Rudder Failures

[stevewrye]

[QUOTE=neilpride;1677770]Hand holds???[/QUOTE

Exactly what I'm getting at. Not only are there no hand holds throughout a very beamy vessel except around the stove but the edges of the furniture are not rounded off, just take a look at the lower left hand corner of the pic or the stoves stainless steel. I hate receiving stitches at sea even from my wife who is a doctor and the older I get the more chance I have of getting injured at sea. And that is my question to Pulox and Smack. Why would a company build a rudder or a keel for offshore work and not build an interior for offshore work? I'm thinking they build a boat to do a certain thing and in the case of this brand they build them to have fun in while coastal cruising at an affordable cost and have no intention of them going offshore. If they do then I think they don't give a lot to the concern of those that own them. Then again maybe they have no concept about what makes a boat for offshore work be it structurally or any other application like the rigging on the boat in the video which is another story.

Sorry Pulox, those European standards suck, they are the bare minimum. Maybe they are made with the companies in mind so that they can sell a boat in the cost range of a whole lot of people so that the companies can survive and yet have a standard.

[goat]

Please point out why the interior is "not suitable" for offshore.







Well it looks like the flower pot might tip over and the water jug might spill.




goat

[minaret]

[QUOTE=stevewrye;1677819]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Hand holds???[/QUOTE

Exactly what I'm getting at. Not only are there no hand holds throughout a very beamy vessel except around the stove but the edges of the furniture are not rounded off, just take a look at the lower left hand corner of the pic or the stoves stainless steel. I hate receiving stitches at sea even from my wife who is a doctor and the older I get the more chance I have of getting injured at sea. And that is my question to Pulox and Smack. Why would a company build a rudder or a keel for offshore work and not build an interior for offshore work? I'm thinking they build a boat to do a certain thing and in the case of this brand they build them to have fun in while coastal cruising at an affordable cost and have no intention of them going offshore. If they do then I think they don't give a lot to the concern of those that own them. Then again maybe they have no concept about what makes a boat for offshore work be it structurally or any other application like the rigging on the boat in the video which is another story.

Sorry Pulox, those European standards suck, they are the bare minimum. Maybe they are made with the companies in mind so that they can sell a boat in the cost range of a whole lot of people so that the companies can survive and yet have a standard.

They do indeed. All you have to do is take a boat from the European certification to ABYC standard. You basically have to rebuild the boat, it costs a fortune.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Would I cross the Atlantic in a Hunter 49? Of course. Why not? Would I want to go "too far north" - no thanks.

Please point out why the interior is "not suitable" for offshore.





You may be convinced of it - but I have absolute proof that it's perfectly doable - even in an F10-11 near Cape Horn with Sequitur.





I understand that this is your view of things and drives the way you see what's valuable and what's not. But there are many, many examples out there of sailors (including Sequitur) taking these production boats all over the world...offshore...and doing just fine.



Again, I completely respect your Boreal. That's a very serious boat. And it definitely informs your expectations of what a boat "should be". But I look at the evidence of what people are doing out there with production boats (again including Sequitur and/or Mike Harker in Hunters) and I see absolutely NO reason to think it would be the boat that caused me any problems in 35-40 knot winds and 5 meter seas (F8 conditions).

Now, agreed, 6 days of that would suck regardless of the boat. But that's kind of my point.

Your Boreal is awesome. No doubt. But it's definitely not for me. I'm very happy and comfortable with a Hunter.

Once again, using your logic, an Albin Vega 27' is a serious offshore craft, because Jarle Andhoy and the berserkers sailed one to the Antarctic and back, crossing Drake Passage twice, a far more demanding passage than the trip around the horn, which can be quite mellow if one sticks to the inside.


Jarle Andhøy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rP1Lk55QH9M

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by minaret

Once again, using your logic, an Albin Vega 27' is a serious offshore craft, because Jarle Andhoy and the berserkers sailed one to the Antarctic and back, crossing Drake Passage twice, a far more demanding passage than the trip around the horn, which can be quite mellow if one sticks to the inside.

Once again - that's not my logic at all. Where have I said that a Hunter is a "serious offshore craft"? I've simply said they are perfectly suited to offshore, bluewater cruising. And they are.

The fact that Sequitur did incredibly well in the Southern Ocean doesn't mean that Hunters are the best boat for the Southern Ocean. I think everyone understands that.

Conversely, I think everyone is also smart enough to understand that doing well in the Southern Ocean in an F10/11 is very compelling evidence of a boat that can endure the "rigors" of typical bluewater cruising.

Surely you can see the difference?

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by goat

Please point out why the interior is "not suitable" for offshore.







Well it looks like the flower pot might tip over and the water jug might spill.




goat

The flower pot is held down with Plexus AND FG tabbing. Very stable in a seaway.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Hand holds???

Originally Posted by stevewrye

Exactly what I'm getting at. Not only are there no hand holds throughout a very beamy vessel except around the stove but the edges of the furniture are not rounded off, just take a look at the lower left hand corner of the pic or the stoves stainless steel. I hate receiving stitches at sea even from my wife who is a doctor and the older I get the more chance I have of getting injured at sea. .

Really? You see NO handholds?

[Coops]

I can see two the vertical poles between the galley and saloon but cannot see any forward of those to be honest.

Coops.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

But this post dont asnwer nothing, i mean you dont say nothing new here.
I dont think you mean construction practiques , then if there is any regulation about that maybe cheeki rafiki could be in Uk now and 4 sailors alive, but apart from that tragic episode i think you mean tank testing, and its nice , but in the real world, there is any builder testing their boats in storms?

No, no tank testing, at least now. I am quite sure that the cheeki rafiki is going to be analysed by the technical commission (as well as the other similar accident with a First) if those accidents did not happen on the sequence of a previous damage due to groundings, the rules would change demanding more exigent specifications for the structure and fixation of keels. That's how the RCD works and they have been made this on the last 20 years, improving the safety of boats. Do you think that is useless?

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Coops

I can see two the vertical poles between the galley and saloon but cannot see any forward of those to be honest.

Coops.

They are white but you should see them. On each side, on the ceiling, you have two bars. There are also some two wood bars below. I don't know which of them is designed to be strong but I am pretty sure one of them is.

[Coops]

Originally Posted by Polux

They are white but you should see them. On each side, on the ceiling, you have two grab bars.

They may be there but if what I think is them is correct they are on the outside limits of the boat nearly. What about in towards the centre of that large space? Any there?

Coops.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by stevewrye

Sorry Pulox, those European standards suck, they are the bare minimum. Maybe they are made with the companies in mind so that they can sell a boat in the cost range of a whole lot of people so that the companies can survive and yet have a standard.

Off course they are a bare minimum. It is exactly what they are, a minimum.
Why should they be made for companies? Most companies, at least the ones that have weight, made almost all of their boats much bigger than the ones that would have any problem passing the minimum requirement.

I understand that you want to maximize safety and comfort offshore but the fact is that experienced sailors that don't have the kind of money needed to buy a boat like yours and sail extensively and circumnavigate in smaller boats, even solo, rarely have problems.

I have give you the example of Mark and his Beneteau 392? that have circumnavigated, but also a countryman of mine that has circumnavigated not once but twice on the same Bavaria 36, a friend of mine that went from Portugal to Brasil and back on a First 30, a French Transat, a kind of more sportive ARC for solo sailors and duos, where most sailboats are light performance cruisers between 30 and 35ft, with about 100 boats and never a serious accident and on and on.

Steve, the RCD class A is a minimum considered safe for a boat with offshore capability to cross oceans on the right season. It is not obviously about the boats better suited to do that or the ones that would take less risks doing that. It is a reasonable minimum that establish a reasonable minimum of seaworthiness to do that without a significant risk.

[barnakiel]

As someone said above: a bomb proof small sailing boat stops being a sailing boat. At the same time we know that a bigger boat does not need to be bomb proof. Then it seems a boat somewhere between the extremes is best suited for the offshore job.

And I think it is a great mistake to say 'can't built this bomb proof' AND use this argument to build a less than best we can rudder, beam or rig. And in the singular case of a small boat to be sailed offshore the quality of design, built and seaworthiness of the system (boat as a system) is of paramount value.

I, for one, would always try to hunt down the best boat I can afford and sail it and fail it rather than say 'what the hell, this is how they are being built right now' and go for a plastic fantastic.

Then again, every person is different and everybody has their own priorities when it comes to which values are at the top of their list and which are towards the bottom. And none of the lists is better. As long as we do not use an EPIRB as a substitute for proper choice of our cruising guns.

b.

[stevewrye]

Originally Posted by Coops

They may be there but if what I think is them is correct they are on the outside limits of the boat nearly. What about in towards the centre of that large space? Any there?

Coops.

Your right Coops there is one hand hold right above the portlights, But they are too high to be effective as most sailors would have to have strait arms to hold onto them. Strait arming a hand hold on a moving boat is impossible to do. If there was a center hand hold running down the cabin top so you could use both hand hold then that might be OK.

Take a look at the video of the Hunter sailboat I was talking about, (youtube, Hunter46 sailboat for sale, Buzz Stoddard) At 10min.40sec. Buzz shows the companion way doors, shocking indeed, you will loose your boat for sure in a knockdown. At 14:50 it does show a hand hold at about the right hight but they are too far away and would have to be strait armed in order to hold onto. At 15:25 Buzz tells us this is a class A boat ready to go offshore. Somewhere in this Video they show the companionway and it has an SS rail about one foot higher than the companionway stairs. This is not for Bluewater sailing even in fairly calm waters. To have a proper companionway you should have bulkeds on both sides so your shoulders can bang into them or brace yourself going down the stairs with your back to the interior. The way this boat is designed ones upper body weight is going to send you over those one foot high rails and your going to get hurt more than likely in the fall.

Smack, I'm not trying to sell my boat to anyone and by the way it is not perfect. But I am trying to show you some differences in what makes a bluewater boat and one intended for other purposes. I don't give a damn that people sail them everywhere, Sailing offshore is serious stuff some of the time and when it is you need the best because sooner or later if you don't something serious just might fail where it would not on a boat built for the conditions.

Cheers

[Polux]

[QUOTE=minaret;1677840]

Originally Posted by stevewrye

They do indeed. All you have to do is take a boat from the European certification to ABYC standard. You basically have to rebuild the boat, it costs a fortune.

You want to compare the standards of an organization that believes that the Industries should regulate themselves, one where the standards are determined by volunteers that can be "anyone who takes an interest in boats, boating and the safety of boats" with the standards of a organization that is independent from the Industry, that mandatory regulates the Industry and whose standards are determinate by the best professionals on the sector (Naval Architects and N. Engineers) after many years of investigation?

"In the USA, we as a society believe strongly that industries should regulate themselves. We believe that Federal regulations should be enacted only when necessary and that they should reflect what the industry and the public already believe is a necessity for the safety and environmental health of the people and the country. To this end almost every industry in the USA has a separate, independent organization that develops standards for that industry. In the marine industry this is the American Boat and Yacht Council.

ABYC has a small, professional staff that oversees and administers the organization, but they do not determine the standards. That is done by the volunteer membership of ABYC. ABYC membership is open to anyone who takes an interest in boats, boating and the safety of boats."
New Boatbuilders Home Page - ABYC Info

I bet you are a member and if the others are like you...well, it should be interesting. Neil is a member too?

Seriously, if you want to talk of a more demanding certification for yachts talk about Lloyds yacht certification...and most mass produced boats are also Lloyds certificated.