Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 11-11-2014, 09:51   #31
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Seattle
Boat: Cal 40
Posts: 2,401
Images: 7
Re: Any reason to maintain direct discharge in the PNW?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MYTraveler View Post
Perhaps the confusion is mine, but as I understand your question, you are not proposing to eliminate your ability to pump the holding tank overboard. Instead, you are proposing that everything go into holding tank and from there you can either pump at a station or overboard. Your question is limited to the benefit of keeping the y-valve that directs to head either straight overboard or into the holding tank. If I have that right, the thinking that went into my boat may be of use. First though, it should be noted that my boat was set up with redundancy of all mission critical systems, and simplicity, with the thought that the boat should be able to travel anywhere, suffer system failures along the way, have enough redundancy to keep going if if a critical system fails, then get it fixed in even remote ports.
With regard to the head system, there are 4 heads divided into two completely redundant systems (ie, 2 holding tanks, two pump outs, etc.). Each head has a y-valve allowing it to dump straight overboard. That could be useful in the event that it becomes impossible to pump out the holding tank. Although I have never needed to use that feature, it is potentially very useful.
I don't consider the head mission critical, worst case, hang your butt over the side.

A bucket as a backup is simplicity.
__________________

__________________
cal40john is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 09:56   #32
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Seattle
Boat: Cal 40
Posts: 2,401
Images: 7
Re: Any reason to maintain direct discharge in the PNW?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rwidman View Post
I have no thru hull valve. The boat was manufactured without one (the discharge is above the waterline).

I was boarded by the USCG a few months ago but they did not inspect my waste system. The actual regulations don't require a Y valve, just an effective way of preventing overboard discharge. If push comes to shove I'll contest it.

Here is the regulation (for the USA):



Notice the phrase " Acceptable methods of securing the device include— " The regulation does not exclude other methods. Also, as I mentioned, I have no valve so none of the suggested methods apply to my boat.
I haven't tested my theory, but as described before my pumpout hose has a tee leading to a diaphragm pump to a through hull. The pump has a removable handle. Without the handle my system is ineffective, locked, incapable of accidental discharge.
__________________

__________________
cal40john is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 10:39   #33
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: So Cal
Boat: Catalina 30
Posts: 943
Re: Any reason to maintain direct discharge in the PNW?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntscout View Post
Wow, that took some doing. I would never have figured that one. Did the PO never realize that it was installed like that I wonder?
Don't think so. Systems weren't a strength of this boat. (OTOH, I'm quite good at plumbing and electrical, so it was a good boat for me)

I've passed poopinspection with locking the thru hull that is the macerator discharge. Was also told that a keyswitch for the macerator would do also.
__________________
jeepbluetj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 19:11   #34
Registered User
 
MYTraveler's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 166
Re: Any reason to maintain direct discharge in the PNW?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cal40john View Post
I don't consider the head mission critical, worst case, hang your butt over the side.

A bucket as a backup is simplicity.
That would work for you and me, but with my wife, three daughters and in-laws on board, if the heads don't work the trip is over. And if we don't get back to facilities before someone has to use plan b, there may not be another trip for a long time.
__________________
MYTraveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2014, 19:25   #35
Marine Service Provider
 
peghall's Avatar

Community Sponsor
Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,533
Re: Any reason to maintain direct discharge in the PNW?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntscout View Post
Sorry I mis-typed, I meant Puget Sound going all no discharge as of 12/31. I assumed most would put in Y valve but obviously not required as long as there is a way to prevent discharge.
That myth or a similar one circulates every year...but it's just wishful thinking on the part of the enviromental activists. The Sound cannot become an NZD because it's a "navigable interstate waterway"...which is defined as "capable of interstate vessel traffic"...iow, either flows through more than one state or provides access to waters beyond the boundaries of a single state , which the Sound indisputably does. That puts not only the Sound, but even Lake Union and Lake Washington, under federal jurisdiction which allows the discharge of toilet waste treated by a USCG certified Type I or II MSD...and will continue to do so until or unless there's a change in federal marine sanitation laws.
__________________
© 2017 Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since 1987
Author "The NEW Get Rid of Boat Odors"
https://www.amazon.com/New-Get-Rid-B...dp/1892399784/
peghall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any Reason Not to.... Delancey Construction, Maintenance & Refit 9 13-04-2013 22:48
Direct Discharge Head waverider General Sailing Forum 129 27-12-2008 11:49
cost no object... neither to buy or maintain - what mono would you have any why? Sterling Monohull Sailboats 36 25-10-2008 08:19



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 18:31.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.