuel ratios. This is a huge mistake. Also it's important to understand how much torque your transmission is rated for and to not stray beyond it. It's possible to reliably extract more performance than the manufacturer supplied but you have to understand what you're getting into. Turning it up to 11 and "rolling coal" is gonna get expensive, and it's super dumb.
  - 12thhandyman 2y ago
    I disagree the diesel crowd doesn’t discuss air/fuel ratios but perhaps I’m misunderstanding something. Sizes and types of turbos, fuel pumps, injector nozzles are frequently discussed. I do agree rolling coal is dumb but most/many daily diesel drivers don’t like it either, have always seen it as kind of a high school thing.
    - jcgrillo 2y ago
      Maybe they've wisened up more recently but I've never seen an AFR gauge in a tuned diesel in the U.S., however they're as common as EGT and boost pressure monitoring elsewhere.
      - potato3732842 2y ago
        You can infer the same information it would get you via boost and EGT and whether or not your exhaust visually indicates unburnt fuel. You also don't need super precise AFR in a diesel like you do a high strung turbo gas engine. Wide band O2 sensors are unreliably enough that they're kind of a pain to keep working accurately long term if you're not on a racecar maintenance schedule and if you aren't tuning things to those extremes you don't need that level of precision anyway. Basically it just kinda adds up to "not worth it" for street vehicles
  - potato3732842 2y ago
    Really depends on which crowd you're talking about. The "I bought a tuner" or "I bought a kit" guys don't care or know enough to care. Once you start talking about people who are reading turbo specs and whatnot people do very much care (because turbos and injectors are expensive and you want them both to be compatible so they get the most out of each other).
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  DEF system: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid> (Emissions control, reduces NOx in diesel exhaust.)
- potato3732842 2y ago
  Those people are outnumbered 100:1 by people who simply deleted their trucks when the relevant parts gave them problem and kept the power at stock levels. Those people don't have a reason to brag anything like the "muh 100hp tune" people do so you don't hear about them.
AStonesThrow 2y ago
In my final high school years, my parents gifted me a 1980 Corolla, and it became my experimental electronics lab for a while. I installed a pull-out stereo, a separate amplifier, various permanent and movable speakers, etc. I mostly had the pros installed them, but I was always tweaking things at the wire-harness level. I enjoyed my music EXTRA LOUD, with minimal distortion. And I had one of those basic aftermarket alarm systems. And there I was, constantly tripping the alarm for various reasons, and we lived in a safe neighborhood, so it was mostly an additional annoyance when I set it off, or armed it, or disarmed it: I was being super ostentatious. So my proudest DIY mod was to install a shiny toggle switch in the dashboard. The toggle switch had the sole function of disabling the alarm by cutting its power. So I basically handed it to the crooks who came along in a few weeks to steal all my cassettes. But honestly, I doubt that anyone on that block was sorry to see me separated from my music at that point.
cameronh90 2y ago
Most mods in recent cars seem to just undo some of the regulatory emissions controls in exchange for a bit of performance. Engines aren’t leaving much on the table nowadays. CPU overlocking is going the same way.
shiroiushi 2y ago
It depends on the mod. Some mods are easily an improvement; new tires are probably a good example here, because automakers frequently install crappy tires at the factory because of some sort of deal with the tire company, and worse, replacement for that same model of tire end up being much more expensive than better tires in the same size, probably because many consumers mistakenly think they need the exact same tire. But yeah, most "enthusiast" mods are a waste of money and make the vehicle worse.

scrlk 2y ago

Sounds like the old maxim around boat ownership still holds: "the two best days in boat ownership are the day you buy it and the day you sell it" :^)

fsckboy 2y ago
the joke is, "the 2nd best day of your life is the day you buy your boat" which makes the listener think "2nd? oh, must be after your wedding/birth of child" and then you say "the 1st best day is when you sell it" rug pull
- jjordy 2y ago
  We used say boat stood for. Break out another thousand
  - AstroJetson 2y ago
    A “boat buck” Is $1000. How much was the bottom paint? All up pretty cheap, 7 boat bucks. Boats are just holes in the water that your throw money into.
    - jcgrillo 2y ago
      Bottom paint is about $250/gal. It takes us about half a day to sand the hull and roll on a layer. My 40' sailboat can be covered with 1 generous coat with 1gal with a little left over. $7k for bottom paint must either be a huge boat, an expensive crew, or both. It's just not all that expensive if you're willing to put in a little effort.
      - SOLAR_FIELDS 2y ago
        I’m no boat expert but doesn’t your statement imply some level of ease of dragging a boat out of the water to perform this operation? Something tells me that pulling a 40 foot sailboat out of the water, turning it over, painting it, and returning it into the water isn’t necessarily the most straightforward operation. A lot of complexity is probably loaded into “it takes us” and if we took a gander at the hourly rates of everyone involved in said operation as well as the upfront cost of the equipment to perform said operation as well as the safety measures required to execute the operation properly I feel like we would be a lot closer to the $7k number than the $250 number

aidenn0 2y ago

I've been sailing on a 13 meter long boat in 40 knot winds, and that mast looks to have more area than the total sail we had up. The moment the wind imparts on such a tall mast must be massive.

shiroiushi 2y ago
They should make these masts retractable.
- kitd 2y ago
  Or use a kite.
- bell-cot 2y ago
  That'd only help if they'd retracted it before the storm hit. Given that they didn't undertake other, "lesser" preparations before the storm hit...
  - aidenn0 2y ago
    Eh, there's some nuance there; the shipbuilder claims they didn't properly prepare and the crew say they did prepare. The limited evidence so far seems to side with the crew.
- nradov 2y ago
  Old wooden sailing ships had masts that were somewhat retractable in that the upper spars could be removed and taken down on deck. But this isn't really practical with modern aluminum or carbon fiber masts. And it would complicate the rigging.
  - jgwil2 2y ago
    If you have an axe on board, all wooden masts are retractable in an emergency.

sellmesoap 2y ago

Having a home designed (previous owner) world sailing vessel with a mast that is bigger then the original designer's spec. It made it around cape horn and has seen a lot of high latitude low atmospheric pressure no problem. I've heard it argued that a longer mast makes the boat more stable like a tightrope walker with a pole. I'm curious about how it went for you?

psd1 2y ago
Not GP or mech eng, but I suspect something similar to the following: Sail area ~square mast height Mast wind force under sail ~linear sail area Mast diameter ~square mast wind force under sail Mast wind force reefed ~linear mast diameter If that's right, then you're in quadratic shit. How much bigger was the mast, a metre taller or - like the Bayesian - tens of metres?

Log_out_ 2y ago

Broke boats and airplane owners club advertising?

potato3732842 2y ago

People have been successfully modifying vessels to better fit their uses for thousands and thousands of years. This wasn't even modified after delivery. It was built to order this way by the OEM. Everything has tradeoffs. Sometimes people go too far or choose the wrong attributes. You're making a mountain out of a mole hill.

maxlamb 2y ago
People have not been making vessels with 237ft masts for thousands of years. That boat literally had one of the tallest mast ever to exist on a boat. You combine the “extreme” nature of this boat with an extreme weather event and you get an extremely outlier outcome
- randomNumber7 2y ago
  I did some resarch because i didnt believe your comment at first. It seems true, the preussen had a similiar height and was a really big ship. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preussen_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preussen_(ship) It shows how utterly insane the design of the bayesian was.
  - jabl 2y ago
    Materials science has advanced quite a bit since the Preussen though. Aluminum, or even carbon fiber masts, rod standing rigging, Dyneema (UHMWPE) ropes, etc., all add up and drastically reduces weight. Not saying the Bayesian design was or wasn't insane, I don't know, but my point is that it shouldn't be judged compared to what was done over 100 years ago.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  It's only ~10% taller than the top end of stuff that was cranked out for commercial use 150yr ago. Forgive me for being unimpressed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Republic_(1853_clipper) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Republic_(1853_clipper) Yes, the yacht is a much smaller ship but it has half as many masts it's masts are aluminum, it has engines so it doesn't have to run sail in poor conditions to maintain control authority and benefits from 150yr of improvements to watertightness. I get that everyone wants to act smug because "everybody knows that you don't put big weight high up, hehehe, stupid billionares" but I'm betting that when the dust settles, the circle jerking dies down and the reports get published the end result will be the mast being a contributory factor (I'm betting on the reduction in righting moment rather than wind area) at best and that the outcome would not have been that much more unavoidable had the same other currently unknown errors been made on the other ships of the class. A modern ship in good state doesn't just sink in minutes from capsizing. Other stuff had to have gone wrong here too. These vessels are designed that you can spend all day burying the bow in wave after wave. A little dip of one gunnel into the water should not be catastrophic. TFA discusses this.

AceyMan 2y ago

I searched the interwebs for what 'lufting' is and found nada. The term is luffing for anyone who wants to look further into these things (as I do/did).