Belay Pins

[Bob Cleek]

On 12/15/2019 at 1:15 AM, shipman said:

It's JUST A NAME.

To deny that SMACKS OF ELITEISM, pure Snobbery.

Not in the least. To the contrary, that assertion simply makes excuses for imprecise speech and, as I noted, betrays an uninformed, if not lazy, intellect, in much the same way that incorrect spelling might not impair the meaning of a word, but, to those who know better, says something about the writer who made the error. There is nothing elitist about that at all. Real life is nothing like the Special Olympics where everybody wins a prize regardless of the place in which they may have finished.

 

An ornithologist who will use the taxonomic name, Erithacus rubecula, would understand the name, "robin" or "robin redbreast," when speaking with a layperson because those are the colloquial English names for the European robin, but an amateur ornithologist or "birdwatcher" who referred to it in a conversation with other ornithologists or knowledgeable birdwatchers as simply a robin would, by their failure to employ proper nomenclature, betray their lack of knowledge and sophistication concerning the subject matter being discussed.  

 

To put a finer point on it, there is also an American robin, which has the taxonomic name of Turdus migratorius. Even though it's properly called a a "robin" or "robin redbreast" in colloquial American English, it's taxonomic name identifies it as a member of the genus Turdus, while the European robin, is as clear from its taxonomic name, is a member of the genus Erithacus.  We know from these taxonomic names that the North American robin is a thrush, while the European robin is a chat, (although formerly classified as a thrush.)

 

 

North American robin:

 

• 

 

Then there are 49 species in 19 genera of Australasian robins, also with a red breast, and also commonly called "robins." These are in the family Petroicidae, and unrelated to either the North American or European "robins."

 

 

So, if a birdwatcher shows up to an international conference of ornithologists and starts pontificating about "robins," they are not likely to be taken too seriously, just as someone who aspires to being taken seriously by mariners and maritime historians will probably be disappointed with the reception they get when they use the term "tall ships." Context is everything.  As with birds, in a serious discussion about maritime subjects, proper use of the nomenclature makes a difference. 

 

BTW, I don't know about your side of the Pond, but over here in the USA we've got lots of people who tar their hair, get covered in crude tattoos and walk with knuckles dragging on the ground and nobody thinks they know squat about ships and the sea, or much else for that matter.

 

 

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bob Cleek

[shipman]

41 minutes ago, Bob Cleek said:

Not in the least. To the contrary, that assertion simply makes excuses for imprecise speech and, as I noted, betrays an uninformed, if not lazy, intellect, in much the same way that incorrect spelling might not impair the meaning of a word, but, to those who know better, says something about the writer who made the error. There is nothing elitist about that at all. Real life is nothing like the Special Olympics where everybody wins a prize regardless of the place in which they may have finished.

 

An ornithologist who will use the taxonomic name, Erithacus rubecula, would understand the name, "robin" or "robin redbreast," when speaking with a layperson because those are the colloquial English names for the European robin, but an amateur ornithologist or "birdwatcher" who referred to it in a conversation with other ornithologists or knowledgeable birdwatchers as simply a robin would, by their failure to employ proper nomenclature, betray their lack of knowledge and sophistication concerning the subject matter being discussed.  

 

To put a finer point on it, there is also an American robin, which has the taxonomic name of Turdus migratorius. Even though it's properly called a a "robin" or "robin redbreast" in colloquial American English, it's taxonomic name identifies it as a member of the genus Turdus, while the European robin, is as clear from its taxonomic name, is a member of the genus Erithacus.  We know from these taxonomic names that the North American robin is a thrush, while the European robin is a chat, (although formerly classified as a thrush.)

 

 

North American robin:

 

• 

 

Then there are 49 species in 19 genera of Australasian robins, also with a red breast, and also commonly called "robins." These are in the family Petroicidae, and unrelated to either the North American or European "robins."

 

 

So, if a birdwatcher shows up to an international conference of ornithologists and starts pontificating about "robins," they are not likely to be taken too seriously, just as someone who aspires to being taken seriously by mariners and maritime historians will probably be disappointed with the reception they get when they use the term "tall ships." Context is everything.  As with birds, in a serious discussion about maritime subjects, proper use of the nomenclature makes a difference. 

 

BTW, I don't know about your side of the Pond, but over here in the USA we've got lots of people who tar their hair, get covered in crude tattoos and walk with knuckles dragging on the ground and nobody thinks they know squat about ships and the sea, or much else for that matter.

 

 

'excuses for imprecise speech'.

Trying to remain light-hearted on the subject, it's a bit rich, an American telling an Englishman about the use of the English language LOL.

I stand by my original comment. However this is the season of forgiveness ...............hands across the water and all that.

[wefalck]

Never sailed on a ‚tall-ship‘ (which indeed is an inflationary expression today, also applied to small two-masted schooners and such). However, with my limited experience of belaying man-made fibre ropes on cleats, I found that things get rarely moving before only one figure of eight is left.

cleats are different, because they wedge the rope more, but I doubt, that a third figure of eight makes any difference. The only reason I can see is that a locking hitch is avoided (which can be ver difficult to cast loose, when the ropes are frozen), because it keeps down due to its own weight.

Having learned to sail before getting into serious model building, it was always logic to me to measure out the lengths of rope  so that the tackles could be worked. I then sometimes cheat by cutting it in order to put it on as a separate coil, which makes things more manageable.

 

[Keith Black]

2 hours ago, Bob Cleek said:

over here in the USA we've got lots of people who tar their hair, get covered in crude tattoos and walk with knuckles dragging on the ground

I dated a girl that fits that description. Name was Robin but everybody called her Bob. Not exactly sure what attraction I saw in her,  her crooked smile, the glint in her eyes that she got after a couple of drinks, or maybe it was the way she handled herself with a belay pin in one of the many bar fights at the Tall Ship Lounge where I hung out with old salts that sang sea shanties till the wee hours of the morning..........but then I digress

[Bob Cleek]

7 hours ago, shipman said:

Trying to remain light-hearted on the subject, it's a bit rich, an American telling an Englishman about the use of the English language LOL.

I stand by my original comment. However this is the season of forgiveness ...............hands across the water and all that.

Just a bit of semantic sparring in good fun. Given the politics of the moment, it would seem neither the US nor England can justify riding a high horse!  

[shipman]

6 minutes ago, Bob Cleek said:

Just a bit of semantic sparring in good fun. Given the politics of the moment, it would seem neither the US nor England can justify riding a high horse!  

You aren't so bad, Bob! (no matter what they say)

'Going to hell in a handcart' is a phrase that comes to mind.

[Bob Cleek]

4 hours ago, shipman said:

You aren't so bad, Bob! (no matter what they say)

Thanks! I'm saving your post to show to my wife!

 

[shipman]

1 hour ago, Bob Cleek said:

Thanks! I'm saving your post to show to my wife!

 

Yep, tell her I'll be over tonight LOL.

We'd better get back to something more constructive on this forum. People are beginning to talk.

[wool132]

On 12/12/2019 at 1:26 AM, Bob Cleek said:

All that is needed is the single half hitch around the top of the pin. the tension on the line and friction in the half hitch will keep it completely secure.

After reading up on the Bollard/Capstan Equation from my college physics course of yore, I'd have to agree with Bob. It doesn't take many turns to create a large hold-force. With Bob's Belay Pin technique, it looks like there are the equivalent of about two turns (one on bottom and another on the sides/top) so the simple half-hitch knot can restrain maybe 200x to 2,000x more force than it normally would.

 

And I had fun reading all the posts. Learned a lot about Robins, too. 🙂

 

Jonathan

[Altduck]

Similar friction characteristics on small boat winches.  It's the first turn or 2 (if the knurling is still in good shape) that carry the load.  If there are 4 or 5 turns, the line doesn't start to slip until the first 2 from the load have some slack in them.  Pays to be careful at that point, though, if just trying to ease a jib sheet a tad.