The Yard Guys

[neilpride]

So i see, trysails and storm jibs and even sea anchors , drogues are designed for heavy slow boats, cool!!!

[colemj]

It does seem like the BWC hopes to get to use them…

Mark

[avb3]

Originally Posted by neilpride

So i see, trysails and storm jibs and even sea anchors , drogues are designed for heavy slow boats, cool!!!

Hey, you may be on to something. Why would the 'go fast or go home" crowd need that stuff. Substitute a ton of electronics, and, "We're good to go". Storm jib for a long passage" Phffffft. We outrun weather.

Mind you some of those new fangled boats, with their hull and keel designs, just may have a bit of problem getting into a heave to position.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by avb3

Hey, you may be on to something. Why would the 'go fast or go home" crowd need that stuff. Substitute a ton of electronics, and, "We're good to go". Storm jib for a long passage" Phffffft. We outrun weather.

Mind you some of those new fangled boats, with their hull and keel designs, just may have a bit of problem getting into a heave to position.

Lol! they dont hove to because they dont need to, flying on top of the seas is more fun ,, trysails you say? why? my inmast furling have infinite reefing options and is build it for the worst conditions ,, outrun the storms? yes we can do it, in fact we dont need all the stuff related to heavy weather, we outrun the bad weather... so funy!

[neilpride]

Back on track, someone say why to build those grid liners thick when in fact can be light and strong with the new tech, well another Jeaneau bite the dust...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWGUdUWXK78

&

[Exile]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Back on track, someone say why to build those grid liners thick when in fact can be light and strong with the new tech, well another Jeaneau bite the dust...

&

Now those yard guys don't look happy at all! And when the yard guys aren't happy, you just know the owner will be getting a big yard bill.

Any idea what happened here?

[neilpride]

Clasic grounding at hull speed , those sharpy edges at the aft keel root are killers, since i suspect is the typical iron keel used by jeaneau and beneteau , no lead in this case, just figúrate...the keel bolts are trough the flat Shell of the hull and the grid liner cant copy with the loads , yes its a expensive repair, mast down, keel down, interior stripped, etc...

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Back on track, someone say why to build those grid liners thick when in fact can be light and strong with the new tech, well another Jeaneau bite the dust...

&

So, being back on track, I'm still not sure how this particular kind of issue is supposed to illustrate anything regarding the "proper" construction for a boat suited to bluewater cruising.

Judging by the leading edge of the keel itself and the location of the hull and grid damage, this looks very much like a hard rock strike. Shouldn't we expect damage from such an incident? Damage that has nothing to do with whether the boat is built well enough for bluewater cruising?

Also, in that same line, wouldn't you expect damage and repair on a similarly configured "bluewater" brand boat (e.g. - fin keel, etc.)? I think you'd at least do some very close inspection, no?

If so, then the discussion comes down to the extent of the damage and if there is an appreciable difference between the two.

Regardless, if you smack a rock that hard in a Moody or an Oyster, even if you don't "see" damage - I guarantee that you have pushed the safe "cycles" of that boat WAY down the road. So when the newb buys it in 30 years thinking he's got it all covered, he's going to have a serious, hidden problem on his hands.

Finally, as I've been trying to point out repeatedly in this thread, this is a charter boat apparently. Charter boats are almost exclusively production boats. They are also sailed by what is likely the least experienced crowd out there. This provides a very simple explanation of why yard guys see so many of these boats being damaged. And that has absolutely nothing to do with the design or suitability of that boat for cruising in bluewater - without slamming into rocks.

This is the same reason I think the Blue Pearl example is a serious red-herring in this debate.

Show me damage from typical off-shore cruising and I'll be impressed. That's why I'm very interested in that bond failure in the other Bene Neil showed. That's seriously concerning.

[Cheechako]

Yep... as I pointed out very early in this thread, grounding my Passport 47 at 5.5 knots (twice!) to a dead stop resulted in only bottom paint damage. Charterer's grounding a 42 Catalina I managed at 5 knots resulted in similar damage to the Jeanneau above.
To me, Bluewater Cruising includes the ability to survive, those or similar issues.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

Yep... as I pointed out very early in this thread, grounding my Passport 47 at 5.5 knots (twice!) to a dead stop resulted in only bottom paint damage. Charterer's grounding a 42 Catalina I managed at 5 knots resulted in similar damage to the Jeanneau above.
To me, Bluewater Cruising includes the ability to survive, those or similar issues.

This boat "survived it" too apparently. As I pointed out above, we're really talking about the extent of the damage.

But two questions here:

1. In terms of the type of force that will be applied in a grounding, how is your Passport 47 different than these boats...or even this Oyster 72...




Passport 47:



2. Are you absolutely certain there was literally NO damage or "fatigue" to the glass in the hull, the keel/keel-structure, the stiffeners, the tabbing, etc.? If so, how?

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Back on track, someone say why to build those grid liners thick when in fact can be light and strong with the new tech, well another Jeaneau bite the dust...

&

I don't understand why you post things like this. Sometimes your contribution is interesting but this?
You should have saw that the company (the yard guys) are from a company that runs a charter service, that the boat is a charter boat owned by them, that they talked about a damaged keel and hull and that means that it happened with a grounding (or several), you don't know the severity of the grounding, in fact you know nothing regarding the conditions that lead to that damage.

What you can say is that the boat looks good after having been repaired and that's their point anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzY4E8-MzYQ

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

Yep... as I pointed out very early in this thread, grounding my Passport 47 at 5.5 knots (twice!) to a dead stop resulted in only bottom paint damage. Charterer's grounding a 42 Catalina I managed at 5 knots resulted in similar damage to the Jeanneau above.
To me, Bluewater Cruising includes the ability to survive, those or similar issues.

Big deal: Groundings at 8k with a narrow fin keel (a lifting one):

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

Not all groundings are the same, it depends if you hit a rock or a soft bottom. I can warranty you that if you had hit a rock at 5.5K with a Passport 47, or any other boat, you would do more than bottom paint damage.

[Cheechako]

Yep, absolutely certain. By inspection. It's not brain surgery, The structure just needs to be strong enough built.
If it's too thin or not tough in other ways, it flexes, stretching and bending things beyond their strength. If it flexes too much attachments fail. In the case of thin hulls and short fin keels, they always crack for and/or aft of the keel.... because they flex. When that happens, engine beds, cabinetry etc come loose.
Long fin keels or full-ish keels distribute the same grounding load over a much greater area... probably 2-3 times the area. When that occurs, the stress levels are lower and the composite doesn't fail. Basic engineering. Then if you add much thicker scantlings to the equations... well it's even stronger... but even if you built the long fin/full hull light like the production fin keeler... it might very well survive for the greater distribution of load.


"Not all groundings are the same, it depends if you hit a rock or a soft bottom. I can warranty you that if you had hit a rock at 5.5K with a Passport 47, or any other boat, you would do more than bottom paint damage. "
And nope, both times it was a hard "bang... pick yourself up off the deck" type of grounding. I have to admit, that the glass had a gouge in it though! I guess that isn't just bottom paint!
Think of it this way, you can hit an anvil with a hammer and it wont break right? What if that hammer was balsa? Are you saying a balsa hammer and a steel one are the same?

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

Yep, absolutely certain. By inspection. It's not brain surgery, The structure just needs to be strong enough built.
If it's too thin or not tough in other ways, it flexes, stretching and bending things beyond their strength. If it flexes too much attachments fail. In the case of thin hulls and short fin keels, they always crack for and/or aft of the keel.... because they flex. When that happens, engine beds, cabinetry etc come loose.
Long fin keels or full-ish keels distribute the same grounding load over a much greater area... probably 2-3 times the area. When that occurs, the stress levels are lower and the composite doesn't fail. Basic engineering. Then if you add much thicker scantlings to the equations... well it's even stronger... but even if you built the long fin/full hull light like the production fin keeler... it might very well survive for the greater distribution of load.

Generally I agree. But no boat out there, not even yours, is "designed and engineered to hit rocks at hull speed". That's why examples like this are kind of ridiculous if they are intended to show some kind of flaw in the design/engineering of production boats.

If, on the other hand, it's just intended to show the kind of damage to look for after you've hit a rock in a Bavaria - that's a different story. In that case, it's great.

PS - What kind of "inspection"? Just visual?

[smj]

Wouldn't the heavier stronger boat have more inertia when hitting the rock than the lighter boat? May cause similar damage.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk