Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 01-12-2014, 08:02   #376
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,964
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pinguino View Post
Found it at last...on an RYA site
'Crew Limit (Part of the Maximum Load)
Crew limit is the maximum number of persons at 75kg each (except inflatables) recommended by the manufacturer for which the boat is designed to carry when underway.
Factors effecting the choice of crew limit will be, in small boats, the available seating area on thwarts, individual seats etc. and in larger boats the number of berths and available space to enable the boat to be safely navigated in the chosen design category. If for a given Crew Limit ISO 12217 or ISO 6185 does not afford the desired Design Category then a reduction in the Crew Limit may be needed.'
In the plans for the Bene up the page I don't see bunks for 8, I can't see seating for 8 yet she is A8....
The important part of this crew limit reg for our discussion seems to be where it specifies the max no. of persons "recommended by the manufacturer". So the govt is relying on the mfg. to determine how many people it can safely carry offshore. I think what Polux has been trying to say is that this is based on a racing scenario, and is a limit on the number of crew the boat is permitted to have onboard when offshore racing (provided there is adequate crew safety gear), as opposed to what may be comfortable or prudent for long-distance cruising. The problem seems to be that most consumers are not likely to understand this, and may assume that if the boat is authorized to carry 8 for offshore racing, then it can certainly carry 8 for cruising.

Innocuous detail or yet more clever marketing? Might be interesting to read what the sales brochure says.
__________________

__________________
Exile is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 08:20   #377
Registered User
 
neilpride's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: in the world
Boat: csy 44 tall rig.
Posts: 3,099
Re: The Yard Guys

CE Certification : A8/B9/C10 from the brochure specifications, A8 offshore
B9. Coastal C10 protected waters ,lakes etc...
So you can take 9 friends for coastal sailing, 10 if you made few tacks in the bay and 8 if you venture far away....all based in wich interior config you choose....

I think berths for 8 its not a serious problem, 3 cabins, 6 can sleep there and 2 in the cockpit doing the wacht or taking a snap in the salón, but fresh wáter capacity and storage space its a isue, not the best boat for a crowd since you need to share your bunk, but oh well!! its the owner skipper decisión to take 8 for a long passage , better to sail a 45 ft or a 50 for 8 people.... because in rough weather 8 persons in the 38 can be a nightmare....
__________________

__________________
neilpride is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 09:07   #378
Wayfaring Mariner
 
captain58sailin's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Homer, AK is my home port
Boat: Skookum 53'
Posts: 4,045
Images: 5
Re: The Yard Guys

Sailed with 6 on a 47' vessel for a long period of time, got crowded after awhile. For me less is more, my top end for crewing on a non-scheduled program would be 4, and prefer 2 or 1, but then I'm a bit cranky before I get my morning coffee.
__________________
" Wisdom; is your reward for surviving your mistakes"
captain58sailin is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 09:12   #379
Registered User
 
neilpride's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: in the world
Boat: csy 44 tall rig.
Posts: 3,099
Re: The Yard Guys

Im ok with 4 , or even 3 ,or just my wife ...Tough to deal with 8...
__________________
neilpride is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 09:21   #380
cruiser

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,132
Re: The Yard Guys

Let me try this again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
I'm not sure what there is not to understand when the wording is very clear:
  • 'A’ OCEAN: Designed for extended voyages where conditions may exceed wind force 8 (Beaufort scale) and significant wave heights of 4 m and above but excluding abnormal conditions, and vessels largely self-sufficient.

This has nothing to do with the BOAT's rating does it. It describes WHO can do those passages, with what additional equipment, not WHAT boat can. The A8 rating applies to the boat, and there is no way I can see THAT boat being used with 8 people on extended passages, which is what the rating refers to. I gave you the source, which is from the regulating authority itself.

So the boat does need extra design work to be used off shore, we agree. Stock setup is not significant. I bet it does nicely for coastal sailing in reasonable weather. Which 97% of people will be looking for. I am just saying it really should not pretend to be a bluewater boat, as there are many others much better suited for that purpose. This is not.
Design work? No. Customization for nervous clients? Maybe.

You seem to really have a hard time with this. I'm thinking you're a pretty bright dude, and that you're just having trouble with this particular debate.

A rated boat can do what the rating says it can do. The boat is a bluewater boat. That is what it is built for. Granted, I personally want a bigger boat than a 38 when I buy new (something in the 45' range) - but that's me. Regardless, there is no "pretending" necessary.

Now, here's where your valuable viewpoint becomes a little suspect - no one is saying that, though a boat is built to be a Cat A bluewater boat, it is equipped and ready as a stock purchase to be sailed across an ocean. That would be kind of silly to say that. Don't you think, av?

In fact, I'm almost positive that the new Oysters (also category "A") don't come stocked with an 8-man liferaft. Furthermore, I took a look at the standard features on the Oyster 475 and don't see a generator, or water maker, or the other stuff you seem to be so insistent that production boats should apparently have as standard equipment to be considered worthy in your mind.

Does that mean you think Oysters are not bluewater boats? Or does that mean you're not quite getting it?

The fact that you're mixing together all this stuff to try to cling to a very strange point is very...interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
What sea berths are they going to use? Those cabins hardly qualify, do they?
Okay - this is just funny.

Can you please show us what you mean by "proper sea berths"? I'm finding this continued critique kind of funny and need to try to understand your definition of a sea berth.

For example, I did a very compelling comparison of the "interior bluewater seaworthiness" of my Hunter versus a Morris:

Morris:


Hunter:


Sea berths? Hand holds? Sink locations? Where are you seeing drastic differences in these things you hold so dear between this stalwart bluewater boat and - the Morris?

Morris Yachts...ppphhhhffff... I mean...

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
What kind of poser are they appealing to?
Heh-heh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
Yes, I hope you recognize what the regulators say when they say a BOAT is has an A8 certification, does not mean it should be taken as gospel and used as such. I get it that you need extra equipment also, but that is the requirement for the crew, not the boat.

Of course, they do not have grab rails either do they?

It may be OK for a coastal cruiser, but to hang an ocean crossing tag on this boat is just stretching credibility. And to market is as such is just wrong.
av - no one is trying to convince you to buy a production boat. In fact, you, without question, should never buy one. You're too engrained in your thinking about what constitutes a "blue water boat". Sure, it's clearly outdated thinking, evidenced by what the vast majority of the yachting industry (production and "blue water") is actually doing. But I would hate for you to miss out on the enjoyment of sailing because you were down below shivering in a cold sweat because your production boat didn't have traditional teak hand holds on the ceiling (p.s. - don't buy that Morris either).

What about a 1976 Morgan OI 41?



Or maybe a Bruce Roberts:


I see some grab rails like you like, and even a through-bolted bulkhead on that OI! There's probably even a sea berth in there somewhere (though I'm guessing here because I don't understand what you actually qualify as a "sea berth").

Wait - maybe this 1970 Cheoy Lee? Are those "sea berths"?



So, in conclusion, I think I now see the issue:

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
I was presuming, and you may be correct.
You do seem to do that a hell of a lot...with very mixed results when it comes to accuracy.
__________________
smackdaddy is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 09:35   #381
Registered User
 
neilpride's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: in the world
Boat: csy 44 tall rig.
Posts: 3,099
Re: The Yard Guys

But in the Oyster i suspect you have place for a genset and a watermaker, and in the 38 i think no.. quite a diference....
__________________
neilpride is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 09:57   #382
cruiser

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,132
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by neilpride View Post
But in the Oyster i suspect you have place for a genset and a watermaker, and in the 38 i think no.. quite a diference....
I could honestly care less about this whole B38 fixation. You guys are kind of grasping at straws by focusing on this single example. I just put it up for a price comparison...and you have to admit, the price is pretty damn good.

But, though I haven't measured it, there seems to be a bit of space in the "sail locker":



Of course, I'm sure you have a reason it can't be done there either. So I'll leave it to you guys to keep pouring over this B38 to find any "flaw" you possibly can.
__________________
smackdaddy is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 10:12   #383
Registered User
 
neilpride's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: in the world
Boat: csy 44 tall rig.
Posts: 3,099
Re: The Yard Guys

Oh great the Fisher panda and the watermaker in the sail locker, good idea!!!
By the way is not just the b38 , the others brands fail in this point to, great open living space , not a single spot to place systems...
__________________
neilpride is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 10:31   #384
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 2,964
Re: The Yard Guys

Random thoughts & musings:

If we follow Smack's inexperienced advice and look at his own example, instead of newbies on limited budgets buying & fixing up 25-year old boats made by builders with great reputations, they should buy 25-year old, cheaply made boats and spend money fixing those boats up instead?? If you happen to simply prefer the looks, performance, and other features of your Hunter, then so be it. But why would those who are looking for a higher build quality, and yes -- a more solid, strongly-built boat for long-distance, bluewater cruising -- go for a Hunter or other "modern" boat when the market for the past 7 years has been offering so many excellent choices?

We can all agree that most 25-year old boats are likely going to need expensive work. So if you want a solidly constructed boat but can't meet the price of a used Hunter made in 1989, then all you have to do in this market is find the higher quality boat you do want that was perhaps built a few years earlier. If it's a boat from a mfg. with a good rep and you get a thorough survey done, it's more about how it was maintained vs. how many cycles it's gone through. And with such a glut of older boats out there, you can also find one with higher performance, more space, more amenities, or whatever your priorities happen to be without buying one from a mfg. with a rep for building lower quality boats. What's more, the "good 'ol boat" that has been well-maintained won't necessarily command a higher price in a market like this, and will likely come equipped with higher-quality, longer-lasting components in any event.

Smack has often touted all the "Yard Guys" & other experts he claims will rebut the people who have already responded re: the build quality of modern, mass-produced boats. I'd like to hear from them . . . .

It's already been said but worth repeating that we already know that the cheaper boats have crossed oceans, and that high quality/expensive boats suffer failures. Without knowing age, usage, and maintenance history, it may be helpful but logically impossible to draw conclusions from this without knowing more. Thus, and notwithstanding Smack's cheerleading, which boats dropped out, or did or didn't suffer failures in a manufactured event such as the ARC, is interesting but almost ludicrous as far as leading to any conclusions.

But we do know more. We have experts pointing out cheap construction methods used to build hulls, bulkheads, rudders & keels on modern, mass-produced boats. We have reports from designers & engineers on the payroll of these mfgs. of undue emphasis on production costs. And lo & behold, in the small percentage of these newer boats that are extensively sailed we are seeing failures in hulls, bulkheads, rudders & keels. Conclusive? Perhaps not, but go figure . . . .

Finally, when we all agree that the vast majority of boats -- of any type or brand -- spend most of their lives at the dock, then it is specious to conclude that any particular brand like Bene is well-built for long-distance, bluewater cruising based on popularity alone. I am sure it is true that most of their buyers are satisfied customers, but once again that doesn't inform the issue of whether they are or are not cheaply built for their advertised purpose.

Smack -- to avoid future confusion & misstatements, here are a few terms used in surveying reports & insurance policies:

"Replacement Cost" -- as Jim Cate explained, the estimated cost in time & materials to rebuild the boat in current dollars, etc.

"Agreed Value" -- the amount that the insurer & insured agree the boat is worth in the event of a total loss, i.e. "market value"

"Market Value" -- we know what this one means, right?
__________________
Exile is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 10:36   #385
Moderator
 
carstenb's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Boat: Jeanneau Sun Fast 40.3
Posts: 4,942
Images: 1
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by neilpride View Post
Oh great the Fisher panda and the watermaker in the sail locker, good idea!!!
By the way is not just the b38 , the others brands fail in this point to, great open living space , not a single spot to place systems...
I guess I would ask if a 38 foot Oyster would have room for a generator or a watermaker?

My 40 Jeanneau has room in the storage area for a genrator and I can also fit a watermaker.

I won't be fitting a generator since I'll go with solar.

A boat can be rated for class "A", ocean voyaging, but obviously it won't be fitted for that stock off the line (very, very few boats are).

Do you need a watermaker to go ocean cruising? Quite a few extremely experienced circumnavigators (Beth and Evans come to mind) have neither a generator nor a watermaker and seem to be able to visit virtually any place on the planet without them.

Rain Catchment systems work well. Solar is quite capable of charging your batteries these days (cut out some of the energy hogs and you don't need much electricity).

Would I take a 38 footer with 8 persons across the pond - no. But that doesn't mean it can't be done.

I know several boat types 42 feet that have berths for 12 - would I do that - no

I think you might have to divorce the "8" from the "A"

my 2 cents - The opinion is worth what you paid for it.
__________________
I spent most of my money on Booze, Broads and Boats. The rest I wasted - Elmore Leonard
carstenb is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 10:58   #386
Registered User
 
El Pinguino's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Punta Arenas ahorra
Boat: 39' Westerly Sealord
Posts: 3,960
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by carstenb View Post
A boat can be rated for class "A", ocean voyaging
Under the UK rules for charter yachts that were in place 20 years ago my boat wouldn't get class 'A'...her 'angle of vanishing stability' is 119*...the requirement is 120*. I think that under the RCD stability may be still the primary requirement...it was with the UK rules. The other stuff was involved with roof over head, a hatch, fire prevention etc etc. One day I may find the book... finding it may be easier than finding exactly what the RCD requirements are....

Quote:
Originally Posted by carstenb View Post
I think you might have to divorce the "8" from the "A"

my 2 cents - The opinion is worth what you paid for it.
I had a bit of a scratch around here earlier
BAVARIA Yachtbau - CRUISER 41 just out of curiosity....

This is what I found

'Water tank (approx.) 210 l
Cabins 2/3
Berths 4/6
Height in salon(sic) 1.94 m
.........
Passengers 8
CE category A'

So 'Passengers' really is a nonsense figure designed simply to impress the cook.
One other thing I notice is that the RCD bases this number on a standard EU sized person of 75kg.

I think the "passenger number" in a yacht's classification can safely be ignored.
El Pinguino is online now  
Old 01-12-2014, 11:21   #387
Registered User
 
Polux's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Portugal/Med
Boat: Comet 41s
Posts: 5,765
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pinguino View Post
Is the meaning of the number actually defined in the regs? The actual '8' bit in 'A8' for instance. As a casual observer I would have assumed it refered to the number of bunks. My boat is pre all that rollocks and was built in the days when the first question you would be asked was 'how many does she sleep?'. I blame the French and their loose morals for that by the way.
..
That also. You are correct. On the version with 8 berth, the boat has 3 double cabins and the salon table goes down and allows for another double berth on the saloon. That's the interior version that is used for charter.
Polux is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 11:35   #388
cruiser

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,132
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Cate View Post
My friend, I have already grasped that in the EU the boat must have the appropriate rating in order to be allowed to clear for offshore travel. No argument from me, and no knowledge of your rules. What I don't yet understand is HOW that boat is judged to meet the requirements which are not spelled out in the reg, except in the most general terms. Who says the boat is capable of "extended voyages" and be "largely self sufficient". How can a boat with limited tankage be granted this rating, to pick on just one of the things most folks think are required for extended passages and self sufficiency?

You have now explained that some NA and NE folks are consulted, and this should result in scantlings and stabilities that are acceptable... that's good. And in fact, as you guys keep pointing out, many such boats have made successful voyages. That does not in itself endorse the "class A" definition. We all can point out horrible boats that have made successful passages.

Again, I'm not concerned with the "8" part, just the extended voyage concept. I've done a few of those, and in boats with no rating or recognition as "blue water" conveyances. Without professional help in deciding on the seaworthyness of my boats, I had to rely upon my own judgement, with fortunate results. My interest and concern here is that a "class A" rating from the government, if not in fact adequately stringent in its criteria, could lead less experienced folks to overestimate the adequacy of some particular vessel with unfortunate results.

Inexperienced folks do get carried away by hype and exaggerated claims. We had a chap here on CF who bought a small cruising cat in Fiji, and explained to us all that he was going to average 10 knots on his trip to Oz. He was quite sure that this was possible because he had read that cats were very fast, and rode over the waves instead of crashing through them. This sort of naivete could well, coupled with an unearned "A" rating lead to disaster. I think this sort of concern is what is driving a lot of the questions about the system.

Cheers,

Jim
I think the bottom line issue is that you guys simply don't accept the rating. In other words, your ideas/preferences of tankage (e.g. - the requirement of a genset and a water-maker) drive your lack of belief in the rating system itself. This is likely for many reasons from your "blue water dogma" to distrust of "gubmint" to whatever.

But, your ideas, your preferences, are actually the things that are very misguided in this particular conversation.

Are gensets and watermakers nice to have? Sure, they are luxurious. Do they provide an additional layer of security? Yes. Are they necessary for an "extended voyage" like crossing an ocean? Of course not. Otherwise there would have been no crossings prior to, say, 1995...you know with the very "blue water" boats you guys say are so awesome?

This is what I meant in my post to av. You guys are so ingrained in your "blue water" dogma, that you have seemingly lost the ability to think beyond your very limited list of features.

And that's just as dangerous a naiveté as that cat newb's. For example, having a geneset and water-maker aboard allows you to get away with a smaller water tank. And when you're 4 days into a 4-week passage and these happen to crap out, you are screwed. You're "blue water capable" planning has just put you and your crew in real peril.

Carsten nailed it above. You guys' "requirements" are bordering on ridiculous.

So, why don't we stay focused on the actual discussion...which is whether or not production boats are built to be cruised in blue water. The answer to that is, clearly, yes. How they are prepared after the sale is COMPLETELY up to the skipper. That's why even Oyster doesn't include all that gear you feel is essential for bluewater on their stock 475, which is also advertised as Cat A - capable of "extended voyages" and be "largely self sufficient".
__________________
smackdaddy is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 11:43   #389
Registered User
 
Polux's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Portugal/Med
Boat: Comet 41s
Posts: 5,765
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by neilpride View Post
But in the Oyster i suspect you have place for a genset and a watermaker, and in the 38 i think no.. quite a diference....
Who would use a Genset on a 38 ft boat? the noise?. Yes it has space for it if the version is the one with two cabins (the one that makes sense for long range cruising) but on a modern boat that sails a lot and needs energy the solution is a hydrogenerator and some solar pannels. Anyway I don't understand all those concerns: this boat has a lot more storage space than any old 38ft boat and some of those were used for extensive cruising even circumnavigations.
Polux is offline  
Old 01-12-2014, 11:54   #390
Registered User
 
Polux's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Portugal/Med
Boat: Comet 41s
Posts: 5,765
Re: The Yard Guys

Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3 View Post
Apparently we are talking about different things. I take the "A" rating at its word, that it is meant for extended passages. Your saying that because it has an "A8" rating it means you can go 25NM off shore while racing with 8 on board.

The two uses are worlds apart. And it may well be fine for your use, I can not for the life of me seeing it being able to do long, extended passages well at all. To me, the passages are important, it appears to you the racing part is. As they say, different strokes for different folks. Which is fine, but I still say that Beneteau is playing up the bluewater aspect, when this boat is anything but.

Too many sharp edges for me, but then, that is me.
No I don't care about racing specially crewed racing but when they make a boat they try to cover all angles and all possible uses of the boat. For charter and racing the 8 places and 8 berths are important. For most of the owners, that don't race and are not interested in having a crowd in their boat, it is not. That's why this boat is so flexible in all possible interior arrangements and number of cabins: that way you can cover the needs of many different types of sailors and the same basic boat can be maximized for different types of sailing.

I believe that this flexible concept is one of the reasons that made this boat so popular, even if it is more expensive than what Beneteaus used to be.
__________________

Polux is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hey, Diesel Guys ! ssullivan General Sailing Forum 20 26-08-2010 06:38
Do you guys really have insurance??? starfish62 Liveaboard's Forum 48 05-07-2007 08:17
OK Florida guys and gals, Who and where is this yard? MNDWGZ Multihull Sailboats 12 20-12-2006 09:25



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 14:49.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.