Oyster Problems?

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Do you see how absurd sounds that? the chance to found a rock in your way in a well charted chart is real, is even in those well charted waters as you say where most bad things happen.

A pogo or a Epoxy plywood RM for unknown charted waters , good choice my friend, keep going... the Pogo I guess its the best choice/

Overall , no one choose a boat A or B if the waters are well charted or not, you choose a boat that fit your needs and espectations, obviously if you choose a slim fin keeler racer cruisers you know that is not the best option for long term cruising, sooner or later even the most experienced skipper kiss the ground, Fact!!

Sometimes your ignorance about modern boat design and the boats I am talking about is annoying. Both the Pogo and the RM have versions with swing keels with all the ballast on the keel and that makes their draft very small (1.2m on the Pogo 12.50).

The keel surface while the keel is swinged up protects the hull from any small grounding even with rocks.

Try to check out information first before posting about what you don't know.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

That's exactly the same logically defective argument as "I've never been in a car crash, so why do I need airbags?".

The answer to your question is -- yes, I do think that keels should be designed to take hard groundings, without damage, except for performance boats where the buyers are making a conscious choice to give up this strength. I would even write it into the CE classification rules, if it were up to me.

Everyone will decide for himself, what his priorities are, and some people may rationally choose to have a less strong keel for the sake of better performance. I might make the same choice myself for a different kind of sailing, than what I do.

But mass produced cruising boats, not intended for people who are making that conscious choice -- that's just wrong.

That is all very funny: We are just on a thread that is about a boat that has a keel the type you prefer, from a very reputable brand, that failed miserably without even a soft grounding and in just one year.

That should give you some hints that things are not always what they look and that a keel being solidly fixed to a boat and his stresses distributed correctly through the hull has very little to do with the type of keel, except if it is a full keel on a very heavy boat.

But it seems that not even reality is able to make you see the light

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

Sometimes your ignorance about modern boat design and the boats I am talking about is annoying. Both the Pogo and the RM have versions with swing keels with all the ballast on the keel and that makes their draft very small (1.2m on the Pogo 12.50).

The keel surface while the keel is swinged up protects the hull from any small grounding even with rocks.

Try to check out information first before posting about what you don't know.

If you define the keel version in your previous post then is clear as mud , right?
Even if you have a swing keel or CB version the bang with a rock don't save your butt from damage, who is the ignorant here?

[barnakiel]

I will disagree with the view that grounding is a norm in the Caribbean or in the Pacific.

We have visited Caribbean 2003, 2007 and 2012, we have also crossed Pacific from Panama to Australia. We have not grounded there once nor have we witnessed first hand any grounding incident.

Caribbean is nearly all deep water almost all the way to the (often tall and conspicuous) land. Charts are good too. Areas with less water (e.g. the Bahamas) ask for a special craft. And again, tidal range is relatively small. Why should one ground their boat then.

Pacific is deep water and eyeball where shallows. Why should anybody ground their boat there.

We may differ in our definitions of the word 'norm'. But to me "navigators" who take grounding as a norm are not the sort of people who should inspire the rest of the sailing crowd.

b.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Polux

That is all very funny: We are just on a thread that is about a boat that has a keel the type you prefer, from a very reputable brand, that failed miserably without even a soft grounding and in just one year.

That should give you some hints that things are not always what they look and that a keel being solidly fixed to a boat and his stresses distributed correctly through the hull has very little to do with the type of keel, except if it is a full keel on a very heavy boat.

But it seems that not even reality is able to make you see the light

I'm really not sure what you are trying to say here. For the avoidance of doubt -- I think everyone should have whatever keel type he prefers. As long as it's an informed choice. Everything, but everything on a boat is a compromise. I am certainly not trying to tell you, what kind of keel you need.

What a shockingly badly engineered keel on an Oyster has to do with the choice of keel type -- I have no idea. The problem on the Oyster which is the subject of this thread had nothing to do with keel type. And everything to do with 5mm GRP brackets, questionable bonding, and cockamamie long bolts.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I will disagree with the view that grounding is a norm in the Caribbean or in the Pacific.

We have visited Caribbean 2003, 2007 and 2012, we have also crossed Pacific from Panama to Australia. We have not grounded there once nor have we witnessed first hand any grounding incident.

Caribbean is nearly all deep water almost all the way to the (often tall and conspicuous) land. Charts are good too. Areas with less water (e.g. the Bahamas) ask for a special craft. And again, tidal range is relatively small. Why should one ground their boat then.

Pacific is deep water and eyeball where shallows. Why should anybody ground their boat there.

We may differ in our definitions of the word 'norm'. But to me "navigators" who take grounding as a norm are not the sort of people who should inspire the rest of the sailing crowd.

b.

Nor is crashing a car the norm, but it makes sense to be prepared for it, to the extent it is rational, in case it happens. Seat belts? Air bags? Crash-tested structure? Absolutely, even if you've driven a million+ miles without an accident, as I have.

I have done some cruising in the Caribbean, and have encountered a lot of coral heads which were not charted. Never touched any of them, but you know -- luck was probably a more important factor than any brilliant navigational skill.

I have done years of cruising off SW Florida and run aground dozens of times, like everyone does in those waters. These are soft groundings, but if you get caught on a falling tide in some surf -- there will be stress which can be dangerous to a boat which is not robustly built. BT,DT, fortunately in a really strong, old, slow American boat which was not damaged by the experience.


If you feel sure you'll never touch the bottom -- then by all means, don't worry about the strength of your keel. I managed to go four years in my present boat, without ever touching the bottom. I was new to tidal waters and utterly paranoid about it, and still take a lot of care. But you know, it eventually happens to everyone. I've only touched bottom once in UK waters in all these years, and that was on an uncharted sand bar in Dartmouth harbor, two meters off the town quay, at dead low tide, which I floated off of in 10 minutes. But I've sailed enough to know that you never, but never, can be 100% sure that it won't happen to you, and the bottom is not always soft.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I will disagree with the view that grounding is a norm in the Caribbean or in the Pacific.

We have visited Caribbean 2003, 2007 and 2012, we have also crossed Pacific from Panama to Australia. We have not grounded there once nor have we witnessed first hand any grounding incident.

Caribbean is nearly all deep water almost all the way to the (often tall and conspicuous) land. Charts are good too. Areas with less water (e.g. the Bahamas) ask for a special craft. And again, tidal range is relatively small. Why should one ground their boat then.

Pacific is deep water and eyeball where shallows. Why should anybody ground their boat there.

We may differ in our definitions of the word 'norm'. But to me "navigators" who take grounding as a norm are not the sort of people who should inspire the rest of the sailing crowd.

b.

Wait, in part yes and in part no, Bahamas is well charted so far, groundings happen every year there, most deep water end when you are close to the islands , for instance Antigua and Barbuda is tricky, many harbours require especial attention at the entrance, Luperon? DR , Turk and Caicos? Los roques Venezuela, What about Costa Rica? so far so good here in St Marteen last season 6 boat aground in the lagoon, 1 write off in Oyster pond reefs, charter boat, another one run aground in Anguilla with a 8000 $ estimate at the boatyard, and I have here in the yard a Kirie feeling with a torn keel , he found the Pinacle in the north side of St martin , between Pinel and the mainland,, What about with the south side of Grenada, every hurricane season something happen on those reefs.. Even multis get keels ripped off here. Groundings in thispart of the world are very common,, if you on all those years never run aground don't mean much except that you take precautions ....many don't....

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

If you define the keel version in your previous post then is clear as mud , right?
Even if you have a swing keel or CB version the bang with a rock don't save your butt from damage, who is the ignorant here?

The standard Pogo has a swing keel and to hit a rock with a 1.2m draft one has to be a moron or to be completely devoid of any care.

For butt I believe you are talking about the hull? I have explained already that the keel when swinged protects the hull but it seems that you did not care to look:

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

The standard Pogo has a swing keel and to hit a rock with a 1.2m draft one has to be a moron or to be completely devoid of any care.

For butt I believe you are talking about the hull? I have explained already that the keel when swinged protects the hull but it seems that you did not care to look:

Pol seriously, are you calling multi owners morons?

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

... Groundings in thispart of the world are very common,, if you on all those years never run aground don't mean much except that you take precautions ....many don't....

You mean he is a good sailor and that is not the norm?

Yes I see sometimes idiots that speed on shallow waters, I see many that sail at 100m of the shore, yes I see a lot of bad sailing around but what those sailors need is not bullet proof sailboats but to learn how to sail.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

You mean he is a good sailor and that is not the norm?

Yes I see sometimes idiots that speed on shallow waters, I see many that sail at 100m of the shore, yes I see a lot of bad sailing around but what those sailors need is not bullet proof sailboats but to learn how to sail.

Well Well, there is xxxxx meters Royal Huisman big boy big bucks $$$$$ yacht running aground at the St Barth Bucket regatta with a $$$$$ skipper at the helm when the incident happen, I guess its a moron to? are you calling idiots to any single person or skipper who run aground by xxx circunstances?

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Pol seriously, are you calling multi owners morons?

No, that never cross my mind if by by multi you mean multihulls. in fact I do like multihulls, I mean some of them, fast performance cruisers, and I certainly understand the ones that prefer condo cats, regarding the advantages but I fail to understand completely your comment.

What has that boat to do with multihulls or with morons?

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

No, that never cross my mind if by by multi you mean multihulls. in fact I do like multihulls, I mean some of them, fast performance cruisers, and I certainly understand the ones that prefer condo cats, regarding the advantages but I fail to understand completely your comment.

What has that boat to do with multihulls or with morons?

Simple, if someone with a 1,2 draft run aground is a moron, Your Words, not mine, I remind you that multihulls run aground to, with horrible consequences in some cases, just figurate.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Well Well, there is xxxxx meters Royal Huisman big boy big bucks $$$$$ yacht running aground at the St Barth Bucket regatta with a $$$$$ skipper at the helm when the incident happen, I guess its a moron to? are you calling idiots to any single person or skipper who run aground by xxx circunstances?

He was racing. While racing shortcuts and bigger risks are taken by some, sometimes with very nasty consequences.

I am a cruiser not a racer and I can assure you I don't take shortcuts in what regards safety and the possibility of running aground. Yes, I see them on that regatta passing dangerously close to the rocks. No wonder some gets banged from time to time.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Simple, if someone with a 1,2 draft run aground is a moron, Your Words, not mine, I remind you that multihulls run aground to, with horrible consequences in some cases, just figurate.

Moron is a way of speaking. If someone runs aground in 1.2m of water it is certainly not a careful sailor, neither a good sailor on my book. As I explained to you I only start speeding when I pass the 10m line and when the depth is increasing steadily.

A 1.2m rock if it is not marked as 1.2m is marked at 4 or 5m on the surrounding area and that means I will approach very slowly and very carefully and if possible I would just avoid the area at all looking for a deeper passage.