kerrydeare wrote:In other words, if they hadn't had a tow from your power-driven boat, they would not have been able to continue south.
*North*. I can assure you that we really did have to talk them into letting us tow them through the Dismal Swamp Canal. They did not want to do it. I also am quite certain that, as resourceful as these people were, had we not towed them through the Dismal Swamp Canal they would have either sailed through the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, or, if for some reason they were unable to make it through the A&C Canal (because of, say, some bureaucratic prig of a bridgetender rather than a lack of ability), they would have back-tracked to Hatteras Inlet and sailed outside to the Chesapeake.
kerrydeare wrote:..people who try this are the very same people who, at some point and without exception, rely on other people with engines.
I have met people like that, too. These weren't those kind of people.
kerrydeare wrote:Did they ever explain the outboard motor mount on the transom of their "engineless" boat?
They did. They had acquired an outboard motor and outboard bracket at some point in their trip after leaving Russia, I'm not sure when or where, but it had long since ceased working and they didn't have the money to buy parts to repair it, so they just left the bracket there. Sort of like the original poster of this thread's desire to bolt an outboard bracket on his transom instead of fixing the diesel.
kerrydeare wrote:The other route (Route One) to Ablemarle involves a lock and several stretches barely as wide as the boat is long, including several timed bridges whose tenders are as likely to delay their bridge as provide a free lunch with showers. Also if done at normal sailboat speeds it's impossible to carry a fair tide at all points of the route.
In my experience, it's pretty well impossible to carry a fair tide at all points on
any route on the ICW. If the wind isn't strong enough to overcome the current, you anchor. If the ditch is very narrow and the wind isn't fair for sailing, you wait until it is.
kerrydeare wrote:I don't however believe you are suggesting that this sort of thing makes practical sense for a typical reader of this board or for that matter most people who have a modicum of common sense and aren't completely destitute. I am prepared to repeat the claim that sailing a modern cruising boat without propulsion is at best a stunt, and at times even illegal. Daysailing on the Chesapeake, particularly from a mooring, is however not only possible but very likely a lot of fun. Just be sure to make it back to the mooring that afternoon early enough to avoid the daily thunderstorm.
I think it's true that people who have jobs and have to be back to work on Monday morning simply don't have the time required to wait for conditions to be fair to sail everywhere. For those of us who are retired and have the leisure of our time, it's another matter. If you are talking about "practical sense", you should give up sailing altogether. Sailing in any form, with our without an engine, doesn't make any sense. Up here in Maine one of the largest industries is lobster fishing, and I have to tell you that to virtually every lobsterman I have talked to, no one "with a modicum of common sense" as you put it would sail. To them, any boat with a sail is just stupid. Get a powerboat and join the real world.
As to sailing without an engine being a "stunt", then I suppose you also think that tossing a 9.5 inch round ball through an 18 inch circle from 50 feet away is a "stunt" or putting a 1.68 inch ball into a 4-1/4 inch hole 367 yards away using a stick is a "stunt" or putting a 8.66 inch ball through a 24x8 foot rectangle without using your hands is a "stunt". Personally I think that sailing without an engine is a
sport, just like basketball, golf, or soccer is. In sport we do things that are essentially pointless for no reason other than the challenge of it. To me a "stunt" is crossing Niagara Falls on a tight rope, though I suppose the tight rope walker might consider what he does a sport. I think you will find that a great many sailors consider sailing without an engine a sport rather than a stunt.
So it's all how you look at it. Feel free to consider sailing without an engine a "stunt" if you like. I consider it a sport. Those lobstermen think we're all a bunch of idiots anyway.
I'll read it once more to be sure, but I didn't see any mention in this article about an englneless sailboat named Mollymawk.
No, I don't think that article mentions anything about being engineless. Try here:
https://www.oceannavigator.com/new-crui ... -veterans/
Smooth sailing,
--Jim