DOCSLIB.ORG

Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Navigation Impact Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Navigation Impact Report Memorandum November 7, 2012 TO: Interested Parties FROM: Kris Strickler, Oregon Project Director Nancy Boyd, Washington Project Director SUBJECT: Columbia River Crossing Navigation Impact Report The Columbia River Crossing Navigation Impact Report contains the results of a comprehensive analysis conducted in 2012 to inform decisions related to the height and navigational clearance for the replacement Interstate 5 bridge across the Columbia River. The report contains findings from several distinct research efforts on river use, vessel size, economic impacts and the feasibility of options to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts to current and future river navigation. The centerpiece of the report is the result of a vessel impact analysis which identifies the number of impacted users along with the community, environmental and cost effects of bridge heights from 95 to 125 feet. The report does not include a recommendation for a particular bridge height. The information and data contained can be used to understand the advantages and disadvantages of the bridge height options studied and inform a balanced decision. The selected bridge height must balance the interests of river users, freight mobility, needs for flight paths over the bridge to Portland International Airport and Pearson Airfield, connections to downtown Vancouver, interstate safety and efficiency, and cost and schedule of the CRC project. A General Bridge Permit, issued by the U.S. Coast Guard, is one of the required elements to begin construction of the replacement bridge in late 2014. In reviewing a permit application, Coast Guard decision makers will consider their mission, which calls for meeting the reasonable needs of navigation and employing a balanced approach to the total transportation systems on land and water. The Navigation Impact Report findings and continuing consultation with the affected parties will be used by the states of Oregon and Washington to finalize a bridge height in December 2012 in preparation to submit a General Bridge Permit application to the U.S. Coast Guard in January 2013. Attachment cc: Project Controls 1 360/737-2726 503/256-2726 WWW.COLUMBIARIVERCROSSING.ORG 700 WASH NGTON STREET, SUITE 300, VANCOUVER, WA 98660 I N T E R S TAT E 5 C O L U M B I A R I V E R C ROSSING Navigation Impact Report November 2012 Title VI The Columbia River Crossing project team ensures full compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by prohibiting discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the provision of benefits and services resulting from its federally assisted programs and activities. For questions regarding WSDOT’s Title VI Program, you may contact the Department’s Title VI Coordinator at (360) 705-7098. For questions regarding ODOT’s Title VI Program, you may contact the Department’s Civil Rights Office at (503) 986- 4350. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information If you would like copies of this document in an alternative format, please call the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) project office at (360) 737-2726 or (503) 256-2726. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may contact the CRC project through the Telecommunications Relay Service by dialing 7-1-1. ¿Habla usted español? La informacion en esta publicación se puede traducir para usted. Para solicitar los servicios de traducción favor de llamar al (503) 731-4128. Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing i Navigation Impact Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Report .............................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 The River and its Users ............................................................................................................................ 1-3 1.3 Findings .................................................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.3.1 Summary of Vessel Impacts ................................................................................................................. 1-5 1.3.2 Meeting the Reasonable Needs of Navigation ..................................................................................... 1-7 1.3.3 Other Factors to Consider .................................................................................................................. 1-10 1.4 Reader’s Guide to this Report ................................................................................................................ 1-11 1.5 Next Steps .............................................................................................................................................. 1-12 2. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE I-5 COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT .............................................. 2-1 2.1 Project Purpose ........................................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Project Need ............................................................................................................................................. 2-1 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT AND HEIGHTS CONSIDERED ....................................................... 3-1 3.1 Project as Approved by Record of Decision ............................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.1 Main Span Crossing of the Columbia River .......................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 North Portland Harbor Bridges ............................................................................................................. 3-2 3.2 Main Span Bridge Heights Considered during CRC NEPA Process ........................................................ 3-3 3.3 Other Main Span Bridge Heights Considered for General Bridge Permit Application ............................... 3-5 4. ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF PROJECT ....................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Summary of Project Economic Benefits .................................................................................................... 4-1 4.3 Landside Traveler Savings ....................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.4 Marine Navigation Benefits and Costs ...................................................................................................... 4-2 4.5 Economic Benefits due to Improved Market Access ................................................................................. 4-3 4.6 Eliminating the Risk of Catastrophic Loss of the Existing Bridges ............................................................ 4-3 5. THE COLUMBIA/SNAKE RIVER SYSTEM AND WATER LEVELS ................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Description of Columbia/Snake River System .......................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Main Channel of the Columbia River in the Project Area .......................................................................... 5-3 5.2.1 Existing Conditions at the I-5 Bridge .................................................................................................... 5-3 5.2.2 River Water Levels at the I-5 Bridge ..................................................................................................... 5-4 5.2.3 Columbia River Treaty .......................................................................................................................... 5-7 5.3 North Portland Harbor ............................................................................................................................... 5-7 5.3.1 North Portland Harbor - Eastern Portion .............................................................................................. 5-7 5.3.2 North Portland Harbor - Western Portion ............................................................................................. 5-8 6. CURRENT AND FUTURE NAVIGATIONAL USES ....................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Overview of Interstate Bridge Opening Trends ......................................................................................... 6-1 6.1.1 Introduction and Methodology .............................................................................................................. 6-1 6.1.2 Description of Bridge Characteristics Relevant to Bridge Openings ..................................................... 6-2 ii Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Navigation Impact Report 6.1.3 Bridge Opening Trends ........................................................................................................................ 6-2 6.1.4 Bridge Openings as a Share of Total Navigation Activity ..................................................................... 6-5 6.2 River User Data ........................................................................................................................................ 6-7 6.2.1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Interstate Bridge Replacement Program December 2019 Progress Report
    Interstate Bridge Replacement Program December 2019 Progress Report December 2019 Progress Report i This page intentionally left blank. ii Interstate Bridge Replacement Program December 2, 2019 (Electronic Transmittal Only) The Honorable Governor Inslee The Honorable Kate Brown WA Senate Transportation Committee Oregon Transportation Commission WA House Transportation Committee OR Joint Committee on Transportation Dear Governors, Transportation Commission, and Transportation Committees: On behalf of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), we are pleased to submit the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program status report, as directed by Washington’s 2019-21 transportation budget ESHB 1160, section 306 (24)(e)(iii). The intent of this report is to share activities that have lead up to the beginning of the biennium, accomplishments of the program since funding was made available, and future steps to be completed by the program as it moves forward with the clear support of both states. With the appropriation of $35 million in ESHB 1160 to open a project office and restart work to replace the Interstate Bridge, Governor Inslee and the Washington State Legislature acknowledged the need to renew efforts for replacement of this aging infrastructure. Governor Kate Brown and the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) directed ODOT to coordinate with WSDOT on the establishment of a project office. The OTC also allocated $9 million as the state’s initial contribution, and Oregon Legislative leadership appointed members to a Joint Committee on the Interstate Bridge. These actions demonstrate Oregon’s agreement that replacement of the Interstate 5 Bridge is vital. As is conveyed in this report, the program office is working to set this project up for success by working with key partners to build the foundation as we move forward toward project development.
    [Show full text]
  • The 46Th Annual
    the 46th Annual 2018 TO BENEFIT NANTUCKET COMMUNITY SAILING PROUD TO SPONSOR MURRAY’S TOGGERY SHOP 62 MAIN STREET | 800-368-3134 2 STRAIGHT WHARF | 508-325-9600 1-800-892-4982 2018 elcome to the 15th Nantucket Race Week and the 46th Opera House Cup Regatta brought to you by Nantucket WCommunity Sailing, the Nantucket Yacht Club and the Great Harbor Yacht Club. We are happy to have you with us for an unparalleled week of competitive sailing for all ages and abilities, complemented by a full schedule of awards ceremonies and social events. We look forward to sharing the beauty of Nantucket and her waters with you. Thank you for coming! This program celebrates the winners and participants from last year’s Nantucket Race Week and the Opera House Cup Regatta and gives you everything you need to know about this year’s racing and social events. We are excited to welcome all sailors in the Nantucket community to join us for our inaugural Harbor Rendezvous on Sunday, August 12th. We are also pleased to welcome all our competitors, including young Opti and 420 racers; lasers, Hobies and kite boarders; the local one design fleets; the IOD Celebrity Invitational guest tacticians and amateur teams; and the big boat regatta competitors ranging from Alerions and Wianno Seniors to schooners and majestic classic yachts. Don’t forget that you can go aboard and admire some of these beautiful classics up close, when they will be on display to the public for the 5th Classic Yacht Exhibition on Saturday, August 18th.
    [Show full text]
  • An Update on Waldo Lake Columbia Seaplane Pilots Association
    Columbia Seaplane Pilots Association 13200 Fielding Road President ARON FAEGRE 503-222-2546 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Vice President BILL WAINWRIGHT 503-293-7627 Treasurer JAMIE GREENE 503-292-1495 Secretary JOHN CHLOPEK 503-810-7690 March 2009 Volume 30, Issue 1 CSPA An Update on Waldo Lake e-BULL-A-TON By Aron Faegre Inside this issue: As of a month ago both Stewart and federal government owns the lake. CSPA have each filed requests for sum- Cloran filed a brief with all the reasons President’s Message mary judgments with the court asking why the case should go on and not An Update on Waldo Lake 1-2 the judge to make his ruling. This is be- stop, and attached the Carrier affida- By Aron Faegre cause we feel the record strongly sup- vit. The judge said let’s have a confer- ports a finding that Waldo Lake is navi- Jamie Greene, making us proud. 3 ence call with all parties and talk gable, which means the Forest Service about it on Tuesday (before the The TSA Proposed LASP, and (FS) is not the agency allowed to regu- planned Friday meeting). At the con- “Playbook” Operations: An Opinion 3-5 from the Alaskan Experimental Air- late seaplane use of the lake. If the lake ference call there was extensive dis- craft Association. is navigable, it is owned by the State of cussion, following which the judge Watercraft Border Crossing Oregon, and it is the State that is al- said “no.” He said he wanted to have 6 By “Chuck I-Am-a-Boat” Jarecki lowed to regulate seaplane use.
    [Show full text]
  • March 16,1865
    *Wima&mvciA~ Jit (ll I / < I ,s *'*iMt**Sf *««* ihnll ,-gaiatf^ a^bxjt ,DM.U —*“r ■*♦•- >’-*wA *i: aft _ “ ri A ■j"i?”s'"1 »iii*V ■«**■> tit * wrs»jt' i 4»Y>fw*-.»Sir^'> v,wi ".■i.,i:.!:L.^i.Y- ■' _ MahlMed June syear, in advance. "v^PMHiSSnKaacantt —n a- a.„n -,r i snow till at length I made my way into the ;>aTLAI3D Is AIL i KH3BB, * main igloo. Nukerton was not dead! She MISCELLANEOUS. MISCELLANEOUS. FOR BALE & TO LET. BUSINESS CARDS. BUSINESS CARlib. soiil, 1’. WiEMAIK. Editor, bieathed,and was much about the same as j merchandise. when I last saw her. I determined then to j ~=' .re puL'Ilehsa st He. 3XKSSXX.ay For Male. U IS SLl WP D « G2*EXCHANGE what I could for the CITY OF Dana & Co. H remain, doing dylug,— PORTLAND subscriber offers his fans* situated in Yar. i%ew & the 1865. Crop Sugar. Ti. A. FOSTER CO. The lamp was nearly out, cold was h»tcuee, PROSPECTUS FOR THEm u h, containing 45 ac es of good i&cd in- the thennometer outside being 51 degrees be- cluding abou' 6 a ires woodland. A two story Fish and SEWING l 8°I«i(l'8n«nUoag|U, and car, Sait, MAC FINES 150 the and I home, wood isg> huus >&. *»nd b »rn wit c-1 ,84 Rrxee Yellow now 1 AroR-rLABX>,>.iur low freezing point; though had on 0 Sugar, l.nding* fro:* FuK3eiapuiiiifiiiedat*s.ot B U NT IE S ! lar an ore an cf about 40 tree*, good Iruit Tl ere f.om M»l>iaaa.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia River I-5 Bridge Planning Inventory Report
    Report to the Washington State Legislature Columbia River I-5 Bridge Planning Inventory December 2017 Columbia River I-5 Bridge Planning Inventory Errata The Columbia River I-5 Bridge Planning Inventory published to WSDOT’s website on December 1, 2017 contained the following errata. The items below have been corrected in versions downloaded or printed after January 10, 2018. Section 4, page 62: Corrects the parties to the tolling agreement between the States—the Washington State Transportation Commission and the Oregon Transportation Commission. Miscellaneous sections and pages: Minor grammatical corrections. Columbia River I-5 Bridge Planning Inventory | December 2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary. .1 Section 1: Introduction. .29 Legislative Background to this Report Purpose and Structure of this Report Significant Characteristics of the Project Area Prior Work Summary Section 2: Long-Range Planning . .35 Introduction Bi-State Transportation Committee Portland/Vancouver I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership Task Force The Transition from Long-Range Planning to Project Development Section 3: Context and Constraints . 41 Introduction Guiding Principles: Vision and Values Statement & Statement of Purpose and Need Built and Natural Environment Navigation and Aviation Protected Species and Resources Traffic Conditions and Travel Demand Safety of Bridge and Highway Facilities Freight Mobility Mobility for Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel Section 4: Funding and Finance. 55 Introduction Funding and Finance Plan Evolution During
    [Show full text]
  • Resettlement
    Resettlement By Gail Wells Because the Pacific Northwest was a focus of international commerce in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, people of many different cultures came to or passed through the region. The earliest Europeans to stay for long on the northern Oregon coast were the Scottish, English, French, and American people attached to British and American fur-trading enterprises. The fur companies recruited Hawai‘ians to work as seamen on company ships and as laborers ashore, and an estimated 1,000 indigenous Hawai‘ians traveled to the Pacific Northwest between 1787 and 1898, when the islands were incorporated into the United States. The HBC post at Fort Vancouver employed Hawai‘ians to work in the company’s gardens and water-powered sawmill, the first in the Oregon Country. Umatilla, Cayuse, Walla Walla, and Nez Perce regularly traded with the HBC, and some of the company men married Native wives. Since the 1860s, however, the population of the Oregon Coast and the Pacific Northwest as a whole has been predominantly Euro-American. The HBC had a tremendous impact on the Native peoples on the coast. Archaeologist Scott Byram argues that the Yaquina, an ancestral tribe of the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians, was one of the first Native groups in western Oregon to suffer the direct effects of colonialism when, in the spring of 1832, they had a series of violent conflicts with HBC fur trappers. Company accounts justified the violence as retaliation for the murder of two trappers, while Native oral tradition describes the events as the beginning of the decline of the Yaquina.
    [Show full text]
  • Hood River – White Salmon Interstate Bridge Replacement Project SDEIS
    (OR SHPO Case No. 19-0587; WA DAHP Project Tracking Code: 2019-05-03456) Draft Historic Resources Technical Report October 1, 2020 Prepared for: Prepared by: In coordination with: 111 SW Columbia 851 SW Sixth Avenue Suite 1500 Suite 1600 Portland, Oregon 97201 Portland, Oregon 97204 This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Project Alternatives ....................................................................................................................... 3 2.1. No Action Alternative .......................................................................................................... 7 2.2. Preferred Alternative EC-2 ................................................................................................... 8 2.3. Alternative EC-1 ................................................................................................................ 14 2.4. Alternative EC-3 ................................................................................................................ 19 2.5. Construction of the Build Alternatives ............................................................................... 23 3. Methodology ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The B I N N a C
    FALL 2014 THE B INNACLE Cruising Around Croatia Leukemia Cup Raises Record $421,000 Area III and Beer Can Awards Blue Jacket 40 Best Midsize Cruiser, 39–41 Feet Domestic Boat Of The Year 2014 2014 Ultimate Cruising Performance Blue Jacket 40 Blue Jacket 40 Winner of two Boat of the Year Awards from Cruising World, the Blue Jacket redefines the term “performance cruiser”. Complete with the high performance, 3 sail package, she is truly an Blue Jacket 40 In-Stock elegant and modern performance cruiser perfect for the Chicago sailor. Special Columbia Yacht Club Incentive Package Larsen Marine is offering this 2014 model with a special incentive package for Columbia Yacht Club members. Call for incentive details and personal tour of the Blue Jacket 40 in our heated showroom. NEW In-Stock: Dealer of the Year Sun Odyssey 41DS, 409, 379 & 349 Brokerage Marketing and Sales Experts www.larsenmarine.com Boat2 TSales H E & FinancingB I N N A C• Full L E Service F A L L Yard 2 0 1 • 4 Storage • Mobile Service • On Site & Online Ship Store Waukegan, IL (847) 336-5456 Fax (847) 336-5530 Fall 2014 ON THE WateR IN THIS ISSUE 06 RACING 18 CrUISING THROUGH 26 ACTIVITIES Area III and Beer Can results CROATIA Plans are underway for 2015 announced at this year’s Columbia members spend a events and parties—why not Boater’s Bash week cruising the Dalmatian join in the fun? coast 09 POWER FLEET 27 ASSOCIATES It’s been a lovely cruise 20 AMATEUR NIGHT RACE Racing, clubs and more, through the summer The first-ever Goose Island there’s something for every Amateur
    [Show full text]
  • DEPARTMENT of the TREASURY 31 CFR Part 33 RIN 1505-AC72 DEPARTMENT of HEALTH and HUMAN SERVICES 45 CFR Parts 155 and 156 [CMS-99
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 01/19/2021 and available online at federalregister.gov/d/2021-01175, and on govinfo.gov[Billing Code: 4120-01-P] DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 31 CFR Part 33 RIN 1505-AC72 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 45 CFR Parts 155 and 156 [CMS-9914-F] RIN 0938-AU18 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; HHS Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2022; Updates to State Innovation Waiver (Section 1332 Waiver) Implementing Regulations AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), Department of the Treasury. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This final rule sets forth provisions related to user fees for federally-facilitated Exchanges and State-based Exchanges on the Federal Platform. It includes changes related to acceptance of payments by issuers of individual market Qualified Health Plans and clarifies the regulation imposing network adequacy standards with regard to Qualified Health Plans that do not use provider networks. It also adds a new direct enrollment option for federally-facilitated Exchanges and State Exchanges and implements changes related to section 1332 State Innovation Waivers. DATES: These regulations are effective on March 15, 2021. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Wu, (301) 492-4305, Rogelyn McLean, (301) 492-4229, Usree Bandyopadhyay, (410) 786-6650, Grace Bristol, (410) 786-8437, or Kiahana Brooks, (301) 492-5229, for general information. Aaron Franz, (410) 786-8027, for matters related to user fees. Robert Yates, (301) 492-5151, for matters related to the direct enrollment option for federally-facilitated Exchange states, State-based Exchanges on the Federal Platform, and State Exchanges.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Historic Built Environment Technical Report for the Final Environmental Impact Statement
    I N T E R S TAT E 5 C O L U M B I A R I V E R C ROSSING Historic Built Environment Technical Report for the Final Environmental Impact Statement May 2011 Title VI The Columbia River Crossing project team ensures full compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by prohibiting discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the provision of benefits and services resulting from its federally assisted programs and activities. For questions regarding WSDOT’s Title VI Program, you may contact the Department’s Title VI Coordinator at (360) 705-7098. For questions regarding ODOT’s Title VI Program, you may contact the Department’s Civil Rights Office at (503) 986-4350. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information If you would like copies of this document in an alternative format, please call the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) project office at (360) 737-2726 or (503) 256-2726. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may contact the CRC project through the Telecommunications Relay Service by dialing 7-1-1. ¿Habla usted español? La informacion en esta publicación se puede traducir para usted. Para solicitar los servicios de traducción favor de llamar al (503) 731-4128. Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Historic Built Environment Technical Report for the Final Environmental Impact Statement This page intentionally left blank. May 2011 Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Historic Built Environment Technical Report for the Final Environmental Impact Statement Cover Sheet Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Historic Built Environment Technical Report for the Final Environmental Impact Statement: Submitted By: Derek Chisholm Mike Gallagher Rosalind Keeney Elisabeth Leaf Julie Osborne Saundra Powell Jessica Roberts Megan Taylor Parametrix May 2011 Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Historic Built Environment Technical Report for the Final Environmental Impact Statement This page intentionally left blank.
    [Show full text]
  • 1899-10-03, [P ]
    H W^isMM •* "*"1 i\> I C, .1 V "^ItJ «. t * V » f A »*%» — " / f r * •* « t » i'j 4( ^i r ^ J.+ *c f t * «. * r j„ ^ # « •• I • "** ' - - ^.\TJ K **&»,mams, «aei®J5SflffiS©^;..ai.-A" ra»*S5iwf s-Tf,# ;•:% -STJ —^TBS-nrf^-^5* ^ ^ -J ' -ssiwr " ' ' ' J'^l •VMSH?* •*W$ sT-lT'•£''' *S- ** * / 1 v,"~'" .4^«AiTli- •-! - {•••••. L'. ; / •> " .. r r „ •..•'*-. -• •.- --• -•¥"; '•' -*.«-•• rwr^Jv TOr r^5J3>-" ~ %yw«r\IW •*TW»«6, «•';«», $&*$!& * * ORDER THE T.-H. FOR QUICKANDCOMPLKTS NKWS. LAST BDITIONi S O'CLOCK ^jf^y, pr#i :^ I ALU TMt NEWS, ? ^a «••*«•«» a The date In the Dally T.- ? THE RELIABLE NEWS. tOnlDare ^ *lth the dates on S, « ^ THE QUICKEST NEW8, — 1-—— other papers and CO IN THE "T.-H." vince yourselves which paper publishes ««C H* MONTH a* MAIL. SEND THE NEWS FIRST. ADORCSS AND MONCV. Then order the T.-R. (or quickest news. 1 fei -. THREE MONTHS, »V MAIL 91.98' •m. ^VOL.XXV. MARSHALLTOWN. IOWA, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1899 -NT). 248 ing the Shamrock, and drew up on her. silenced the grans of the foe, sunk the 2:40 p. m.—Columbia apparently had hostile fleet, demonstrated the suprem­ slight lead.'; Both are making short acy of American sea power and trans­ tacks and jockeying for position. The ferred to the United States the empire lead is likely to change at any moment. of the islands of the Pacific. Later, by Columbia ipas to windward. your display of large, powers of admin­ First Race Between Columbia and :47 p. m.—The boats have covered Dewey Presented With the Magnifi­ istration, by your pdlse and prudence, Most Alarming Reports on the Situ­ The Harris-Emery Department Store Shamrock Sailed Today—A about a third of the journey back to cent Sword Voted by Congress The Weather.
    [Show full text]
  • Design of the Courageous Mast Designers’ Forum by Arvel Gentry YACHTING Magazine, February 1975
    Design of the Courageous Mast Designers’ Forum By Arvel Gentry YACHTING Magazine, February 1975 (Arvel Gentry is a research aerodynamicist at the Douglas Aircraft Co., in Long Beach, Cal., and has long had a special fascination for sailboat aerodynamics, a subject with which he has had extensive practical experience on his successful Ranger 23 “Kittiwake.” His non-sailing weekends are spent with such December 1999 design projects as a sailing performance recorder for the new 79' ketch “Kialoa III” and mast shapes for ocean racers and 12-meters. Here he describes the work behind the mast section on the 1974 America's cup defender. Eds.) The America's Cup is defended and challenged by men sailing the most advanced boats afloat, and no 12-Meter skipper would want to go to the starting line with anything but the fastest boat and best equipment that designers and builders can produce. Since very small differences in boatspeed can mean the margin between victory and defeat, every part of the boat (hull, rigging, and sails) is reviewed and studied for any possible improvement. Much was written last summer and fall about hull shape (with the disappointment of the Chance-designed Mariner) and about sails (the Kevlar mainsails and the Hood versus North competition). Although other design Figure 2. Aluminum shapes used to test new spar designs on the author’s Ranger 23 (foreground) and on an Ericson 46 features were less spectacular and less obvious, they were (background). The restrictive 12-Meter rule prohibits any nonetheless important. A case in point was the new mast radical developments, as the similarity of these shapes section shapes that appeared on both the challenger, indicates.
    [Show full text]