Whale versus catamaran

[colemj]

That may not be bog - it might be core bonding compound like this: Nida-Bond - Bonding Compound - Skin to Core Adhesive - Polyester Adhesive

Mark

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by colemj

That may not be bog - it might be core bonding compound like this: Nida-Bond - Bonding Compound - Skin to Core Adhesive - Polyester Adhesive

Mark

Resin with thickening agent?
Looks and sounds like bog to me
tomato tomahto

[Cheechako]

Having witnessed the lack of infusion into core on most boats i've seen opened up, I would suggest that anything put in there, including bondo, would be better than the usual, cover it up and pretend it's "infused".

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

Having witnessed the lack of infusion into core on most boats i've seen opened up,

That is scary. Bad scary.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by cat man do

Resin with thickening agent?
Looks and sounds like bog to me
tomato tomahto

I understand bog to be light fairing compound used to cover imperfections and smooth surfaces. Bonding compound is a structural adhesive used to connect core to skins. All resins in fiberglass are "resins with thickening agents" (that is why there are a lot of viscosities available) with the difference being how much and of what type of agent.

My point was that it may be an actual structural part of a good build and not globs of fairing compound used to cover up a crappy build job.

Mark

[smj]

Originally Posted by colemj

I understand bog to be light fairing compound used to cover imperfections and smooth surfaces. Bonding compound is a structural adhesive used to connect core to skins. All resins in fiberglass are "resins with thickening agents" (that is why there are a lot of viscosities available) with the difference being how much and of what type of agent.

My point was that it may be an actual structural part of a good build and not globs of fairing compound used to cover up a crappy build job.

Mark

I would agree. I can't think of any reason to use bog as a fairing compound in a production built boat coming out of a mold. Maybe there was a previous repair? Personally I can't see any bog but that may be due to the fact I'm looking at it from the iPhone screen.

[Mr B]

Their lucky its the way it is, Other wise they may have sunk, That may be the reason it stayed afloat,

[smj]

Originally Posted by Mr B

Their lucky its the way it is, Other wise they may have sunk, That may be the reason it stayed afloat,

Looks to me as if all the damage was done forward of the watertight bulkhead so no sinking.

[ausaviator]

Does a Seawind have much of a water tight bulkhead?

I understand that in Victoria (Australia) they (in the last few years) had their survey status changed to a maximum of 6? POB due to the fact that it doesn't have the required crash bulkheads that would allow the 12'ish? that they previously carried on-board when under survey.

[smj]

Originally Posted by ausaviator

Does a Seawind have much of a water tight bulkhead?

I understand that in Victoria (Australia) they (in the last few years) had their survey status changed to a maximum of 6? POB due to the fact that it doesn't have the required crash bulkheads that would allow the 12'ish? that they previously carried on-board when under survey.

I can't speak for all the Seawinds but on the 1995 and 1996 models the forward 3' is behind a watertight bulkhead. Aft of that are the single bunks.'they are broken up into 4 seperate sections . These sections are watertight from the others well above the waterline. If one of these sections are compromised there should be no flow out of these sections into the rest of the boat. Out of the 8'cats we have owned there is more thought put into the safety of the Seawind than any other I have seen. Not sure about the Aussie rules.

[ausaviator]

Maybe it's a terminology thing on my behalf. Perhaps they are not "crash resistant" bulkheads.

Either way, Victoria changed their laws and any Seawind 1000's (not sure on the other models) had a reduced number of pax under survey depending on the use. Happy to be corrected if I haven't got that exactly right. I felt sorry for the guy running the business on his 1000 given what they did, but they didn't do in other states which is intersting. No such thing as federal / national boating regulations down here!

[Ironhorse74]

Once again a boat with black bottom paint getting hit by a whale. As a casual observer it seems like most of the whale strikes are on boats with black bottoms.

[markpierce]

I wonder how a steel hull would deal with a whale.

[Mr B]

My Gemini gets a hole in the bottom, it fills the whole boat with water, stem to stern.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by ausaviator

Maybe it's a terminology thing on my behalf. Perhaps they are not "crash resistant" bulkheads.

Either way, Victoria changed their laws and any Seawind 1000's (not sure on the other models) had a reduced number of pax under survey depending on the use. Happy to be corrected if I haven't got that exactly right. I felt sorry for the guy running the business on his 1000 given what they did, but they didn't do in other states which is intersting. No such thing as federal / national boating regulations down here!

There will be - at least for Commercial vessels - in 3 months time.

National System

On the issue of Victoria, which survey classification was effected? I know Class 1 under the NSCV has some changes? I know of no issue concerning the crash bulkheads, they all meet the Survey requirements for commercial operation in Australia. I would be keen to understand what it is that is happening in Victoria.

I suspect it may be the older thousands which are under 10 meters LOA which affects class 1 vessels under the new system?