Rudder Failures

[a64pilot]

What is different in automobiles, is mostly computer control of the engine, transmission, steering and even the brakes. It has been a complete paradigm shift, engines are tremendously more powerful, while polluting less and consuming less fuel.

There has been no similar paradigm shift in boats, I'd compare boats to General Aviation airplanes, where there has been no tremendous technological advancement, but technology has made large inroads like composite airframes.
Guess what? We are finding out these modern composite designs are not as strong, not as easily repaired and will not last as long as our Fathers Cessna will.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Polux,
Not doubting, just want to learn. I haven't heard of any failures on an IP, but if there have been, mind posting or sending me that data, links or whatever you have?

If there is any kind of common failure mode with an IP's rudder, I want to know what it is and look especially hard at that area this winter when she is on the hard.

Thanks

Sorry for a late replay but this thread goes fast and I did not saw your question.

I was not talking about rudders but generically about boat problems.

Originally Posted by Polux

...
Regarding problems with Beneteaus you have to consider that on the last 15 years, that is what for many is considered a "recent" boat, they have made more than 20 000 cruising boats and that the accidents that happen regards a very tiny proportion. If you consider for example Island Packets and I know that some had problems too, you have to consider that on the last 15 years they had been built in a much smaller scale, maybe 20 times less. That makes that for each problem on a Island Packet you had to have 20 on Beneteaus, or something like that, and it does not seem to me that happens.

Besides an outdated design that gives the boat a not very good sailing performance the problems I have heard regards rudder delamination. Search on the net and you will find what I am talking about.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

What is different in automobiles, is mostly computer control of the engine, transmission, steering and even the brakes. It has been a complete paradigm shift, engines are tremendously more powerful, while polluting less and consuming less fuel.

There has been no similar paradigm shift in boats, I'd compare boats to General Aviation airplanes, where there has been no tremendous technological advancement, but technology has made large inroads like composite airframes.
Guess what? We are finding out these modern composite designs are not as strong, not as easily repaired and will not last as long as our Fathers Cessna will.

You can only be kidding. Sail performance that comes from boat stiffness (compared to a car engine) that allows bigger sails evolved so much that today a mass market cruiser is as fast as a racing boat from 40 years ago. About the same thing if you compare a racing car with a touring car.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

What is different in automobiles, is mostly computer control of the engine, transmission, steering and even the brakes. It has been a complete paradigm shift, engines are tremendously more powerful, while polluting less and consuming less fuel.

There has been no similar paradigm shift in boats, I'd compare boats to General Aviation airplanes, where there has been no tremendous technological advancement, but technology has made large inroads like composite airframes.
Guess what? We are finding out these modern composite designs are not as strong, not as easily repaired and will not last as long as our Fathers Cessna will.

Really? Avionics, wing design, and jet engines haven't seen a similar paradigm shift since the time of our Fathers Cessna?

You do bring up an interesting point, though, as it relates to this thread. The expectation that boats should inherently last 50 years is misguided. The fact that they do is incredible. But this certainly doesn't mean that this should ever be a design imperative for new boats. It makes absolutely no sense.

And I think that fact alone, even the appearance of it, is what most of the old salts respond to in calling new boats "flimsy". If it doesn't "look" like my 45-year-old TayaValMorInckly - it's obviously crap. It's an argument that holds no merit.

[neilpride]

Smack , you have some evidences from a production boat in page 10 ..

Today , 8.00 Am, In the Beneteau Oceanis from the previous pics, time to rewire the bilge pump, shock horror,!!! a rule 1100 automatic pump fitted in a 3 inches x 9 Inches shallow bilge sump, ok, where is the backup pump? no one!! in a 50 ft boat?? time to run to the shop and buy a rule 1500 or 2000 , but WTF!!! The sump is to small that there is no place for a switch?? Ok, lets swicht to another small Project, replace the compass and cockpit lights, following the wires inside of the aft rudder cave , Shock again!!!! cant believe this ****!! the wires are crushed between the deck and top liner in a mush of resin .... i mean no way to pull this wires out, really? the list is endless...


Polux regarding cars, the cars technology run 5 steps forward v production boats, i mean im still waiting for someone to probe here with a link or a pic or something what kind of new era technology sport a Bavaria compared lets say with a 1980 hunter legend haha.. if you mean the robots cutting the bulkheads or making holes in the deck i call this labor saving equal to hig profit versus same result if a crew is doing the job by hand..

To me new stuff is something like a CF hull with Airex sándwich bulkheads, or a metal grid to spread the loads in Xyacht, but even that is probe it years agoo..

The previous poster is very right when he claim that low entry production boats are made like before but with less materials compared with vintage boats , the gain?? light boats... the cons?? weaker boats... fact!!!!!

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

.......
Polux regarding cars, the cars technology run 5 steps forward v production boats, i mean im still waiting for someone to probe here with a link or a pic or something what kind of new era technology sport a Bavaria compared lets say with a 1980 hunter legend haha.. ...

When we talk about the performance of mass market cruising boats of an era we don't talk about any particular case but about average. 40 years ago make for 1974 not 1980. Go to the PHRF list and compare the handicaps of the average mass market cruisers of 1974 or older with the average mass market of a 2014 sailboat and you will see that I am right. If not maybe you want to post several of those comparative PHRF to show you are right.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Really? Avionics, wing design, and jet engines haven't seen a similar paradigm shift since the time of our Fathers Cessna?

Avionics yes, but they are not part of the airplane anymore that a VHF is on a boat, wing designs, nope no significant change, jets? Not what most consider General Aviation.

There has not been a real substantial improvement in General Aviation since WWII, My 1946 C-140 carries two at 110 MPH and gets 20 MPG, very few production modern airplanes do any better. Many homebuilts do, but they aren't certified.

I think most production boats are similar, no real game changing anything, still fiberglass, still sails, a Paradigm shift would be a different hull material or possibly adoption of a hard wing instead of a fabric sail etc.
I would think the shift from wood to glass would have been considered a paradigm shift for example.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

When we talk about the performance of mass market cruising boats of an era we don't talk about any particular case but about average. 40 years ago make for 1974 not 1980. Go to the PHRF list and compare the handicaps of the average mass market cruisers of 1974 or older with the average mass market of a 2014 sailboat and you will see that I am right. If not maybe you want to post several of those comparative PHRF to show you are right.

Im not talking about perfomance, im talking about construction metods and strenght..

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Avionics yes, but they are not part of the airplane anymore that a VHF is on a boat, wing designs, nope no significant change, jets? Not what most consider General Aviation.

There has not been a real substantial improvement in General Aviation since WWII, My 1946 C-140 carries two at 110 MPH and gets 20 MPG, very few production modern airplanes do any better. Many homebuilts do, but they aren't certified.

Okay - I thought you were looking at the bigger picture when you posted this:

Originally Posted by a64pilot

What is different in automobiles, is mostly computer control of the engine, transmission, steering and even the brakes. It has been a complete paradigm shift, engines are tremendously more powerful, while polluting less and consuming less fuel.

In this case, the electronics and integrated systems on most aircraft are definitely a paradigm shift from your Fathers Cessna.

But if you're actually trying to say that, apart from these computerized automotive systems which are "like VHF in a boat or avionics in an aircraft", cars are just the same as they ever were because they still have 4 wheels - okay. I guess your point didn't come through very well.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Im not talking about perfomance, im talking about construction metods and strenght..

Well, then you've got a problem on your hands. Right now, you keep listing a single (non-hurricane-damaged) Bene as your example to condemn the entire line. There are, maybe, thousands of them out there built pretty much exactly the same way. And they are doing fine.

So, if they are, indeed, as weak and poorly built as you insist they are, there should be many, many more falling apart than there actually are.

So someone is wrong. And I tend to go with numbers over opinion.

And though I definitely respect your knowledge and experience in repairing boats - I don't buy your conclusions. For example...

Originally Posted by neilpride

Today , 8.00 Am, In the Beneteau Oceanis from the previous pics, time to rewire the bilge pump, shock horror,!!! a rule 1100 automatic pump fitted in a 3 inches x 9 Inches shallow bilge sump, ok, where is the backup pump? no one!! in a 50 ft boat?? time to run to the shop and buy a rule 1500 or 2000 , but WTF!!! The sump is to small that there is no place for a switch??

Isn't there a standard manual bilge pump as backup? And if the bilge sump is that small, do you really need a 1500 or 2000 pump as a standard?

For example, if you do the rough math on that bilge sump with your measurements - and assume that it's maybe 6" deep ("shallow" like you say) - my calculator comes up with 162 cubic inches of volume (3X6X9). A single gallon of water is 231 cubic inches. And the existing Rule 1100 pump can move 1100 of these in an hour. So, exactly what are you designing for on this boat when choosing the 2000?

And have you ever wondered why there isn't constant complaining about the floorboards always being awash in these newer production boats because the bilges are "too small"? Maybe, just maybe, the common problem that you're imagining requiring double the amount of water movement isn't there?

Originally Posted by neilpride

Ok, lets swicht to another small Project, replace the compass and cockpit lights, following the wires inside of the aft rudder cave , Shock again!!!! cant believe this ****!! the wires are crushed between the deck and top liner in a mush of resin .... i mean no way to pull this wires out, really? the list is endless...

Though I agree it might not be the "best" way to install wiring - I can guarantee you that I (and most others) don't want to pay extra in design and construction costs to make your job repairing and adding stuff easier. Sure, it would be nice to have (especially for you) - but it's very, very low on most boat buyers' priority list. So if it meets common standards, doesn't sacrifice the integrity of the yacht, and the price/value are good - I don't really care if it presents difficulties when customizing the boat's systems, etc.

BTW - I'm still not clear...how did this Bene in your photos get damage? Did this happen while it was under sail offshore?

[robert sailor]

The concept, Smack, that new boats have new technology in their construction is both right and wrong. As I said earlier, some do and some don't. The more upscale boats sometimes do and the cheap seats seldom if ever. Its the same polyester glass from 5o years ago except there is a lot less of it and instead of high labor fitting and tabbing the bulkheads they now use a thin liner glued in place with Plexus(hold it I guess I found something that qualifies as high tech), the interiors are fake Ikea type prefab cabinetry and floors that are cut out with a computer(hold it another high tech technique as it was done by hand before) They put their brass through hulls in and their fender washers under the cleats and other than engine designs from the 1960's and deck hardware, wires etc. the construction today is the same material as used for 50 years but done cheaper. Parts that should be properly glassed in place are now held with Plexus and for most of the users it does the trick but it hardly represents any improvements other than the bottom line for the builder.
As to whether yachts today are faster, well there is no discussion here because by and large they are and not only that but they are much bigger to boot and the interior spaces are used much better for most owners. So on the design side I agree with Polux and yourself, boats are much better in that dept. There are some beautifully made boats today and a great choice to boot but they are not the cheap seats. The cheap seats are built down to a price and their build quality reflects it BUT these are often wonderful value for the money paid and as long as you really know you are buying this type of product then no problem, just don't try to sell yourself that you can pay less and somehow get decent quality. This concept never has worked.... in any industry.

[sailorboy1]

There are so many posters on this thread that only ever have something to say when they sense an opportunity to trash production boats. Just such a waste of electronic air disguised as internet expertise and knowledge.

The plain facts are that modern production boats have been sailing around for over 20 years and not falling apart any more that the old tanks. There are many many boat designers etc currently designing the "modern" boats who also were designing boats 30 years ago. For those posters who insist that modern design is all wrong please post all the boats you have designed so we can evaluate your vaulted expertize.

[Coops]

Most of the posters have, like yourself, posts numbering into the thousands and I sincerely doubt that all of those posts are rubbishing production boats.

One of the posters with the least posts would be the OP and he is definitely a spokesman in favour of them.

Not arguing any case, just presenting the numbers and trying to smooth the waters so to speak.

Coops.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Polux

We are talking about mass production boats and Comet is not one of those. It is a small production boat. As a result of that its price is considerably superior to a mass production boat. My opinion regarding this type of boats (Halberg-Rassy, Solaris, Xyacts etc) versus mass production boats is that even if they are better finish and generally have a slightly better built, that difference in no way corresponds to the difference in price.

Production boats are on what regards the structural basis, that includes rudder, hull, keel, mast and rig are generally well designed and well built. The big difference in price comes not so much from a lower quality (except finish) but from huge savings that are allowed by big mass production that allow the use of robotics and scale economies.

You see many of them doing circumnavigations without special preparation. I remember a case that had impressed me some years ago: a Bavaria 44 that having made its normal charter live period and being sold after that had circumnavigated (without special preparation) and without problems by the Northwest passage. By what some had said here about the fragility of those boats this seems a pretty much impossible feat.

Corfou-Corfou via le Nord-Ouest en Bavaria 44 !

I know of many cases that would be impossible if what some had said here was true, like a Portuguese Bavaria 36 that circumnavigated not one but two twice.

Polux I don't doubt for a moment that a Bavaria 44 got around the world or that a 36 did it twice after all Catalina 27's do it too as well as old Cal 25's so doing it may not be the best reason to choose either of these boats as an all around offshore boat. The Beneteau 50 is probably more boat than either of the Bavarias and it came to grief and sunk when the plywood bulkheads held in place with glue failed to do the job when the skipper and crew ran into some rougher weather in the north Atlantic. Watching that video was enough for me as I watched the boat come apart in conditions that it should have been able to deal with, it just wasn't that bad, I've certainly been in a lot worse.
Most people these days don't really actually sail around the world anymore because of the piracy issues so they have their boats shipped for part of it. Some actually do round the Cape of Good Hope but even those that do often don't get themselves into any real weather so the boats never get a proper test. There is no question that any boat can break down if the conditions are right but even you don't buy the entry level boats that you speak so highly of. In my mind there are just so many other good choices for that purpose both newer and older that are not built by companies that throw nickels around like man hole covers!

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

...instead of high labor fitting and tabbing the bulkheads they now use a thin liner glued in place with Plexus(hold it I guess I found something that qualifies as high tech)...Parts that should be properly glassed in place are now held with Plexus...

What does "properly glassed in" mean? And when Plexus makes this claim about it's FG adhesive...

Plexus "Fiberglass Fusion" Adhesives have revolutionized the way boats are designed and built. When applied to fiberglass and other composites, they dissolve a thin layer of each mating surface and actually fuse two composite surfaces into one, creating a chemically cross-linked bond so strong that the composites will delaminate before the bond fails.

How is that inferior to the "proper glassing" of yesterday?

I think you need to provide some proof of what you're claiming...or at least acknowledge that these Plexus guys might know something you don't.