Oceanis 485 steering failure

[neilpride]

This remind me when Lagoon claim that their multis have watertight engine rooms,,,
Obviously Watertight in a French dictionary its something else.... and after 2 serious incidents they still have the Word Watertight bulkheads in the agenda....Lol...

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by Polux

I don't contend that most brands made publicity advertising that is way to "flattering" to say the least, or even misleading regarding their products. It happens not only with Beneteau but with many other brands, like Dufour that call their cheaper mass production main series "Grand Large" identifying them with boats specially designed for voyaging when to the more strongly built and much more expensive boats they built, they call performance series.

Here on this forum you have the same phenomena regarding making vastly exaggerated statements with some talking about small yachts that are suitable for "Oceanic unrestricted use".

I did not object to the misleading publicity but to you stating that the Oceanis series are only suitable for sailing on a lake, contrary to the vastly agreed view that they are suitable to coastal sail and to make oceanic passages on the right time of the year when conditions are mild. In fact it is for that they are designed to and is for that they are used with success.

That is also the use 95% of the sailors give to their sailboats.

I objected also to the ones that say that Oceanis are CRAP boats, as if they were not used successfully by almost all of their owners that remain faithful to the brand. In fact if you go on this forum to any of the threads regarding new owners of Oceanis, or to Oceanis owner's forums, you will find mostly satisfied costumers.

If that was a swipe at me it is an ignorant one> I know you have tried to ridicule this phrasing of mine a number of times, and on several different threads, but the thing is that it is NOT my phrase. The phrase belongs to the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, which is the certifying authority for all UK flagged vessels. I am currently sitting, right now, anchored off a dark Far Eastern shore on a Category "0" certified vessel, certainly describable as a "small yacht", which category is stated by the MCA as fit for "UNRESTRICTED SERVICE". Get it?

No. You wouldn't, because your own experience doesn't extend far beyond sight of the European mainland, in the "right" season!

And to cap it all off, you try to use demagoguery and hand waving to make the collective experience of the likes of Minaret, NeilPride, Evan Starzinger, Jim Cate, and myself among many others etc. etc. appear a weakness in the face of your endless bloviating.

This is the last response you will get out of me on this thread, and perhaps ever.

[neilpride]

Brent Swain must be horrified with this thread.......

[ontherocks83]

and following muckle's lead because as far as I'm concerned the turkey timer on this thread has popped

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Muckle Flugga

Please don't misquote me. I never actually said there were "good Oceanis around". I stated that there are some good BENETEAUS and that I like some models for some purposes. It is you who are being thoroughly inconsistent, equivocating constantly between the fact that these boats ARE INDEED DESIGNED FOR SUMMER COASTAL CRUISING IN MEDITERRANEAN LIKE CONDITIONS AS YOU ACKNOWLEDGE, and then repeatedly saying that they are fine for circumnavigations and more! Please don't pretend you have not said this. You have.
...

You make funny statements. First you say that there are good Beneteaus around and then it implies that there are no good Oceanis around.

Since 1990, that is 27 years ago, Beneteau doe two line of boats, First, that are cruiser racers, and main market cruising boats that are Oceanis. Six years ago they introduced the Sense that is a kind of more luxurious Oceanis with a new interior layout. So what the hell are you talking about when you do refer to good Beneteaus?

As usual you are misquoting me regarding what i said regarding the Oceanis and it is easier to quote what I had really said:

Originally Posted by Polux

...
I did not object to the misleading publicity but to you stating that the Oceanis series are only suitable for sailing on a lake, contrary to the vastly agreed view that they are suitable to coastal sail and to make oceanic passages on the right time of the year when conditions are mild. In fact it is for that they are designed to and is for that they are used with success.

That is also the use 95% of the sailors give to their sailboats.
...

Originally Posted by Polux

I don't think that anybody in his right mind, including Beneteau dealers is going to say that an Oceanis was designed to circumnavigate. Everybody knows that and also that there are boats specifically designed to do that kind of stuff. They are called in Europe voyage boats.

Off course even if not designed for it, evidence shows that many have circumnavigated and it is expected that a boat that cost 3 times less than one specifically designed to circumnavigate has more problems while doing that.

That is all obvious and you never heard me saying that an Oceanis was the most indicated boat to circumnavigate but one thing is all this, that I would say is evident, another thing is saying that the Oceanis are crap.

Originally Posted by Polux

Yes, you are absolutely right, a Voyage boat is to do extensive voyaging while living permanently on the boat. For doing the ARC an Oceanis or other mass production main market boat is adequate and many do that each year.

For sailing to Polynesia that is another story, a Voyage boat would be far better and more adequate even if many do that with a main mass production sailboat, including Oceanis, simply because they cannot afford a more adequate boat. ...

This is completely different than what you said I had said and there are no consistencies regarding what I have said. Yes, that is a fact that even if not being designed for it or the most suitable boats to do that many Oceanis have circumnavigated successfully and one of them is even owned by a member of this forum, Mark.

[Dockhead]

People, be respectful to each other. We are going to close this thread and issue sanctions if it goes on like this. Disagree, by all means -- but don't disrespect.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

People, be respectful to each other. We are going to close this thread and issue sanctions if it goes on like this. Disagree, by all means -- but don't disrespect.

I agree, I mean nothing personal with Polux from my part, we can have hig tension discussions and probably I reach the red line sometimes so I apologize ...

But I'm still wating from Polux a answer if he want to answer to my previous question in what he thinks about the B43 In the video from the dutch guy. I'm really curious...

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by neilpride

I agree, I mean nothing personal with Polux from my part, we can have hig tension discussions and probably I reach the red line sometimes so I apologize ...:

Good.

A very robust argument can be carried on, nevertheless, with respect.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Polux

Curiously you confirm what I have said about the infrequency of hard groundings and about many sailors not having one is his lifetime.

You had three in 33 years of cruising and if I am not mistaken (I seem to have read on on other thread) 200 000nm.

That means one for each 11 years and about 60 000nm. The vast majority of sailors never makes that number of miles.

Then you say that all the hard groundings were done on conditions you know you were at risk, with submerged markets and that you were going very slow, one on Haway other on the Fuji Islands.

Hard to understand how you can get an hard grounding going very slow but in any case I doubt that I would have entered a place that needs markers and that I know that they are submersed and regarding to sailing in Fiji and in a less extent to Hawaii, those are already sailing grounds out of where the vast majority of sailors sail, the ones for whom mass production main market cruising boats are designed for.

In reality the type of extensive sailing and cruising you do, sailing in baldly charted waters, would make the more indicated boat for you a voyage boat.

It seems that you are just doing what most do in this forum that is assuming that the characteristics a sailboat should have for you and your type of cruising and use of the boat, should be the ones that all sailboats should have regarding all type of cruisers.

In fact your use of the boat is a very unusual one among the vast majority of cruisers. Probably a lot less than 1% had sailed for 33 years on a sailboat and done 200 000nm, or sailed on remote and badly charted places and more important, they have no desire to do that and they will never do that.

It is a bit like the need to have a 4 wheel drive truck with a big engine (able to last 500 000km) if one only wishes to travel or voyage on well paved roads and not for a lifetime, but only for some months in a year.

G'Day Paulo,

Despite my post appearing in this thread, it was not in reference to anything that you have posted, but an answer to Evans' specific question about groundings experienced by long term cruisers.

And I am fully aware that Ann and I do not represent common boat usage. This perhaps accounts for our choices of cruising vessels, neither of which have been Beneteaus or other mass produced boats. But, we have not gone anywhere all that exotic in our boats, certainly not destinations that one would call dangerous or exotic (like Evans has done). Hawaii and Fiji hardly meet those descriptions.

Interestingly, I can't think of many places we have been where there were not a few examples of Bennies or Jeaneaus (sp?) etc plying the same waters, so I must agree with you that in most cases, the designs have proven to be adequate. But the undeniable numbers of terminal failures of Beneteau rudders and keels is STILL UNACCEPTABLE to me. If one can not trust t hat these essential features of a yacht are properly designed and executed and will not fail, then the yacht is a poor design overall, and should only be used with the understanding that it may indeed fail, fatally, in your normal usage. And to reiterate: this is UNACCEPTABLE. The fact that many such boats do not have failures does not mean that the design is good... just ask one of the owners or crew members who have suffered loss of property or life how they view the situation. Your consistent defense of such a flawed design is difficult to understand.

And Paulo, just to keep the record straight, we have been full time cruising since October of 1986 and have logged just under 140,000 miles since then, all between San Francisco and the west coast of TAsmania. The event in Hawaii was in 1983 during our first blue water cruise, and that was in a production boat, a Yankee 30, which was a S&S design. And that grounding, on a submerged coral head, was at speed... we were novices at the time and had no idea that markers could be submerged on a high tide. It was an educational and somewhat sobering experience!

Jim

[Dockhead]

In favor of this thread, despite the squabbles, I have to say that it has been enormously instructive. There is enough knowledge in this community that you can get a whole education in whatever field relating to boating you want.

I won't express any opinion about any particular boat which has been discussed, but I certainly do agree with those who have been saying that keels and rudders should never fail, never ever, just like the wings should never fall off an airplane, ever. When I have my next boat built, a lot of lessons will be considered, which I learned on here.

The best rudders I've ever seen, I think, are the ones Dashew did for Beowulf, and for the Sundeers -- spade rudders but with massively over built structure. A structure which couldn't possibly be breached by any force which could possibly ever be applied through the rudder itself, which is designed to break off half way down in case of a violent grounding.

I'm sure it has a certain cost, and maybe a cost that weekend Med sailors are unwilling to pay, but surely it's not actual rocket science, to built a virtually fail-safe rudder.

[HappyMdRSailor]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The best rudders I've ever seen, I think, are the ones Dashew did for Beowulf, and for the Sundeers -- spade rudders but with massively over built structure. A structure which couldn't possibly be breached by any force which could possibly ever be applied through the rudder itself, which is designed to break off half way down in case of a violent grounding.

You mean like this one...

[IdoraKeeper]

OMG! Where is Brent Swain when we need him? If I ever get a Benne (not) I better fix the steering system.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

G'Day Paulo,

Despite my post appearing in this thread, it was not in reference to anything that you have posted, but an answer to Evans' specific question about groundings experienced by long term cruisers.

And I am fully aware that Ann and I do not represent common boat usage. This perhaps accounts for our choices of cruising vessels, neither of which have been Beneteaus or other mass produced boats. But, we have not gone anywhere all that exotic in our boats, certainly not destinations that one would call dangerous or exotic (like Evans has done). Hawaii and Fiji hardly meet those descriptions.

Interestingly, I can't think of many places we have been where there were not a few examples of Bennies or Jeaneaus (sp?) etc plying the same waters, so I must agree with you that in most cases, the designs have proven to be adequate. But the undeniable numbers of terminal failures of Beneteau rudders and keels is STILL UNACCEPTABLE to me. If one can not trust t hat these essential features of a yacht are properly designed and executed and will not fail, then the yacht is a poor design overall, and should only be used with the understanding that it may indeed fail, fatally, in your normal usage. And to reiterate: this is UNACCEPTABLE. The fact that many such boats do not have failures does not mean that the design is good... just ask one of the owners or crew members who have suffered loss of property or life how they view the situation. Your consistent defense of such a flawed design is difficult to understand.

And Paulo, just to keep the record straight, we have been full time cruising since October of 1986 and have logged just under 140,000 miles since then, all between San Francisco and the west coast of TAsmania. The event in Hawaii was in 1983 during our first blue water cruise, and that was in a production boat, a Yankee 30, which was a S&S design. And that grounding, on a submerged coral head, was at speed... we were novices at the time and had no idea that markers could be submerged on a high tide. It was an educational and somewhat sobering experience!

Jim

Hi Jim,

As I have said repetitively I don't think Oceanis are designed to that kind of extensive cruising and use and certainly they will give much more maintenance problems than a boat built specifically for that use or even a more strongly main market or performance boat, not specifically designed for that use, but much more expensive and built with less restrictions in what regards cutting costs to have a boat the bigger number can afford.

However Oceanis are used extensively as charter boat and there is few uses that can have so much strain on a sailboat as charter service. From undisclosed groundings to boat abuse and also annual migrations between Caribbean and Atlantic groundings all contribute to that superior wear than the average owner boat

Oceanis would not be used for that service if they were so fragile and would give the number of problems with the easiness that some here have speculated about.

They would all be substituted by Jeanneaus, Bavarias, Dufours or Hanse boats with the same price tag and some even cheaper than the Oceanis.

A member of this forum that works on a charter company and that has several brands of recent sailboats on his fleet posted recently about the quality of those boats: "New Dufours are worse than Beneteau and Jeanneau's". He was referring to maintenance of those boats and "shipyard" problems, meaning problems that need shipyard intervention.

So why targeting particularly Beneteau on this forum an this is not the first time?

Regarding what you say about Beneteau keels being unacceptably built I don't think that it is a particular concern. Two keels were lost on a particular model of a First cruiser-racer and none (that I know off) on an Oceanis. There are much more Oceanis than First by a multiplying factor and even if some concerns may be raised regarding the solidity of the keels of a particular First model it seems completely unjustified to extend those concerns to Oceanis or other Beneteau models.

There are about 600 First 40.7 and from those two lost the keel, there are certainly more than 30 000 Oceanis and I have not heard of any case of one losing the keel. Besides that the maintenance cares with a cruiser racer, specially one used extensively for racing (as it was on the two cases that lost the keel) should be much more frequent and careful than the ones with a boat built and used for general use. On the case of the First that lost the keel it was proved that the maintenance had not been adequate and that both boats have been grounded.

Regarding the Keel structure I agree that Beneteau, Jeanneau and Dufour use a system (integral contre moule) that has the advantage to be cheap (in large scale and using industrial processes) and efficient, distributing the strain for a large surface and offering multiple bonding points, but has the big disadvantage of making a bonding inspection very difficult as well as a reparation, if needed.

I believe something should be made regarding that namely those brands studding an effective process/equipment that would make those inspections easier.

In what concerns rudders I have a different opinion and contrary to keels the only cases that I know off regarding Beneteau concerns the Oceanis line. I don't know of any case with the First line or the Sense line. Given the huge number of the Oceanis around the cases are relatively few but even so raise concerns specially because they have happened on the last 13 years models.

Beneteau had already made two recalls regarding rudder problems on previous models of Oceanis and that should be a warning that the basic rudder system they were using is more prone to have problems than a traditional one with the upper bearing on the cockpit floor.

Not that the system they use namely on the 48 cannot be built strong enough using those materials but it is just a less efficient design and one with more disadvantages namely regarding needing more quality control on all building phases and one where a single small flaw (while building the boat) can have catastrophic effects. Probably also an inherently less strong one, specially if subjected to continued strain.

Off course, I am assuming that the design on the 48 is correct in what regards efforts and scantlings and it may not be the case, as in any design. In that case I am sure Beneteau will made a recall on that model as it had made previously regarding others.

As I said I don't like the design and think that Beneteau should turn again to a more conventional design regarding the rudder set up. Anyway, the number of the boats around without particular problems on that sector, many being used in charter service, other used for service the boat was not designed to, like extensive voyaging and circumnavigations, show that in a general way the structural systems used are nowhere as fragile as this thread make suppose.

My objections regarded only the vast exaggeration that lead several to cal Crap to the Oceanis series (that are the Beneteau main market cruising brand since 1990) and to say that those boats were only suited for sailing on a lake.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

I agree, I mean nothing personal with Polux from my part, we can have hig tension discussions and probably I reach the red line sometimes so I apologize ...

But I'm still wating from Polux a answer if he want to answer to my previous question in what he thinks about the B43 In the video from the dutch guy. I'm really curious...

That problem regards the 40 and the 43, models tha where subject by Beneteau to a Recall, regarding rudder problems. It is a much worse design than the one on the Oceanis 48 that this thread is about, I would say in that case not only a bad design but a defective one since its failure with time would be predictable.

The problem there regards the bonding of the rudder tube to a plywood structure. That bonding would be subjected to continuous and very frequent lateral forces due to the inevitable flexing tendency of that tube. The huge number of times that would happen would end up on the failing of that bonding.

The solution they found to take care of the problem, that piece that you posted to link the top of the rudder to the upper part of the boat makes a lot of sense and it would effectively diminish the strain on that bond taking those efforts to the upper new structure that would be fixed by screws to plywood panels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7GYGlN_t2g

This video is a 2011 one. Beneteau made a recall on that model in 2012 to fix the problem. I agree that it should be well designed in first place but it is also true that Beneteau acted correctly when it was alerted for the inadequacy of that design.

To my knowledge that modification, taking out the lateral and torsional loads on the tube was effective and I did not have heard of any more problems regarding those models, the Oceanis 40 and 43 (not in production anymore).

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by HappyMdRSailor

You mean like this one...

Hard to say -- without some background on what is shown here, and what happened to it, you can't really tell anything.

If (I'm guessing?) that's a Dashew boat, whose rudder someone (I'm guessing?) put hard onto some rocks, then I'd say that looks pretty good. Broke off half way down, and if (I'm guessing again) the shaft wasn't bent, water integrity was not compromised, and the boat could still be steered, I would say that's just about an optimum result . But again -- just guessing at what is being depicted.


You can't make a rudder which is totally impervious to being broken if run onto rocks. Or at least, it would be very difficult, expensive, and with much compromise to other values. But you can make a rudder which will survive being run onto rocks without (a) compromising watertight integrity of the vessel; and (b) without completely losing the ability to steer. I will insist on it, on my next boat.


Another point which is relevant to the original discussion, and which I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned, is that there is great tension between the value of strength and safety in the rudder design, and hydrodynamic performance.

For hydrodynamic performance, there is nothing like a deep, high aspect spade rudder, not too thick. Obviously that is hardest rudder to make strong.

I'm not commenting on the construction details of the Beneteau which is the subject of this thread, as I am not a boatbuilder. On that, I am listening and learning and keeping my mouth shut.

But concerning the basic configuration of the rudder -- choice of a thin, deep, high aspect rudder -- for the kind of sailing done by 99% of Bene owners, this is the right choice. It makes a huge difference in how well the boat sails, especially in light weather fun day sailing and light coastal cruising situations.

My own boat has a massive and thick rudder, not too deep (to make the difference between keel depth and rudder depth, to reduce risk of grounding the rudder). It has a partial skeg to widen the span between upper and lower bearings, protecting the rudder shaft, but not a full skeg to avoid the very poor hydrodynamics of full skeg rudders. It has an oversized rudder shaft. So my rudder is fairly strong, but mediocre hydrodynamically. A compromise like so many things.

I think Dashew's approach is a better compromise than that, giving much better hydrodynamics, and probably less risk of losing steerage or watertight integrity in a rudder grounding.

Hydrodynamics are fundamental to how a boat sails and performs. If we didn't care about them, then we would all be sailing full keel crab crushers with barn door rudders. I think maybe too little attention has been paid to that in relation to the Beneteau design.