Production Boats Fit For Blue Water

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by SwissMocha

When you have a boat somewhere on the ocean (usually cat A or B) and you want a Swiss flag for that, you have to meet the technical requirements to get that. That will include an expertise of a licensed surveyor (for used boats) meaning that the surveyor has to be accepted by the Swiss authorities (they provide you with a list of possible choices),

You have to renew the flag every three years and for that you have to provide proof that the vessel is seaworthy. A technical inspection is not mandatory as long as you provide e.g. invoices which show what kind of work has been done on the boat. Also you have to provide proof, that the raft has been properly inspected and that the boat is insured.

Looks like flying a Swiss flag is quite a hassle. Do many Swiss actually flag their boats elsewhere?
I intend to become a Swiss citizen next year. But I will not put my boat under Swiss flag.

Originally Posted by Polux

TRS 747.201 Loi fédérale du 3 octobre 1975 sur la navigation intérieure (LNI)[/url]

It seems to me that even in the efficient Swiss some laws are very difficult or almost dificult to implement and that the solutions that you presented as what really happens is a kind of way to turn around a law impossible or very dificult to implement

This law applies to ships that sail in Switzerland itself. So there the inspections etc. are not that hard to have performed. There is a lot of sailing going on in this landlocked country. (it has a 5000 km long coastline after all...).

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by colemj

Just the facts. Please feel free to bring some of your own to the table.

Mark

Mark,

Please copy and save this picture of corroded 6 year old DZR brass for future reference... so I don't have to keep posting it.

Ken

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

I wanted to come back to this Hunter keel issue that Keno brought into the mix.

I guess I'm still not seeing the real "problem" here from a design and build perspective.

Let's first take the "honeycomb build quality". I'm not exactly sure what that means, but I assume he means that it's not monolithic - in other words, it has the voids you see in the pic. Now, this certainly doesn't surprise me in that this is a fairly common building technique to control the distribution of the weight throughout a structure. And it makes a lot of sense to me in a keel - where it seems you want to keep the bulk of the weight as low as possible.

So - for the design/build experts - Is there a reason a keel needs to be monolithic? Does this "honeycomb" technique automatically equate to "poor design/build standards"?

Let's then take the foam issue. Again, continuing on the weight distribution logic above, it makes perfect sense to put some kind of light filler in these voids (not really necessary for anything structurally I don't think, but provides a bit more internal support maybe?). Now, from a water intrusion perspective, granted, it's definitely not the best material. I could certainly see how it would soak up that water and become a mess that does more harm than good. No argument there.

But this brings me to my second point - should water be getting into the keel in the first place? Is this what "good keels" are designed for...providing for water intrusion? Or was there another problem in play in his keel issue above?

Some of you may know that I'm rather fond of another very accomplished Hunter out there called Sequitur.

Here is that boat being brought into the yard for the first time to be assembled after shipping (you'll noticed it's been shipped from the factory without the keel attached - for obvious reasons):



And now the guys at the yard are attaching the keel:



We presume that this attachment was done correctly and with the utmost attention to quality. No errors. But what if it wasn't? Would the joint potentially start leaking? If so, is this a problem with the design/build of the boat? Or does the shoddiness lie elsewhere?

I've explained this issue on this forum numerous times and have been accused multiple times of "Hunter bashing" by the fanboys. Search the forum yourself for the threads and use a little common sense to figure it out. I'm tired, just got back from work... don't have all day to sit on the computer and go digging for stuff that you just want to find fault, criticize and argue.
You've caused more harm to your boat manufacturer over the past three weeks than I would have thought possible by any one individual. I've never wished ill will on the company or the Hunter owners, as I was one myself having owned their flagship 450 at one time. My only wish was to pass on some safety advice to the owners so that they could take adequate precautions and continue to enjoy their boats.


You fanboys have caused some serious damage to the brand, but I seriously doubt you have the capacity to understand what you've done.


Ken

[SwissMocha]

Originally Posted by Polux

Thanks for the clarification. I was puzzled how Swiss would be able to fulfill what the legislation demand, not having sea, having lots of boats with Swiss banner on the sea:
.....

Just one more clarification, you mean that the boat has to be compulsively insured? If so only that will imply in most cases an inspection.

Yes, liability insurance is mandatory for boats under Swiss flag

https://www.eda.admin.ch/content/dam...0yachts_en.pdf

"Liability insurance for yachts sailing under the Swiss flag
The existence of valid liability insurance cover in Switzerland is a prerequisite for entry of a
yacht into the Swiss register. Liability insurance cover is required for the entire period of
registration. The applicable provisions relating to liability insurance are laid down in the Ordinance of
15 March 1971 governing Swiss seagoing yachts. The relevant provisions stipulate that the
necessary insurance cover may only be provided by insurance companies that have been
authorised by the Federal Council to conduct business in Switzerland. The minimum amount of
liability insurance cover is currently 5 million Swiss francs per case for injury and material damage.
Insurance cover in Switzerland therefore has be taken out in Swiss francs.
Liability insurance must be valid for one of the two geographical regions cited below:
World-wide (also referred to as Zone C)
or
Western Europe (also referred to as Zone B), i.e. the Baltic Sea, the Kattegat and Skagerrak bays,
the North Sea, the English Channel, the Irish Sea and the adjoining areas of the Atlantic Ocean within
60° north, including Bergen, 20° west, 25° north, and the Mediterranean, including straits and
connected inland seas.
Proof of liability insurance cover must be submitted to the Swiss Maritime Navigation Office by
completing the Insurance Certificate for Yachts form (same form as for domestic shipping),
indicating the key data of the vessel and the applicable geographical region (B or C – see above).
The name and address on the insurance certificate must correspond to the name and address entered
in the flag certificate.
We cannot register your vessel until you have concluded valid liability insurance cover."

[SwissMocha]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

Looks like flying a Swiss flag is quite a hassle. Do many Swiss actually flag their boats elsewhere?
I intend to become a Swiss citizen next year. But I will not put my boat under Swiss flag.



This law applies to ships that sail in Switzerland itself. So there the inspections etc. are not that hard to have performed. There is a lot of sailing going on in this landlocked country. (it has a 5000 km long coastline after all...).

I'm not familiar (yet) how big a hassle it really is. Because in practice it's really more a system of self declaration rather than physical inspection. And the rules make sense for the most part in my opinion.
Also, it's not easy to register your boat just under any flag you like. It usually depends on where you live (country of residence) as far as I know.
I have a friend who used to register his boat under St.Vincent flag and it was a constant hassle to maintain that, so eventually he switched to the Swiss flag.
But all of you, I'm sure, know best what rules apply in your respective country of residence.

[SwissMocha]

I like this topic The production boat market has made owning a boat and cruising much more affordable and in the end, that's the key point.

The posts of Polux with all the production boats having completed circumnavigations are reassuring, thank you very much, I'd like more of those.

What I'm missing are multihulls, e.g. FP's, Lagoons, Leopards against the rest of the world

[Exile]

Originally Posted by SwissMocha

I like this topic The production boat market has made owning a boat and cruising much more affordable and in the end, that's the key point.

The posts of Polux with all the production boats having completed circumnavigations are reassuring, thank you very much, I'd like more of those.

What I'm missing are multihulls, e.g. FP's, Lagoons, Leopards against the rest of the world

Agreed! All good points, and always inspiring to see people getting out there. On whatever!

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Mark,

Please copy and save this picture of corroded 6 year old DZR brass for future reference... so I don't have to keep posting it.

Ken

You have missed my point - Do you know that you don't have a larger problem? I have seen bronze look that way from electrolysis, as I'm sure you have with propellers, shafts, etc.

If you are blaming the material itself, you are flying in the face of all industry expertise and metallurgy. You are calling into question worldwide usage of DRZ in some of the most corrosive environments where failure would literally cost lives (boilers and such). You are also calling into question highly regarded Blakes and Isis seacocks and fittings, among others.

So, you must ask yourself if you truly believe that was DZR brass and, if so, are you sure you don't have some larger issue going on.

Your picture in no way constitutes a "fact" that DZR is unsuited for seacocks and the like - no more than me posting a picture of a corroded bronze propeller would would prove that bronze is unsuited for that use.

Mark

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by colemj

You have missed my point - Do you know that you don't have a larger problem? I have seen bronze look that way from electrolysis.

If you are blaming the material itself, you are flying in the face of all industry expertise and metallurgy. You are calling into question worldwide usage of DRZ in some of the most corrosive environments where failure would literally cost lives (boilers and such). You are also calling into question highly regarded Blakes and Isis seacocks and fittings, among others.

So, you must ask yourself if you truly believe that was DZR brass and, if so, are you sure you don't have some larger issue going on.

Your picture in no way constitutes a "fact" that DZR is unsuited for seacocks and the like.

Mark

That's a very good point, and yes the electrical bonding issue was thoroughly examined. The failure took place at the elbow to hose coupling as pictured. There was nothing left of the coupling.

When we replaced all of the fittings on the Oyster last summer, I decided to use Naval Bronze through hulls then mated to all Maralon after that point for corrosion resistance. Maralon sea docks to Malalon elbows and connector flanges. I'm not comfortable with fittings such as connector flanges being able to corrode in places where I can't see them.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by SwissMocha

What I'm missing are multihulls, e.g. FP's, Lagoons, Leopards against the rest of the world

They are dangerous and not suitable for even inland lake sailing. There have already been many threads with experts proving this. It is a closed case - no point rehashing it.

Mark

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

The failure took place at the elbow to hose coupling as pictured. There was nothing left of the coupling.

So you do not know if the coupling was DZR brass or yellow brass?

I hope you referred to "naval bronze" generically, because real naval bronze is a zinc-rich brass. Silicon bronze is usually used for underwater fittings, and people might refer to that as "naval" because of its usage.

Curious as to why you didn't use the Marelon thruhulls that are provided mated with Marelon seacocks?

Mark

[Polux]

And the next one is dedicated to the cat guys, particularly Mark that has been around these threads and to SwissMocha that would like them posted:

The reason I have been posting on this threads is that there is a lot of disinformation about mass production boats on this forum: they are not fit for bluewater sailing, they break in pieces in some short time, they cannot survive strong gales (that inevitably will appear when one does a several year circumnavigation), the rudders broke, the keels fall, the seacocks will fail the rigs are undermentioned and all that jazz that we have seen on this and other threads.

Not trying by any means that a boat specifically designed to voyage, like an Allures, a Cigale an Amel or a Boreal will not be a better option, quite the contrary, but I am talking about recent boats. These boats are much more expensive than mass produced boats, sometimes over two times, so in most cases the choice would not be between one of those and a mass production boat (recent boats) but over a new mass production boat and an old boat that was expensive when new, many years ago. Regarding old boats, even the ones that were once expensive boats, each case is a case and very few have a similar condition as new boats (and I am not talking about the interior).

Due to the big number of them circumnavigating and sailing extensively for many years without relevant problems those critics miss completely reality or are so just vastly exaggerated that they are in many cases ridiculous. Nothing like a reality check regarding what those boats regularly accomplish regarding cruising extensively, bluewater sailing and living aboard for extensive periods, in some cases many years.

Regarding the boats I have been posted, I am posting more about Beneteaus, Jeanneaus and Bavarias because it is over them that most critics are about, like that story about unsuitable bonding agents used for more than 20 years on Beneteau and jeanneau, but many mass production cats are circumnavigating also and among them many Lagoons that seem to be a very popular choice and are also the target of many unfair and unreal critics.

So a post about a Lagoon 400 circumnavigating, the first of many posts about mass production cats, that from now one will be part of my list of circumnavigations:

A French Family, the Drozorus: Fabrice, Sandrine and the two kids, Chloé and Amandine that are now in New Zealand (after almost 3 years cruising) at the middle of a circumnavigation and they say nothing about problems on the boat (a new Lagoon 400) but a lot about how they are having fun.







Le blog de Fabrice, Sandrine, Chloé et Amandine - Liste des derniers articles parus sur le-zorus-oceanique.over-blog.fr

Sister ships:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvEd1SJ4gP0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lME9_1Ag3mo

[Polux]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

..
This law applies to ships that sail in Switzerland itself. So there the inspections etc. are not that hard to have performed. There is a lot of sailing going on in this landlocked country. (it has a 5000 km long coastline after all...).

Yes but this one is about all Swiss flagged boats:
Controle technique

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Modern Category A "Production Boats" - also referred to in forums as "BeneHunterLinas" and "Bleach Bottles" and other interesting names - are built for and perfectly suited to bluewater cruising. Period.

Based upon our debate elsewhere re the comparative merits of the Caribbean 1500 vs. Salty Dawg Rallies, I gather you have considerable respect for Andy Schell, correct?

He would appear to disagree with your assertion above... From the excellent interview with SFLF, here:

Sail Far Live Free - Sailboats, Sailing News, and Gear: An Interview with Andy Schell from 59-North

Recently I’ve come to admire the fast, though aesthetically pleasing boats. J/Boats fit this example, as do the newer Swans. I loved the Outbound 46 I sailed to Tortola. Specific to offshore, the standard production boats are awful. I’ve delivered plenty of them, and while fast off the wind, they’ll pound your brains out going to weather and make for a miserable trip.

Oh, well... What would a guy like Andy Schell know about Bluewater Cruising anyway, right?

:-))

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Oh, well... What would a guy like Andy Schell know about Bluewater Cruising anyway, right?

:-))

I don't see where he said things break or that they are unsuitable. I only see where he, personally, is uncomfortable upwind in them.

I'm uncomfortable downwind in most old "blue water" boats because they roll their guts out - does that count?

Mark