Transom Steps on Catamarans

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by markpierce

these boats look suitable for enclosed bays and lakes. can't imagine them doing well in serious following seas.

LOL...............

[Lagoon4us]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Ah but that pump is there, albeit in front of the manifold. This means you actually pressurize the manifold itself too. This way you can use the valves on the manifold to decide which parts of the system you want to pressurize or bleed. You can even backflush fuel pickup pipes in the tanks !

There are two pumps, one pressurizes the feed manifold, and the other the return manifold. Both draw from the transfer manifold followed by turbine filter. The pumps are self priming.

The way I bleed the system is just switching on the bleed/boost pump and listen to return fuel dumping in tank. When flow is steady, I start engine or genset which is self-bleeding and helped by the boostpump it is a 5 second affair and all is good.

I know another spiff way to bleed an engine: spray small bursts of WD40 into the air inlet while starting. The engine will start on WD40 and you control rpm with length and frequency of bursting it into the air inlet. When bleeding is done, regular diesel takes over and you can stop spraying the WD40.

It kinda proves that WD40 is just diesel fuel

ciao!
Nick.

Hahaha i love the WD40 idea just shows how careful you need to be spraying anything near a running engine.
I remember a local charter boat here running out to the local reefs, the engineer noticed the plume behind the boat was yellow!!!! He checked and found one of the fire dousing systems had slow leaked into the engine room!!!!
Yes i understand using the pump in-situ gives you a backflush effect to the tank i guess my line of thought was to draw the fuel through the pick up line not so much back flush.
Good thinking on that system on my last fitout on my previous boat i installed a sump beneath the filters to catch dribbles, got fed up knocking buckets over....
Cheers Frank

[markpierce]

Originally Posted by cat man do

LOL...............

Ho, ho, ho.

[Southern Star]

sv/Jedi, you suggest that your gratuitous comment in this thread that I do not need hull extensions because I am nothing but a 'weekend warrior' was not an insult; rather, you infer that it was some serious advice based upon your knowledge of catamarans in general and my boat and its intended use in particular - i.e., because I am "not carrying that load of solar panels, huge dinghy with large outboard", "nor crossing oceans." You are wrong.

If you had bothered to read my OP in the thread to which you refer ('Hull Extensions for a Catamaran') you would see that I need to compensate for the weight of "davits, dinghy, outboard, solar panels, wind generator, radar". You also know nothing of my planned itinerary for the boat, where the transoms now sit, etc., etc. Of course, why let a lack of knowledge of the facts get in the way of sloughing somebody off with a comment that you apparently found funny?

If you would like to express your opinion (and the basis for the same) in the appropriate thread, I am sure that it will receive the response it deserves. In this thread it was, of course, nothing more than an irrelevant and incendiary comment without a factual basis.


Brad

[Palarran]

Originally Posted by colemj

A design that allows for a lot of weight in the ends is never a good design - mono or cat. It is a compromise design to allow for a feature that the builder/owner/marketer wants. In the case for your boat, the feature is a larger stateroom with the compromise of the engine outside, fatter hulls to support it and the propeller behind the rudder at the very stern. That is great, and one may wish to choose a boat based on this compromise, as you did (although I seriously doubt you chose the boat solely on that feature ).

Please don't think I am arguing for or against any method of engine placement. I was just pointing out how rabid cat owners get over this issue and how it is solely a cat thing (thanks for helping me make my point ) .

I didn't criticize any boat or engine placement and I challenge you to find where I did. Again, I just pointed out where this is never a debate with mono owners. And by making that point, I was implying that this isn't really a good debate at all. The only reason it comes up is that cats, by their very design nature, allows this choice more than mono designs.

Except for big boats like Nick's, where engine rooms are practical and common. The same exists for larger catamarans, where engine rooms are the norm (and are accessed from INSIDE the boat). To be fair and put this issue in proper perspective, no mono design that I know of has external engine access, and I suspect no mono owner would want to crawl out on their transom to access their engine. But they would never need this design compromise, so it is never an issue.

When you get out cruising (I can do the implication thing also), I think you may find that there are several things more seasick inspiring than a warm engine (a backed up head or a night of rum comes to mind!)...

Mark

Mark, I think the Amel's have engine access from the center cockpit.

From what I have seen, the reason to have engines mounted inside is that they go under the aft berths, which means you can move the bulkhead to the transom. This make for a much bigger space inside. The St. Francis are perfect examples.

My cat is pretty large so it's not directly comparible but I like my engine compartments. You drop down into the hold then open an insulated access door to the motors. There is ton's of room to work on them while under way. And the amount of storage made available in the transom is nice.

[s/v Jedi]

@Brad,

Before I go into specifics, let me apologize for having offended you. Please be assured that this was never my intention and that what I wrote was not even directed at you personally nor anybody else for that matter. Now that I read it back I can understand how you can have interpreted it as being addressed at you... sorry for that.

Originally Posted by Southern Star

Nick, my current boat was 13 years old when I bought it and yes, there was sediment in the tanks. After a flush I am hopeful that the problem is alleviated

Oh my, let me start with that I have nothing against 2nd hand boats. I never said anything like that and Jedi was 8 years old when we bought her and had some sediment in the tanks too. Also, sediment builds up over time so that countdown timer started ticking again the moment the tanks were flushed. The problem will return if not addressed on a regular basis.

but hey - I'm just a weekend warrior, right?

Is there a negative meaning to "weekend warrior" that I missed? For me it is normally used for someone who parties during the weekends. Nothing wrong with that? In the context I used it, I meant it to include sailors who sail during the weekends. I do not know if you are in that category but if you do then yes, I guess I called you weekend warrior. I'm sorry if that was offending to you as for me it is not an offending term at all. Like I wrote earlier, I was one for 17 years myself.

Also, I don't need extensions? That is a different thread, but nevertheless, based upon your extensive experience in catamarans I appreciate your opinion, even if it is thread drift.

Oh please, don't do the thread-police thing, especially not when you're involved in it yourself; I am allergic to that. I do realize that the rest you write here is probably the opposite of what you mean, but I can't play that game, sorry.

Originally Posted by Southern Star

PS If you had read my post, you would also have read that I acknowledged that I may never have to bleed the diesels again in boisterous conditions (I am hopeful that flushing the tanks will have had the desired result, but cannot be fully condfident that no other sediment will come off the bottom/sides of the tanks again if the going gets really rough). Nevertheless, I suspect that other 'weekend warriors' will be buying used boats and may have similar experiences.

Yes, you had said that about the tank already. And yes, other weekend warriors do experience this problem regularly. It is caused by fuel standing in tanks for a long time without inspecting and cleaning the tanks regularly. This is typical for boats that are not used full time.

Obviously, 'serioius cruisers' buy only new boats, or ones where there is no build-up of sediment in the tanks.

No, you mis-quote me. I wrote "serious full time cruisers". The "full time" meaning that they are live-aboard cruisers and the "serious" meaning that they take their boat and it's systems serious. You repeat things about new boats that I never mentioned and you are misinformed about buildup of sediment so I will repeat that: it never stops, you need to do regular maintenance to prevent it.

Obviously, 'serious cruisers' never get air locks because they are never out with low tanks in boisterous conditions. Heck, obviously 'serious cruisers' like youself and Lagoon4us don't even need to know how to bleed diesels, because they will never have the need!

It is correct that serious full time cruisers do not normally leave port with near empty tanks. Topping up the tanks is standard practice among them. But I can assure you that we not only know how, but also regularly bleed our diesels. This needs to be done every time new filter elements are installed or when fuel lines are opened for regular maintenance. If you read my posts and follow the link to the fuel system I have designed, you will discover that I actually make a big point in optimizing fuel systems for easy bleeding.

But sv/Jedi, if there are no advantages to having good access to the diesels and being able to service them from inside, why are you happy you have a separate engine room?

The answers to this are in several posts in this thread already, but I'll repeat them for you: on mono-hulls they keep the messy maintenance away from the salon. On catamarans this is not an issue as the engine is not located there, as Mark explained. On mono-hulls not having the sound of the engine for off-duty crew is another advantage, but it was explained that this isn't an issue on catamarans because they only run one engine normally and thus there is a hull with peace and quiet when under power.

Originally Posted by Southern Star

sv/Jedi, you suggest that your gratuitous comment in this thread that I do not need hull extensions because I am nothing but a 'weekend warrior' was not an insult; rather, you infer that it was some serious advice based upon your knowledge of catamarans in general and my boat and its intended use in particular - i.e., because I am "not carrying that load of solar panels, huge dinghy with large outboard", "nor crossing oceans." You are wrong.

I think you are repeating yourself a bit again here. This makes me explain again that I never called you "nothing but a weekend warrior", those are your words, not mine. See my previous explanation. The second part needs some explanation obviously. What I mean is that the naval architects that design catamarans are quite capable in that job and thus their designs do not need hull extensions. Only when owners start modifying these boats, like adding heavy weight gear at the stern, these modifications might lead to the need for more buoyancy at the stern (or bow) and thus further modifications.
I understand that you claim to have all this gear and do long distance sailing without being a live aboard cruiser. What can I say.. I was wrong and my hat off for you for putting that effort and money into your boat.

If you had bothered to read my OP in the thread to which you refer ('Hull Extensions for a Catamaran') you would see that I need to compensate for the weight of "davits, dinghy, outboard, solar panels, wind generator, radar".

No, I did not refer to any thread that you started. I also don't think you can require me to read threads that you start before posting in other threads.

You also know nothing of my planned itinerary for the boat, where the transoms now sit, etc., etc. Of course, why let a lack of knowledge of the facts get in the way of sloughing somebody off with a comment that you apparently found funny?

Correct, I don't know your plans but it now sounds as if you plan to become full time cruiser? If so, what the heck are you complaining about? You are doing exactly what I suggest in that case. Also, you sound a bit frustrated with not being a full time cruiser (yet?). You shouldn't be. My comments were not even directed at you personally because, like you correctly state, I didn't even know who you are, what you are, nor the plans you have, hence, I didn't know you were a weekend warrior at all ! And yes, I find the term weekend warrior funny. If you want me to switch to "non full time cruiser", just tell me so and I will.

If you would like to express your opinion (and the basis for the same) in the appropriate thread, I am sure that it will receive the response it deserves. In this thread it was, of course, nothing more than an irrelevant and incendiary comment without a factual basis.

I disagree. I have commented on the direct subject of this thread and on loosely related subjects that were brought forward not by me but by other posters in thew thread. I would need to read back to see if you actually posted anything about the thread subject, but I do not remember it.

I think that when you calm down a bit and think about hull extensions needed on cats for weekend sailors (is that an okay term for you?) you will find that I am right and that only the catamarans that get modified by full time cruisers or long distance sailors become candidates for hull extensions. Others have commented the same. Sorry if you don't agree. Also, I am not at all impressed by your threats of giving me "deserved responses" in that thread you keep mentioning... I might actually search for it and join in

ciao!
Nick.

[muskoka]

Manta extended their transoms from 38 to 40 feet, and then up to 42 feet. This was to help them carry the same types of loads which Southern Star is talking about - dink, solar panels, hard bimini etc. The added benefit is that it also enhanced the lines of the boat.

I've seen smaller extensions done (2 ft), and it seems quite straightforward and it's not stupidly expensive. Though I'd bet if you want to go up 4 or 6 feet the cost is exponential. I think that if you have a boat you like, it's a reasonable expense to get better performance out of it.

[Sand crab]

Originally Posted by markpierce

these boats look suitable for enclosed bays and lakes. can't imagine them doing well in serious following seas.

The South African cats cross the Atlantic immediately after being built
The French cats, ditto
The Australian cats, Pacific or Indian
The rest of them from wherever to wherever then they all go wherever and hve done it for decades.
So how did all these crews survive if they are only for enclosed bays and lakes? BOB

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by muskoka

Manta extended their transoms from 38 to 40 feet, and then up to 42 feet. This was to help them carry the same types of loads which Southern Star is talking about - dink, solar panels, hard bimini etc. The added benefit is that it also enhanced the lines of the boat.

I've seen smaller extensions done (2 ft), and it seems quite straightforward and it's not stupidly expensive. Though I'd bet if you want to go up 4 or 6 feet the cost is exponential. I think that if you have a boat you like, it's a reasonable expense to get better performance out of it.

This is off topic really but, when I was in east central florida a couple years ago, there was a guy in the yard extending a 50 ft Lagoon. he was just getting ready to cut off the transoms just aft of the cockpit and was going to put in 4-6 ft of hull. I tried to get him to help me understand why he needed more room than a 50 ft cat! What a job!!

[Cheechako]

"From what I have seen, the reason to have engines mounted inside is that they go under the aft berths, which means you can move the bulkhead to the transom. This make for a much bigger space inside. The St. Francis are perfect examples. "
The down side being your aft cabins smelling like engine oil and diesel, moving 3 or 4 large cushions and a multitude of wooden covers to get at your engine, and a nice hot berth in the tropics after a long motor....

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

"From what I have seen, the reason to have engines mounted inside is that they go under the aft berths, which means you can move the bulkhead to the transom. This make for a much bigger space inside. The St. Francis are perfect examples. "
The down side being your aft cabins smelling like engine oil and diesel, moving 3 or 4 large cushions and a multitude of wooden covers to get at your engine, and a nice hot berth in the tropics after a long motor....

That is not summarily true. Modern diesels should not leak or smell. If they do, there is a maintenance issue that should be addressed, or the owner should learn to be more clean. Access is a function of design - I don't have to move any bedding or covers to get to mine. A properly insulated interior engine room does not bleed heat and any heat that is in there is easily removed with a few minutes of engine blower - again, a function of design.

And the above points are equally valid for monos as they are for cats (I REALLY don't understand why people go nuts over where engines are placed in cats - both mono and cat people).

BTW, where is your engine located?

Mark

[Lagoon4us]

Originally Posted by Sand crab

The South African cats cross the Atlantic immediately after being built
The French cats, ditto
The Australian cats, Pacific or Indian
The rest of them from wherever to wherever then they all go wherever and hve done it for decades.
So how did all these crews survive if they are only for enclosed bays and lakes? BOB

Sugar scoops like them are getting a little silly, seems there is an importance on who can come up with the grandest set of back stairs.
I will say i've never had a following sea issue on any modern boat other than when my dinghy nearly swamps when the motor suddenly dies.
I'd think that todays modern cat wouldn't see too many following sea issues as that's not a point of sail often used.
Cheers Frank

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Sand crab

The South African cats cross the Atlantic immediately after being built
The French cats, ditto
The Australian cats, Pacific or Indian
The rest of them from wherever to wherever then they all go wherever and hve done it for decades.
So how did all these crews survive if they are only for enclosed bays and lakes? BOB

(falling down laughing)

This thread has been all over the place. OBVIOUSLY they work.

I've got a small cat and the transom steps are one of her best features. My wife would have a great deal of difficulty boarding without them (knee replacement).

Yup, railings are good; too many boats are shot on them.

Following seas? I just haven't had the problem. I suspect as long as they are open on one side the issue is overstated. And who is kidding whom; it's a very limited number of boats that spend much or their lives on serious crossings. If that were my intent, I would opt for a moderate step design.

[Lagoon4us]

Sorry i dont know how to attach piccies yet however if you look at the pictures of Spirit i built her 21 years ago, note the dive platform with stairs leading P&S. She has travelled the Pacific from Sydney to PNG and East to Noumea and NEVER has the sugar scoop caused any issues and she has been in some very foul weather in that time.

Fears of following seas are akin to fears of the 'Kracken' and 'The edge of the world!!!' (Humour is intended here for those that may take offence.)

And who is kidding whom; it's a very limited number of boats that spend much or their lives on serious crossings.
Totally agree with you there!

spirit of freedom pictures - Google Search

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Lagoon4us

Sorry i dont know how to attach piccies yet however if you look at the pictures of Spirit i built her 21 years ago, note the dive platform with stairs leading P&S. She has travelled the Pacific from Sydney to PNG and East to Noumea and NEVER has the sugar scoop caused any issues and she has been in some very foul weather in that time.

Fears of following seas are akin to fears of the 'Kracken' and 'The edge of the world!!!' (Humour is intended here for those that may take offence.)

And who is kidding whom; it's a very limited number of boats that spend much or their lives on serious crossings.
Totally agree with you there!

spirit of freedom pictures - Google Search

Now thats a practical stern for a monohull. Steve Dashew also provided safe access on his monos.

One of the big plusses fof a cat certainly is the access they provide to the water which at the end of the day is why most people get out on the water.

The safer and more practical this is donw without compromising the seaworthiness of the vessel the better. Seems all new designs of monohulls have inproved their access as well. How well and the safety compromise could still be debatable.

cheers