Did It Yet Again :Banghead:

[Hoofsmit]

FWIW , I have more time with legs on motor boats, with no means of shutting down the intake, the replacement of feed pipes form the shield and double jubilee clips on every connection has never fail me yet!
So I kind of agree with the fact that closing seacocks every time the vessel is left is not so important if all fittings are replaced on a maintenance schedule and reduces the risk of failer when on passage.



Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Garrettw]

I have a stupid amount and I'm embarrassed to list them all but here goes:

- Below water
DST800 sensor
A/C common inlet
Cockpit drain
Sink drain x3
Toilet inlet x2
Holding tank dump x2
Genset inlet
Saildrive?

- Above water
A/C discharge x3
A/C condensate discharge x3
Engine exhaust
Genset exhaust
Anchor locker drain
Electric bilge
Manual bilge

At some point in the next year or two I will replace the production brass hardware with bronze, flanged seacocks. At the same time I plan to consolidate a lot of the drains into a common header(s).

[ontherocks83]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Sure! I can not only list them, I am intimately acquainted with every one of them! Know the feel and quirks of every one.

Two toilets = 2x intake and 2x discharge = 4

Main engine -- one cooling water intake, one discharge = 2

Genset -- ditto, 2

Blackwater discharge -- 1

Two cockpit drains

Four deck drains.



Simples!

Excuse my ignorance but that seems crazy. The manufacturer could have easily limited the over all number. Route both heads to black water tank and that gets rid of 2 discharges. Now we're at 13. Both engine and gen could have discharged exhaust above water line. Now we're at 11. The cockpit drains and deck drains could be consolidated and some of them y piped together maybe getting rid of 2 more. Now at 9. Seems like instead of spending a little more time routing hoses they put every hose through the nearest section of hull.

Maybe I am missing something and dont see why it was done this way. If I could (which I know is impossible) I would have 2 seacocks. One water inlet for everything and one discharge for everything. I know thats not possible but it would be nice. Keeps it cheap and simple.

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by ontherocks83

Maybe I am missing something and dont see why it was done this way. If I could (which I know is impossible) I would have 2 seacocks. One water inlet for everything and one discharge for everything. I know thats not possible but it would be nice. Keeps it cheap and simple.

And that should be the only acceptable standard. I really don't know why it is not at this point.

[CarlF]

I'm in the camp that I don't want to go to sea in a boat with hoses I don't trust. In too many cases, the seacock can become an excuse to live with old hoses.

At sea, it's not always easy to close the seacock if a hose leaks. And maybe it's the stuffing box, or the rudder bearing, or keel bolts. Too often the water isn't noticed until the it's above the cabin sole. Then you can't find the source of the leak. And if you close all the seacocks, you have no engine. The problem can quickly change from saving the boat to saving the lives of the crew.

So I leave my seacocks open but pay a lot of attention to the hoses. I inspect and tighten them every six months. I use double AWAB clamps that clamp evenly. And I replace all below waterline hoses every five years (or sooner if they don't look "new")

[carstenb]

Having just had my boat on the hard, I counted.

Engine water intake -1
Toilet water intake -1
Black water tank discharge - 1


All others are above the water line (sinks, exhaust diacharge etc)

total- 3

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by ontherocks83

Excuse my ignorance but that seems crazy. The manufacturer could have easily limited the over all number. Route both heads to black water tank and that gets rid of 2 discharges. Now we're at 13. Both engine and gen could have discharged exhaust above water line. Now we're at 11. The cockpit drains and deck drains could be consolidated and some of them y piped together maybe getting rid of 2 more. Now at 9. Seems like instead of spending a little more time routing hoses they put every hose through the nearest section of hull.

Maybe I am missing something and dont see why it was done this way. If I could (which I know is impossible) I would have 2 seacocks. One water inlet for everything and one discharge for everything. I know thats not possible but it would be nice. Keeps it cheap and simple.

I think the main problem is not the number of them, but the fact that they are all in the main hull volume. The superior solution is what Steve Dashew did with his Sundeers -- watertight bulkheads forward and aft, all seacocks in watertight compartments outside of the main hull volume. Now that's really clever.

As to the specific recommendations -- it's easy to design a boat in your head, second-guessing the real designer, but in reality none of these solutions is good.

All black water through the holding tank is very poor if you are in an area (like Atlantic Europe) where 90% of all toilet discharge is directly overboard. Much better to have the sewage go straight out rather than have it run through pipes all through the boat and into a holding tank which you have to remember to pump out, whenever you're allowed to discharge direct.

One water inlet for toilets rather than two would require running a seawater hose 40 feet from one end of the boat to the other -- a much more dangerous point of failure than an extra seacock.

Exhaust water discharge below the waterline has many advantages, especially for the genset -- eliminates the constant splash of water which annoys people in an anchorage when you're running the genset.

So where are all the unnecessary seacocks so far?

I don't like, however, the fact that deck and cockpit drains require sea cocks, and which you can't even close, to boot (shouldn't close). I'm pretty sure that that is to save the topsides from water stains. Sure would be better if they could run them to the transom, at least.

[transmitterdan]

I agree that cockpit drains should be above the waterline. In fact most discharges should be so. I can't understand why people whine about a little splashing water from a generator in an anchorage.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

I agree that cockpit drains should be above the waterline. In fact most discharges should be so. I can't understand why people whine about a little splashing water from a generator in an anchorage.

Water splashing all night actually is annoying.

[Mattdwyerva]

Slick solution, Lloyd.

Sent from my XT1060 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Golden Echo]

What if you wired a switch back near the sea cock for your gen set that (if not closed) won't allow your gen set to start at the switch?

Sent from my QMV7A using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[TeddyDiver]

Dry stack and keel cooling... Just remember where are the keyes :-?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Golden Echo

What if you wired a switch back near the sea cock for your gen set that (if not closed) won't allow your gen set to start at the switch?

Sent from my QMV7A using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

That was exactly what Lloyd suggested. It seems like complication, wiring, etc., but maybe worth it.

[transmitterdan]

I still say the water flow switch is the easiest and best solution. It will save the impeller and only requires wiring at the engine. It can be easily bypassed (disabled) if the switch fails for whatever reason. It protects against obstructions such as jellyfish and plastic bags too.

[Mattdwyerva]

The more protection the better, although if you make it idiot proof, they just invent a better idiot... :sly: