Rudder Failures

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Have you ever been out in a F10 far out at sea which has been blowing for a few days? I'll bet not. That's survival conditions for any small vessel, and very different from the sea state you get from a strong but brief gale on the coast.

I agree with that but you are wrong in thinking that relatively near a coast a f10 cannot give worse sea conditions than in open ocean. The fact that the sea is not as deep at on open ocean can create steeper waves that break more easily and also sea currents are stronger than in open ocean and that also contributes to form a more disorganized sea with waves coming from different directions.

Cape Hatteras is known has one of the worst spots as also Cape horn or Gulf of Biscay, exactly for creating those conditions. Yes I have been on F10 on one of the places that are known to create steep waves. Yes, very frightening conditions with waves coming over the boat and all the sea white. Yes on those conditions you don't go to where you want, you keep the safest course and try to keep the energy to be at the wheel all the time. With a bit of luck those conditions do not last more than 48 hours, most of the time less.

[a64pilot]

Where does "irreparable damage" come from, is this when the embellishment begins?

Gust are the measurement of wind speed above the sustained winds, 60 kts gust could be push the wind speed form anything from 60 kts to 200, only thing we have to go on is the picture, and even being on the leeward side of a Supertanker, it doesn't look bad, certainly no hurricane force.
First paragraph in the article claimed hurricane force winds

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

.. Smacks ... its a bit like debating with a teenager. ..He figures that the Hunter is just as capable offshore as any other boat because it has crossed oceans, ....

Again you are saying that someone, that does not share your opinion, said things he had not said. You had done that already to me.

You accuse smack to debate like a teenager but I did not saw him attributing to other members things they have not said. Are you sure that is he that is debating like a teenager?

[robert sailor]

No Polux what I am saying is that when you debate someone on a subject you usually have some knowledge on that subject. If your knowledge base is really limited then rather than always challenging the other person and questioning their concepts and ideas you put forth your own concepts and ideas based on your own experience on the subject. Generally teenagers don't have a deep knowledge base but that doesn't stop them from thinking they know it all. When a very experienced boat builder puts forth his opinion on how a high quality boat should be built its expected that others will respect that opinion even if it is not their opinion and if you are going to disagree with that person, which is just fine, back it up with your own first hand experience rather than some crap on Google.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

...
Article said 60 kt gusts, not wind speed, but it's irrelevant anyway.
Tell me please how the boat failed? Article claims she was knocked down three times in a few hours and apparently was upside down.
The generator broke loose, lost her dodger and solar panels and electronics all mods, not factory installations. Nothing about the seaworthiness of the boat, and if she did get over on her back, how many boats keep their rig when they do that? How did the boat fail?
No this was apparently an incompetent crew that got in way over their heads, and truthfully in my opinion in a lesser boat, they may not have survived.
...

You did not read well. They talk about structural failure and that surely is not losing the dodger. The sea state was not bad when the boat was abandoned:


The owner stated that:
"We regret to inform you that the CNE Greenland expedition 2009 has been abandoned due to repeated, irreparable storm damage to our sailing vessel Fleur; in the north Atlantic "

Again I don't think he was talking about the dodger or electronics but about the structural damage.

Obviously I don't know the crew competence but this was a "expedition to show how journeys to some of the most remote places on the planet can be undertaken with minimal impact on the environment" and they were heading to Arctic water to attempt the first ever carbon-neutral crossing of the Greenland ice cap.s". No one would attempt that if the crew was not experienced.

Why you say they were inexperienced? The boat was capsized three times and suffered structural damage. That was not to do with experience. Even the most experienced, given the "right" boat and the "right" conditions would not be able to avoid that and certainly much less the structural damage.

UK team sets sail for first carbon-neutral Greenland crossing | Environment | The Guardian

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

.. When a very experienced boat builder puts forth his opinion on how a high quality boat should be built its expected that others will respect that opinion even if it is not their opinion and if you are going to disagree with that person, which is just fine, back it up with your own first hand experience rather than some crap on Google.

I don't doubt that Minarete is a knowledgeable repair boatbuilder but some of his statement, like not knowing that most mass production sailboats(out of Jeanneau and Beneteau) have the bulkheads laminated led me to believe that his experience with contemporary boats is limited out of the ones that are produced in America.

Also is statements that nothing has changed for the better in what regards materials and building techniques on the last 30 years on the building of mass produced boats, is obviously not true and easily demonstrable. Later he had said that all those modern techniques existed already 20 years ago (no 30) but he missed the point that those techniques and materials were used then only on race boats and very expensive boats and today they are used on mass production boats. He has an opinion, that is not shared by contemporary NA or boat builders, that old boats were generally better built then the new ones. Each case is a case but he is not certainly right regarding the average.

So I would take is opinion with a bit more than a grain of salt. But I would say that contrary to you I don't see him attributing to others things they had not said. He is correct in the way he discuss things (even if I don't agree with him).

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Sorry , but i dont get this BS, read the dozen of Fountain Pajots blíster horror historys, since when they start to fix the problem? since the claim number 376?
....

I thought we are talking about Benetaus and Jeanneaus and other boats produced in great numbers. Do you know of frequent cases of blisters on those boats?

I remember that 30 years ago Vaillants and other very expensive boats had quite an epidemic case of blisters in boats with just some years.

Not understanding the role that the use of new materials on modern mass production boats, like vinylester resins and a final epoxy coat barrier had on the elimination of that problem is not understanding the advantage of the use of new materials and techniques.

[a64pilot]

I say they were inexperienced based on a couple of observations, first the carbon neutral thing, that's just silly and brings out the fruits and nuts.
Secondly abandoning the vessel in what appears to be not bad weather, as well as hiding in the fwd cabin. I own an IP 38 and can tell you, that is not the place to be in bad weather, especially if you think sinking is a possibility.
And yes losing your dodger, and solar panels is structural damage, probably not repairable due to it not even being on the boat anymore, but do do you need that to sail back to port? Your abandoning your boat, you can't say it's because your scared and hiding in the fwd cabin hoping nothing bad happens can you?
No, I think like the boat that popped the EPIRB this Summer off the US coast due to seasickness, these guys got in way over their head and wanted out.

Carbon neutral? In a fiberglass boat?, what's the generator that broke loose, was it a wind up generator? Bet she even still had her Yanmar too.

I guess they were burning Bio-Diesel, that makes it OK huh.

[highseas]

I would rather be in a homebuilt steel boat in F10 than a FRP production boat any day.

[neilpride]

Plexus, Plexus, ple,,x uss, Plex, u,,,,,oh ****...

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Polux

It seems you did not read the article. They said gusting 60K, that means probably established 40 or 45K. Recently on a med race, with mostly modern performance cruisers and cruiser racers they got that kind of winds, many boats retired the race but none has to be abandoned due to "irreparable storm damage" and none was capsized and many did not stop racing, including a 33ft performance cruiser with a crew of two.

On the med that kind of winds generally make a worse sea than on the Atlantic with steeper breaking haves, short period too.

Regarding hurricane winds: "If the wind speed is less than 75 mph it is not a hurricane at all and the most severe hurricanes are more than 150 mph"

"A typical hurricane has sustained winds of 100–150 mph. Winds in some stronger storms may exceed 200 mph."Sigda, Robert. Earth Science. New York, 1977.

Note that I am not saying that the Island Packet 38 is not an offshore boat. you have to put it on the contest. It was a reply to someone that said that:
"So your correct any production boat is a blue water boat, as long as the weather is good."

I think that is a vast exaggeration but I am quite sure that no small sailboat is designed to sustain really heavy weather but all of then will fare well on moderate to strong weather, if the boat and the skipper is prepared. Really heavy weather is an almost static impossibility on most regions on the better season (even in what regards to cross Oceans) and a well prepared production boats with a well prepared crew will risk very little crossing those waters.

Any relatively small sailboat going to the wrong place at the wrong season will take considerable risks, even if many succeed without problem. Only with a huge dose of luck a relatively small sailboat will survive a major storm.

Of course, all boats have not the same seaworthiness and generally bigger boats have a bigger safety margin. I posted that to take away the impression that, what by many is considered a seaworthy blue-water boat, is a safe bot in a major storm. That IP, in a not major storm had terminal problems. Also to point out and that the difference between the so called bluewater boats in seaworthiness, towards mass production boats, is in no way as big (if any, depending on the boat) as many want us to make believe.

Sorry, a Force 10 blowing for days in the Northern N Atlantic off Greenland is not just a "major storm", it's a "bloody major storm", and I'm sure not more than one or two people posting on this thread has the slightest idea of what those conditions look like.

It's the sea state, not the wind, which will get you, and a strong gale which blows through a coastal area with a gust to 60, like the katabatic storms in the Med, is not at all the same as what happens up there with thousands of miles of fetch and days to build up the sea state. And the nasty short seas in short sharp blows in enclosed water like the Med or Baltic are also a completely different kettle of fish; extremely unpleasant (BTDT) but child's play compared to this. A short-lived F10 in the Med or in the Solent -- something I've experienced -- is very unpleasant but not life threatening for a decently well-found boat decently managed. A F10 in the open Atlantic, on the other hand, given enough time, will make 15 meter breaking waves -- something which doesn't exist in the Med -- and the long period is no comfort. It's the breaking crests which will roll you over, if you don't have a way to keep her head or stern into the waves (a drag device, and skills to deal with the situation), and smash the inside of the boat to pieces, making it uninhabitable inside -- which is what happened to that unfortunate IP. Or even pitchpole you. And F10 is quite enough for that; even less wind will do it as long as there's enough fetch and enough time.

Another misstatement is that "no small boat will survive a really big storm" -- also false. Small boats even lying ahull are rolled over and dismasted but are very rarely sunk by even the biggest hurricanes. The problem is that the people inside can't survive -- the interior of the vessel becomes uninhabitable.

So experience in strong weather in the Med is not applicable. And what happened to that IP says nothing about IP's being weak. The boat itself did not break up -- it just became uninhabitable inside. This has nothing to do with the boat -- the crew were apparently incapable of dealing with the situation, and apparently didn't have a drag device.

Those kind of conditions never exist in enclosed bodies of water, and don't exist in lower latitudes outside of tropical rotating storms. They do exist in higher latitudes, all the time in the Southern Ocean (infinite fetch!), and frequently enough at latitudes frequented on W-E Atlantic crossings. Cheap production boats will handle anything 95% of all sailors will ever experience in their lives -- no question about that. But more structural integrity is not at all a bad thing if you're venturing out far from shore in higher latitudes.

And of course, larger and heavier vessels do better than smaller or lighter ones. So I would certainly rather be in a Beneteau 57 than in a Hallberg-Rassey 40, for sailing to Greenland. But even much better would be a HR54 or even better still an HR64.

And preparation is more important than the boat -- namely being ready to avoid a roll by having a drag device and knowing how to use it, and by being ready to survive a roll, if it happens, by having everything tightly locked down inside the cabin -- including the generator. Sole plates screwed down tight, batteries (most important!) fully restrained, cabinet doors well locked, and all objects capable of flying around stowed away.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

I don't know why I keep coming back, this is like argueing with a teenager, good observation.
Of course an IP is a production boat, vast majority are, I don't want "homebuilt" to use an aircraft term, nothing wrong with them, I just don't have the knowledge and experience to pick though and find a good one. Why I usually say something like high volume production boats when talking about Bayliners, Hunters, Bene's and the like.

The reason I'm pressing you on this a64 is that instead of saying something IS NOT suited to anything but good weather, it would be much more constructive if you said what "bluewater" boats ARE suited to.

For example, when you say something like this...

Originally Posted by a64pilot

I don't believe there is a certification basis for boats, where limit loads and ultimate loads are established.
If there was, then an A category rating would mean something, as it is, it doesn't.

...it's completely wrong. Of course there is a certification basis...one that's recognized across the industry (CE). Now you might not like it, or agree with it, or whatever - but for you to say it "means nothing" is silly.

What proof do you have that is "means nothing"? That's the point of this thread. Let's look at the facts.

There's plenty of opinion out there, and much of it is clearly wrong - when you just take the time to look at the facts.

Originally Posted by a64pilot

I'll tell you something else, there is no boat ever made that the sea can't tear up and sink, it takes a competent crew AND a competent boat to pull through a bad situation.

Now I'm not an experienced Sailor, I don't pretend to be, but even I know that, money can't buy safety, but a craftsman needs quality tools to perform at their best and even a novice will do better with quality tools, and a boat is just a tool.

This part I agree with. Any boat can sink.

But your last statement (and the one where you assumed the crew on that other IP were in over their heads) is EXACTLY the part that can actually be dangerous. If an inexperienced sailor believes his "bluewater boat" will allow him to sail into conditions he otherwise wouldn't - that's a recipe for disaster.

Which is why I'm asking the question of what you think the limits of your boat are? And what the limits of the other traditional "bluewater brands" are? What exactly is the boat buyer getting when they take you guys' advice and buy the "bluewater brand"?

If the production boats are only good-weather sailors, it's critical to know EXACTLY what these "bluewater boats" are suited for.

[neilpride]

Really heavy weather is an almost static impossibility on most regions on the better season (even in what regards to cross Oceans) and a well prepared production boats with a well prepared crew will risk very little crossing those waters. By Pólux.

Come to my mind Tonga to NZ , the infamous Biscay Bay and the funny weather Windows even in summer, the NARC just to mention few spots, sooner or later someone is caught in the crap.....

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Plexus, Plexus, ple,,x uss, Plex, u,,,,,oh ****...

Okay - now THIS is good...



Did the bulkhead here fail? In other words, did the entire plexus bond let go? Or did it just not bond in certain places (e.g. - the thin edge)?

Also, how old is the boat? And what cause the damage (please don't tell me it was beached and battered)?

[neilpride]

The Bulkhead rest in the liner slot at the bottom, no plexus there, the sides made contact with the hull and here all the plexus is unbonded , the top is just doing nothing , no plexus no Fg, just a few mm gap between the top of the bulkhead and the inner top liner,no this boat dont suffer any damage, in fact looks like new , original hull topsides gelcoat, no patches, keel in really good shape, rudder in really good shape, he made 2 transats previously, the onwer keep everythig in really good condition....