23 Feb 2007 10:01:49
Rutger T
Fin/Skeg question

I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?

Cheers,

Rutger


23 Feb 2007 02:20:55
J Flory
Re: Fin/Skeg question

On Feb 23, 4:01 am, Rutger T <[email protected] > wrote:
> why are skegs almost
> universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
>
Are you considering 1x's or larger boats? There is a lot of variation
in skeg/fin placement in 1x's.



23 Feb 2007 02:21:37
Jonny
Re: Fin/Skeg question

On Feb 23, 5:01 pm, Rutger T <[email protected] > wrote:
> I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
> magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
> universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
> Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rutger

Carl will probably have a better answer (he does make the things after
all), but I have found that the placement of the fin makes a huge
difference to how easily - or not - a boat turns.

On most hull shapes the fin would be submerged at any mounting point.

For example, a single scull.
If the fin is near the stern (say 30-50cm from end) the boat is much
harder to turn - but will stay straight on a 2000m race course.
If the fin is closer to the end of the cockpit (say 70-150cm from
stern) the boat is easier to turn, which is great for a winding river,
but not so good for the 2000m race.

Like everything about rowing boat design - it is a compromise!



23 Feb 2007 11:58:05
Rutger T
Re: Fin/Skeg question

Jonny wrote:
> On Feb 23, 5:01 pm, Rutger T <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
>>magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
>>universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
>>Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Rutger
>
>
> Carl will probably have a better answer (he does make the things after
> all), but I have found that the placement of the fin makes a huge
> difference to how easily - or not - a boat turns.
>
> On most hull shapes the fin would be submerged at any mounting point.
>
> For example, a single scull.
> If the fin is near the stern (say 30-50cm from end) the boat is much
> harder to turn - but will stay straight on a 2000m race course.
> If the fin is closer to the end of the cockpit (say 70-150cm from
> stern) the boat is easier to turn, which is great for a winding river,
> but not so good for the 2000m race.
>
> Like everything about rowing boat design - it is a compromise!
>
Ok, but then, if you wanted easier turning, couldn't you use a smaller
fin at the stern, the smaller fin introducing a smaller drag?


23 Feb 2007 06:47:19
J Flory
Re: Fin/Skeg question

On Feb 23, 5:58 am, Rutger T <[email protected] > wrote:
> Ok, but then, if you wanted easier turning, couldn't you use a smaller
> fin at the stern, the smaller fin introducing a smaller drag?

You probably wouldn't need to go all the way to the stern. We once
tested a Filippi 2x/- which had a teensy rudder at the tip of the
stern in addition to a normal skeg at the usual location. We were
rowing it as a 2x and could barely get it to turn at all using just
pressure. When we used the rudder it turned on a dime.

But as I understand it the skeg also contributes to the lateral roll
stability of the boat: for a given hull shape a skeg of smaller area
may render the boat a bit tippier. And perhaps a deeper skeg may
exert more leverage (and may extend further beyond the turbulent
layer), so that may be why Empacher and Fillipi offer optional deep
banana-shaped carbon skegs.

Another factor is hull shape. Hulls with a flat keel, especially
towards the bow (Empacher, Hudson, most Filippis) are inherently
harder to turn than hulls with more rocker (Van Dusen, CD, King).

I don't understand (and hope somebody can explain) why hulls that have
more rocker (Van Dusen, King, CD) have skegs further forward than the
flatter hulls mentioned above. Perhaps they have less roll stability
than the flatter hulls and putting the skeg closer to the cockpit
confers more stability than locating it further astern, for a skeg of
a given size??








23 Feb 2007 15:30:42
Peter Ford
Re: Fin/Skeg question

On Feb 23, 9:01 am, Rutger T <[email protected] > wrote:
> I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
> magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
> universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
> Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rutger

We have two 4-/x's at our club, one with a rudder/fin combination at
the stern, and the other with it partway down the stern canvas. The
difference in their steering characteristics is dramatic; the mid-
ruddered boat will react wonderfully to sudden changes, and apparently
with less effect upon the balance of the boat. In particular, it seems
to be assisted by the ability of the stern to slide sideways through
the water. The other boat, particularly in adverse stream conditions,
has a tendency to feel like steering an 8, which is hardly the feel I
prefer from a bow-steered boat.

Peter



24 Feb 2007 21:47:59
Carl
Re: Fin/Skeg question

Jonny wrote:
> On Feb 23, 5:01 pm, Rutger T <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
>>magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
>>universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
>>Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Rutger
>
>
> Carl will probably have a better answer (he does make the things after
> all), but I have found that the placement of the fin makes a huge
> difference to how easily - or not - a boat turns.
>
> On most hull shapes the fin would be submerged at any mounting point.
>
> For example, a single scull.
> If the fin is near the stern (say 30-50cm from end) the boat is much
> harder to turn - but will stay straight on a 2000m race course.
> If the fin is closer to the end of the cockpit (say 70-150cm from
> stern) the boat is easier to turn, which is great for a winding river,
> but not so good for the 2000m race.
>
> Like everything about rowing boat design - it is a compromise!
>

In simple terms the skeg/fin of an oar-steered boat (i.e. 1x or 2x)
serves primarily to stabilise the course taken by the boat & secondarily
to improve the roll stability.

To serve either function the fin needs to be deep enough to penetrate
the boundary layer - the zone of disturbed water which extends out from
the hull surface in which the fluid velocity lies between boat velocity
(in contact with the hull) & free stream velocity. This layer is
infinitesimally thin at the very bow of the boat, but thickens
progressively as you move towards the stern. And for all but the first
metre or so, it is turbulent - tiny packets of water, vortices, are
spinning & moving between slower & faster parts while all being dragged
along with the boat. Ignoring the wave pattern generated by the boat,
which is an entirely separate phenomenon, the thickness of the turbulent
boundary layer is indicated by the width of the minutely disturbed zone
of water surface closest to the boat.

The further you place the fin towards the stern, the deeper it must be
to get the same penetration of the boundary layer, & the more difficult
it will make it to steer the boat in a cross-wind. And in choppy
conditions it could suffer intermittent loss of full engagement with the
water. But hull shape also influences how much demand you may place on
a fin - some hull shapes will, if deprived of their fins, be inherently
better at running straight that others. So fin positioning should be
determined by consideration of the whole range of factors discussed above.

The fin's primary purpose being to stabilise the course, it needs most
of all to be able to generate lift (sideways) in response to, & to
counteract, the first stages of unintended swings (yawing) in the boat's
course. This is needed because all hulls do have a tendency to swing
off course, their combined centre of mass being always somewhat ahead of
their centre of fluid drag. However, you do not want your fin to
generate ever large amounts of course-correcting lift when you actually
_do_ want to change direction, & that's why it makes much more sense to
use flat plate fins on oar-steered boats than aerofoil-section fins -
the flat plate will stall & lose its lift capacity long before a
foil-section fin will even begin to stall.

Conversely, when you are talking about rudder-steered boats it makes
much more sense that they be fitted with integral, aerofoil-shaped
fin/rudder devices, which can be seen in:
http://www.carldouglas.co.uk/html/aerowfin.html
In the rudder-steered boats you require a fin which will go smoothly &
efficiently from simply holding a course to providing precisely
calibrated amounts of lift (sideforce) according to the amount of
steering input, rather than a dedicated fin plus a cut-out or appended
rudder section, both of which produce horrendous turbulence patterns
(i.e. lots of drag) & poor steering responses (with even more drag).

Cheers -
Carl



--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK
Email: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)


24 Feb 2007 14:01:29
Peter Ford
Re: Fin/Skeg question

On Feb 24, 9:47 pm, Carl <[email protected] > wrote:
> Jonny wrote:
> > On Feb 23, 5:01 pm, Rutger T <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
> >>magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
> >>universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
> >>Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?
>
> >>Cheers,
>
> >>Rutger
>
> > Carl will probably have a better answer (he does make the things after
> > all), but I have found that the placement of the fin makes a huge
> > difference to how easily - or not - a boat turns.
>
> > On most hull shapes the fin would be submerged at any mounting point.
>
> > For example, a single scull.
> > If the fin is near the stern (say 30-50cm from end) the boat is much
> > harder to turn - but will stay straight on a 2000m race course.
> > If the fin is closer to the end of the cockpit (say 70-150cm from
> > stern) the boat is easier to turn, which is great for a winding river,
> > but not so good for the 2000m race.
>
> > Like everything about rowing boat design - it is a compromise!
>
> In simple terms the skeg/fin of an oar-steered boat (i.e. 1x or 2x)
> serves primarily to stabilise the course taken by the boat & secondarily
> to improve the roll stability.
>
> To serve either function the fin needs to be deep enough to penetrate
> the boundary layer - the zone of disturbed water which extends out from
> the hull surface in which the fluid velocity lies between boat velocity
> (in contact with the hull) & free stream velocity. This layer is
> infinitesimally thin at the very bow of the boat, but thickens
> progressively as you move towards the stern. And for all but the first
> metre or so, it is turbulent - tiny packets of water, vortices, are
> spinning & moving between slower & faster parts while all being dragged
> along with the boat. Ignoring the wave pattern generated by the boat,
> which is an entirely separate phenomenon, the thickness of the turbulent
> boundary layer is indicated by the width of the minutely disturbed zone
> of water surface closest to the boat.
>
> The further you place the fin towards the stern, the deeper it must be
> to get the same penetration of the boundary layer, & the more difficult
> it will make it to steer the boat in a cross-wind. And in choppy
> conditions it could suffer intermittent loss of full engagement with the
> water. But hull shape also influences how much demand you may place on
> a fin - some hull shapes will, if deprived of their fins, be inherently
> better at running straight that others. So fin positioning should be
> determined by consideration of the whole range of factors discussed above.
>
> The fin's primary purpose being to stabilise the course, it needs most
> of all to be able to generate lift (sideways) in response to, & to
> counteract, the first stages of unintended swings (yawing) in the boat's
> course. This is needed because all hulls do have a tendency to swing
> off course, their combined centre of mass being always somewhat ahead of
> their centre of fluid drag. However, you do not want your fin to
> generate ever large amounts of course-correcting lift when you actually
> _do_ want to change direction, & that's why it makes much more sense to
> use flat plate fins on oar-steered boats than aerofoil-section fins -
> the flat plate will stall & lose its lift capacity long before a
> foil-section fin will even begin to stall.
>
> Conversely, when you are talking about rudder-steered boats it makes
> much more sense that they be fitted with integral, aerofoil-shaped
> fin/rudder devices, which can be seen in:http://www.carldouglas.co.uk/html/aerowfin.html
> In the rudder-steered boats you require a fin which will go smoothly &
> efficiently from simply holding a course to providing precisely
> calibrated amounts of lift (sideforce) according to the amount of
> steering input, rather than a dedicated fin plus a cut-out or appended
> rudder section, both of which produce horrendous turbulence patterns
> (i.e. lots of drag) & poor steering responses (with even more drag).
>
> Cheers -
> Carl
>
> --
> Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
> Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
> Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK
> Email: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550
> URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk(boats) &www.aerowing.co.uk(riggers)

Where, then, do you generally recommend your fins be placed, in terms
of position from the stern? And does this differ in concept between 8,
4-, 4+, 4x and 2-?

Finally, do you have any particular solution for 2-/x's? I assume it
is moderately common practise with boats used in this way for people
to remove the rudder when using them as a 2x, not just with our own
club.

Thanks
Peter Ford



24 Feb 2007 22:25:14
Kieran
Re: Fin/Skeg question

Peter Ford wrote:
> On Feb 24, 9:47 pm, Carl <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Jonny wrote:
>>> On Feb 23, 5:01 pm, Rutger T <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
>>>> magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
>>>> universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
>>>> Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Rutger
>>> Carl will probably have a better answer (he does make the things after
>>> all), but I have found that the placement of the fin makes a huge
>>> difference to how easily - or not - a boat turns.
>>> On most hull shapes the fin would be submerged at any mounting point.
>>> For example, a single scull.
>>> If the fin is near the stern (say 30-50cm from end) the boat is much
>>> harder to turn - but will stay straight on a 2000m race course.
>>> If the fin is closer to the end of the cockpit (say 70-150cm from
>>> stern) the boat is easier to turn, which is great for a winding river,
>>> but not so good for the 2000m race.
>>> Like everything about rowing boat design - it is a compromise!
>> In simple terms the skeg/fin of an oar-steered boat (i.e. 1x or 2x)
>> serves primarily to stabilise the course taken by the boat & secondarily
>> to improve the roll stability.
>>
>> To serve either function the fin needs to be deep enough to penetrate
>> the boundary layer - the zone of disturbed water which extends out from
>> the hull surface in which the fluid velocity lies between boat velocity
>> (in contact with the hull) & free stream velocity. This layer is
>> infinitesimally thin at the very bow of the boat, but thickens
>> progressively as you move towards the stern. And for all but the first
>> metre or so, it is turbulent - tiny packets of water, vortices, are
>> spinning & moving between slower & faster parts while all being dragged
>> along with the boat. Ignoring the wave pattern generated by the boat,
>> which is an entirely separate phenomenon, the thickness of the turbulent
>> boundary layer is indicated by the width of the minutely disturbed zone
>> of water surface closest to the boat.
>>
>> The further you place the fin towards the stern, the deeper it must be
>> to get the same penetration of the boundary layer, & the more difficult
>> it will make it to steer the boat in a cross-wind. And in choppy
>> conditions it could suffer intermittent loss of full engagement with the
>> water. But hull shape also influences how much demand you may place on
>> a fin - some hull shapes will, if deprived of their fins, be inherently
>> better at running straight that others. So fin positioning should be
>> determined by consideration of the whole range of factors discussed above.
>>
>> The fin's primary purpose being to stabilise the course, it needs most
>> of all to be able to generate lift (sideways) in response to, & to
>> counteract, the first stages of unintended swings (yawing) in the boat's
>> course. This is needed because all hulls do have a tendency to swing
>> off course, their combined centre of mass being always somewhat ahead of
>> their centre of fluid drag. However, you do not want your fin to
>> generate ever large amounts of course-correcting lift when you actually
>> _do_ want to change direction, & that's why it makes much more sense to
>> use flat plate fins on oar-steered boats than aerofoil-section fins -
>> the flat plate will stall & lose its lift capacity long before a
>> foil-section fin will even begin to stall.
>>
>> Conversely, when you are talking about rudder-steered boats it makes
>> much more sense that they be fitted with integral, aerofoil-shaped
>> fin/rudder devices, which can be seen in:http://www.carldouglas.co.uk/html/aerowfin.html
>> In the rudder-steered boats you require a fin which will go smoothly &
>> efficiently from simply holding a course to providing precisely
>> calibrated amounts of lift (sideforce) according to the amount of
>> steering input, rather than a dedicated fin plus a cut-out or appended
>> rudder section, both of which produce horrendous turbulence patterns
>> (i.e. lots of drag) & poor steering responses (with even more drag).
>>
>> Cheers -
>> Carl
>>
>> --
>> Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
>> Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
>> Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK
>> Email: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550
>> URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk(boats) &www.aerowing.co.uk(riggers)
>
> Where, then, do you generally recommend your fins be placed, in terms
> of position from the stern? And does this differ in concept between 8,
> 4-, 4+, 4x and 2-?
>
> Finally, do you have any particular solution for 2-/x's? I assume it
> is moderately common practise with boats used in this way for people
> to remove the rudder when using them as a 2x, not just with our own
> club.
>
> Thanks
> Peter Ford
>

I'm the pair rudder thief at our club. I remove rudders from all pairs
I use and coach. No-one should learn to row a pair with a rudder, and
only very experienced crews should add a rudder ever, and then only for
racing when conditions require it. If you can't row a buoyed, straight,
2k course with no wind or current without a rudder, you have no business
racing a pair.

-Kieran


25 Feb 2007 13:10:55
Carl
Re: Fin/Skeg question

Peter Ford wrote:
> On Feb 24, 9:47 pm, Carl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Jonny wrote:
>>
>>>On Feb 23, 5:01 pm, Rutger T <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>>I'm writing a short article on the physics of steering for my club
>>>>magazine. There is one thing I was wondering about: why are skegs almost
>>>>universally placed about halfway down the stern, and not further back?
>>>>Does this have something to do with keeping the skeg submerged?
>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>
>>>>Rutger
>>
>>>Carl will probably have a better answer (he does make the things after
>>>all), but I have found that the placement of the fin makes a huge
>>>difference to how easily - or not - a boat turns.
>>
>>>On most hull shapes the fin would be submerged at any mounting point.
>>
>>>For example, a single scull.
>>>If the fin is near the stern (say 30-50cm from end) the boat is much
>>>harder to turn - but will stay straight on a 2000m race course.
>>>If the fin is closer to the end of the cockpit (say 70-150cm from
>>>stern) the boat is easier to turn, which is great for a winding river,
>>>but not so good for the 2000m race.
>>
>>>Like everything about rowing boat design - it is a compromise!
>>
>>In simple terms the skeg/fin of an oar-steered boat (i.e. 1x or 2x)
>>serves primarily to stabilise the course taken by the boat & secondarily
>>to improve the roll stability.
>>
>>To serve either function the fin needs to be deep enough to penetrate
>>the boundary layer - the zone of disturbed water which extends out from
>>the hull surface in which the fluid velocity lies between boat velocity
>>(in contact with the hull) & free stream velocity. This layer is
>>infinitesimally thin at the very bow of the boat, but thickens
>>progressively as you move towards the stern. And for all but the first
>>metre or so, it is turbulent - tiny packets of water, vortices, are
>>spinning & moving between slower & faster parts while all being dragged
>>along with the boat. Ignoring the wave pattern generated by the boat,
>>which is an entirely separate phenomenon, the thickness of the turbulent
>>boundary layer is indicated by the width of the minutely disturbed zone
>>of water surface closest to the boat.
>>
>>The further you place the fin towards the stern, the deeper it must be
>>to get the same penetration of the boundary layer, & the more difficult
>>it will make it to steer the boat in a cross-wind. And in choppy
>>conditions it could suffer intermittent loss of full engagement with the
>>water. But hull shape also influences how much demand you may place on
>>a fin - some hull shapes will, if deprived of their fins, be inherently
>>better at running straight that others. So fin positioning should be
>>determined by consideration of the whole range of factors discussed above.
>>
>>The fin's primary purpose being to stabilise the course, it needs most
>>of all to be able to generate lift (sideways) in response to, & to
>>counteract, the first stages of unintended swings (yawing) in the boat's
>>course. This is needed because all hulls do have a tendency to swing
>>off course, their combined centre of mass being always somewhat ahead of
>>their centre of fluid drag. However, you do not want your fin to
>>generate ever large amounts of course-correcting lift when you actually
>>_do_ want to change direction, & that's why it makes much more sense to
>>use flat plate fins on oar-steered boats than aerofoil-section fins -
>>the flat plate will stall & lose its lift capacity long before a
>>foil-section fin will even begin to stall.
>>
>>Conversely, when you are talking about rudder-steered boats it makes
>>much more sense that they be fitted with integral, aerofoil-shaped
>>fin/rudder devices, which can be seen in:http://www.carldouglas.co.uk/html/aerowfin.html
>>In the rudder-steered boats you require a fin which will go smoothly &
>>efficiently from simply holding a course to providing precisely
>>calibrated amounts of lift (sideforce) according to the amount of
>>steering input, rather than a dedicated fin plus a cut-out or appended
>>rudder section, both of which produce horrendous turbulence patterns
>>(i.e. lots of drag) & poor steering responses (with even more drag).
>>
>>Cheers -
>>Carl
>>
>>--
>>Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
>> Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
>>Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK
>>Email: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550
>>URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk(boats) &www.aerowing.co.uk(riggers)
>
>
> Where, then, do you generally recommend your fins be placed, in terms
> of position from the stern? And does this differ in concept between 8,
> 4-, 4+, 4x and 2-?
>

Peter, I don't have the privilege of determining where to place an
AeRowFin in another maker's boat. The slot or bolt holes are where they
are, as is the rudder tube, so that's where it goes. Happily, the
AeRowFin always makes a big & improving difference over what went there
before.

> Finally, do you have any particular solution for 2-/x's? I assume it
> is moderately common practise with boats used in this way for people
> to remove the rudder when using them as a 2x, not just with our own
> club.

Yes. We now make AeRowFin steering foils for pairs & fours, & they work
very well indeed. But I'm also on record as advocating that pairs
train, at least, without rudders (not without fins) in order to learn to
balance up their forces throughout the stroke & recovery.

However good a steering system, not needing to steer beats having to
steer on a straight course. A pair being like an oddly-rigged 1x, it
would be no bad thing for all pair rowers to learn to row it as a shared
1x, just as our left & right sides have to get their acts together in a
single. And don't we all know how hard that can sometimes be!

Cheers -
Carl

--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK
Email: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)


26 Feb 2007 09:01:30
Nick Suess
Re: Fin/Skeg question


"Carl" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:ers1t1$j9t$1

> ... just as our left & right sides have to get their acts together in a
> single. And don't we all know how hard that can sometimes be!
>
> Cheers -
> Carl

And what happens when neither side is functioning?




26 Feb 2007 11:14:15
Carl
Re: Fin/Skeg question

Nick Suess wrote:
> "Carl" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:ers1t1$j9t$1
>
>
>>... just as our left & right sides have to get their acts together in a
>>single. And don't we all know how hard that can sometimes be!
>>
>>Cheers -
>>Carl
>
>
> And what happens when neither side is functioning?
>
>

Didn't you experience that last October, Nick?

C


28 Feb 2007 09:39:24
Nick Suess
Re: Fin/Skeg question


"Carl" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:erufea$fat$1

>> And what happens when neither side is functioning?
>
> Didn't you experience that last October, Nick?
>
> C

This is my own personal Fishing Temple, Carl. I just lob a baited hook your
way, and you bite!