Rudder Failures

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

....

So, i dont buy the bad designed steering system with enough maintenance can be ok for a TW... and here i recall what i say in a previous topic, the 90% of new production boats owners dont know a crap about the boat they are buying...in terms of how is build it and fitted....My 2 cents,..

Yes I agree with that. I disagree that today in what regards mass production rudders they are badly designed. They are designed using not only the information provided by hundreds or thousands of boats produced with similar systems, they use modern computerized analyse instruments to calculate all the forces involved and its efficiency in what regards its function, they are designed by highly qualified Na and engineers with a huge experience using those tools.

A big difference regarding the times where the design was a bit like trying this or that to see how it works (and sometimes it didn't) and just by caution making everything over sized heavy and sluggish instead of doing it strong where it has to be strong and lighter where it could be light.

[DeepFrz]

If you think that NAs and great engineering software are so infallible just take a look at what has happened in the first 36 hrs. of the Route du Rhum. Broken rudders, broken Ama, dismasting...not a pretty picture. And these boats are supposed to be the best of the best.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

If you think that NAs and great engineering software are so infallible just take a look at what has happened in the first 36 hrs. of the Route du Rhum. Broken rudders, broken Ama, dismasting...not a pretty picture. And these boats are supposed to be the best of the best.

You seem to confuse things. who would compare the reliability of a F1 car with the one of a "cruising" car, or the reliability of a top racing boat with the one of a cruising boat?

Pure top racing boats, like pure top racing cars are built to win. Off course to win they have to finish but if they are too heavy they will not win. That's a delicate balance between speed and lightness and not always they prove to be strong enough....specially when they find very nasty conditions. on those conditions there is another balance that it is to know how fast they can go without breaking the boat. There is a huge difference in efforts in going against a terrible sea at 25K or going at 10K. Their are racing and pushing the boats to the limit and sometimes over the limit.

Besides you mix other things: The rudder problem had to do with an impact at high speed with a solid object (container?), one of the big multihulls broke because collided with a cargo ship. A trimaran 50 class broke an ama. Those boats are terribly fragile and have always a big breakage rate. On bad weather they take a lot more stress than a monohull.
Losing a mast on bad seas on a race boat is not that unusual much more worrying is the lost of two keels on 40 class racers. That should be deeply investigated.
Look here for more details:
Interesting Sailboats: RR: NASTY NIGHT WITH BIG SEAS ....AND AN OLD MAN LEADS!!!!

but then again what all that to do with cruising boats? This one is not like an American sailboat race where most of the boats are cruiser racers, also used to cruise. These are all pure racing boats and those guys are not amateurs but professionals that accept the risk that top racing involves in many sports.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by Polux

Yes I agree with that. I disagree that today in what regards mass production rudders they are badly designed. They are designed using not only the information provided by hundreds or thousands of boats produced with similar systems, they use modern computerized analyse instruments to calculate all the forces involved and its efficiency in what regards its function, they are designed by highly qualified Na and engineers with a huge experience using those tools.

A big difference regarding the times where the design was a bit like trying this or that to see how it works (and sometimes it didn't) and just by caution making everything over sized heavy and sluggish instead of doing it strong where it has to be strong and lighter where it could be light.

Remember it's an age old tradition: designers specify one thing, and builders proceed to interpret and construct as their budget allows. Designers specify rudder size and stock diameter, but maybe the builder substitutes a cheaper stainless alloy, or the welds holding the grid to the stock arent done right because they hired cheaper labor. The list goes on and on. It's just that mass production boats are mass production and often to a price point. I guarantee that no designer specified brass seacocks instead of naval bronze, but there it is on many boats due to builders cutting corners


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

If you think that NAs and great engineering software are so infallible just take a look at what has happened in the first 36 hrs. of the Route du Rhum. Broken rudders, broken Ama, dismasting...not a pretty picture. And these boats are supposed to be the best of the best.

Paulo answered this pretty well already - but who the heck is saying that "NAs and great engineering software are...infallible"?

Some of you guys jump to the strangest, most extreme conclusions in these discussions. What point are you really trying to make here? That modern technology and techniques are useless?

[DeepFrz]

What point are you really trying to make here? That modern technology and techniques are useless?

Yes, some do jump to extreme conclusions, don't we Smack...

Of course I'm not implying that. I was referring back to a previous post where it was inferred that boats are designed to such high standards because of the experience of NAs and the excellence of engineering software. And then in the first 36 hrs. of a race there are a significant number of failures, one requiring rescue and others requiring towing. I have great respect for many NAs and I also have respect for engineering software. But they aren't infallible and they often push designs to such an extreme that failure is almost inevitable. The same thing for racing and/or cruising designs.

There are people on this forum who make there living repairing boats. They know good boats and they know bad boats. Some have spoken out and said what they think of some of the modern production boats. It ain't pretty. I don't know what interest you have in these boats but I have no dog in this race. But I can read, listen and make decisions based on what people who know and whom I respect say. I have been sailing and interested in sail boats for a lot of years and I have seen a lot of ***** masquerading as yachts...some from good NAs but bad builders, some the other way around.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by malbert73

Remember it's an age old tradition: designers specify one thing, and builders proceed to interpret and construct as their budget allows. Designers specify rudder size and stock diameter, but maybe the builder substitutes a cheaper stainless alloy, or the welds holding the grid to the stock arent done right because they hired cheaper labor. The list goes on and on. It's just that mass production boats are mass production and often to a price point. I guarantee that no designer specified brass seacocks instead of naval bronze, but there it is on many boats due to builders cutting corners


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

You hit the nail! but they still kicking the idea that any production rudder is well made it for the intended purpose, same for everything fitted in a production boat..

designers?? i bet a cold 6pack that this dudes sometimes they are horrified to see what they are doing with the design... maybe the real solution is to link the designer to the final construction, is not going to happen , but who know?? Im sure Beneteau think a lot about future cruisers towing a drogue with that Mickey mouse washers under the cleat, lol....or what about a breach in the hull with that monsters hull liners hiding the real beef?? S.O.S....... they are real bluewater features....

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

Yes, some do jump to extreme conclusions, don't we Smack...

Of course I'm not implying that. I was referring back to a previous post where it was inferred that boats are designed to such high standards because of the experience of NAs and the excellence of engineering software. And then in the first 36 hrs. of a race there are a significant number of failures, one requiring rescue and others requiring towing. I have great respect for many NAs and I also have respect for engineering software. But they aren't infallible and they often push designs to such an extreme that failure is almost inevitable. The same thing for racing and/or cruising designs.

There are people on this forum who make there living repairing boats. They know good boats and they know bad boats. Some have spoken out and said what they think of some of the modern production boats. It ain't pretty. I don't know what interest you have in these boats but I have no dog in this race. But I can read, listen and make decisions based on what people who know and whom I respect say. I have been sailing and interested in sail boats for a lot of years and I have seen a lot of ***** masquerading as yachts...some from good NAs but bad builders, some the other way around.

You didn't answer my question...who said they were infallible?

And if you don't actually believe that modern yacht design draws on historical reference (as Paulo is saying) and takes advantage of improved technologies and methods that were not available 30 years ago, therefore resulting in yachts that are "designed to...high standards because of the experience of NAs and the excellence of engineering software" (among other things) - then I'm not really sure what you believe is going on with modern yacht design. But I'm pretty sure I don't buy it.

As for the racing - Paulo answered that very well. At that level it's all about pushing everything to the very edge. Have you watched the VOR...or even the AC? That design/construction/use-case has very little to do directly with cruising boats - which is the subject of this thread. Certainly the advances in that arena filter down into modern yacht design, but to say that we should doubt the integrity of such advances because race boats break? Mmmmm no.

As for how various pros feel about production boats - there are LOTS of pros and LOTS of different opinions out there. A handful of them are on this (or any other) forum. Some make good cases for their views, others don't. You just have to weed through them and decide who to believe based on the evidence they put forth.

But I do know this FOR SURE - the wholesale trashing of modern production boats is seriously goofy.

[neilpride]

Huuu Mack, you cant believe how goofy is outside from net fórums.... btw, there is production boats and there is production boats!!!

Pólux i think own a Comet, i call it a production boat but the detail and construction is by far a long way better than the low spectrum list.
Is not strange to see Italians puting attention to detail and construction in almost anything made it there....

[robert sailor]

SmackDaddy owns a Hunter and deep within his mind he wants to reinforce his decision that it was a wise one. We all do this, its quite a normal human response. In my opinion some of the older Hunters were decent boats and just might have been built better than many of the new production boats and depending on how it was looked after it may be an excellent choice for him. Some Hunters were not so great and have had more than their share of problems.
The average sailor doesn't really know that much about the construction of his/her boat and their opinions are less valid than someone who repairs these boats as a full time job.
A few of our members do just that and like the rest of us that have lots of experience in our fields of expertise they have strong opinions about build quality. They have those opinions based on years and years of inspecting and tearing apart and repairing boats. They don't need a degree in Engineering as they have something much better which is the hands on experience of what works and what breaks on what boats.
There are new technologies in construction and manufacturing that have allowed builders to produce some very strong light boats BUT they are not being employed building entry level production boats. These boats are still built with old fashion methods but using less material and many taking some pretty serious corner cutting to get their prices down to meet the market. Polux talks about a company Jefa that is designing and building new spade rudders using newer technology than builders have used in the past, hopefully there are some improvements in future production boats.

[transmitterdan]

If you own a boat, no matter what brand, you don't have to get "comfort" from the experiences of other owners. You can look for yourself at how the rudder is built, controlled and attached to the hull. You can see bulkheads and decide if you have faith in their integrity. You can look at how the AP tiller is attached to transmit forces to the hull. There have been good examples of these areas already posted for some boats. Why don't some of us take a cue from the anchor photo thread and post pictures of various elements of rudders and APs? It would give something real to discuss rather than unverifiable statistics and brand name chest beating. Digging through the stern of your boat may give you confidence or if you find something it gives you a chance to correct before it's a problem. Everybody may learn more.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

There are people on this forum who make there living repairing boats. They know good boats and they know bad boats. Some have spoken out and said what they think of some of the modern production boats. It ain't pretty.

What no answer to this?
I'm going to tell you as a maintainer, a maintainer sees things and becomes intimately acquainted with things that not even the designer could foresee,
a good designer and or builder if they have any sense comes out to the manufacturing floor asking opinions of the trusted employees, and polls failure rates of the vehicles in the fleet. It's how a good design evolves and gets better
High production rate vehicles do something very similar, but it's usually how can we build faster, make production cheaper, not better and that is the difference folks, the high volume manufacturers are trying to cut cost, become more profitable and stay in business.
The manufacturers that sell boats based on reputation of quality are first and foremost concerned with how can we make it better, not cheaper. Because you are only as good as your last press release, and they know that.

I get a couple of well respected repairmen tell me my boats good, but this system or the other is crap, must have been an afterthought, I listen, because they are most likely correct, no boat is perfect.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

SmackDaddy owns a Hunter and deep within his mind he wants to reinforce his decision that it was a wise one. We all do this, its quite a normal human response.

What do I owe you for the session? I assume you're a psychoanalyst?

Like most, I did a great deal (several years) of research and looking before I settled on my Hunter. And, like most that do some of that research on forums, I very much started in the "bluewater boat" camp because that was the consensus among most posters. But, over time, I came to a very different conclusion - based on very clear evidence. If you're interested you can see a summary of it here.

As you'll see, my conclusion was that the "bluewater debate" was, overall, very misguided. And I'm very comfortable with that conclusion - even "deep within my mind" - and even if many disagree with it.

The bottom line is, I don't really care if people like my decision or not. This is clear because, being fully informed, I happily and unapologetically purchased one of the most maligned brands of boat on the forums. I don't need to justify it to anyone. Obviously.

Yet, countless forum posters continually need to malign production boats (especially Hunters) as mysteriously inadequate for the type of sailing 99% of cruisers out there actually do. Would you care to assess that condition doc?

Originally Posted by robert sailor

The average sailor doesn't really know that much about the construction of his/her boat and their opinions are less valid than someone who repairs these boats as a full time job.

True. Others know more.

Originally Posted by robert sailor

A few of our members do just that and like the rest of us that have lots of experience in our fields of expertise they have strong opinions about build quality. They have those opinions based on years and years of inspecting and tearing apart and repairing boats. They don't need a degree in Engineering as they have something much better which is the hands on experience of what works and what breaks on what boats.

I've heard this argument a lot. And I don't really buy it. I'm not going to let a carpenter design my house/building. Sure, that carpenter might have worked on many parts of many houses/buildings, and have very strong opinions about design, some of which are probably valuable - but he's no architect and he's no engineer, despite all his experience. That's just fact. So his opinions aren't as valuable to me in the areas of design and engineering - precisely because they are not as informed.

Originally Posted by robert sailor

There are new technologies in construction and manufacturing that have allowed builders to produce some very strong light boats BUT they are not being employed building entry level production boats.

This is not correct (depending on how you're defining "entry level"). Even the B&R rig on my Hunter 40 is derived from race boat technology which was built around the idea of "strong and light"...for better or for worse (i.e. - my friend Bob Perry doesn't think much of the rig - and his opinion I DEFINITELY respect).

So try again.

Originally Posted by robert sailor

These boats are still built with old fashion methods but using less material and many taking some pretty serious corner cutting to get their prices down to meet the market.

Can you please walk us through clear examples of this? With actual evidence?

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Huuu Mack, you cant believe how goofy is outside from net fórums.... btw, there is production boats and there is production boats!!!

Pólux i think own a Comet, i call it a production boat but the detail and construction is by far a long way better than the low spectrum list.
Is not strange to see Italians puting attention to detail and construction in almost anything made it there....

We are talking about mass production boats and Comet is not one of those. It is a small production boat. As a result of that its price is considerably superior to a mass production boat. My opinion regarding this type of boats (Halberg-Rassy, Solaris, Xyacts etc) versus mass production boats is that even if they are better finish and generally have a slightly better built, that difference in no way corresponds to the difference in price.

Production boats are on what regards the structural basis, that includes rudder, hull, keel, mast and rig are generally well designed and well built. The big difference in price comes not so much from a lower quality (except finish) but from huge savings that are allowed by big mass production that allow the use of robotics and scale economies.

You see many of them doing circumnavigations without special preparation. I remember a case that had impressed me some years ago: a Bavaria 44 that having made its normal charter live period and being sold after that had circumnavigated (without special preparation) and without problems by the Northwest passage. By what some had said here about the fragility of those boats this seems a pretty much impossible feat.

Corfou-Corfou via le Nord-Ouest en Bavaria 44 !

I know of many cases that would be impossible if what some had said here was true, like a Portuguese Bavaria 36 that circumnavigated not one but two twice.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

If you own a boat, no matter what brand, you don't have to get "comfort" from the experiences of other owners. You can look for yourself at how the rudder is built, controlled and attached to the hull. You can see bulkheads and decide if you have faith in their integrity. You can look at how the AP tiller is attached to transmit forces to the hull. There have been good examples of these areas already posted for some boats. Why don't some of us take a cue from the anchor photo thread and post pictures of various elements of rudders and APs? It would give something real to discuss rather than unverifiable statistics and brand name chest beating. Digging through the stern of your boat may give you confidence or if you find something it gives you a chance to correct before it's a problem. Everybody may learn more.

Owning an old boat you seem to have a big confidence in your understanding of new materials and new building techniques

Go and look to a very expensive high performance sailboat like this.

Yachting Monthly tests the Premier 45 - YouTube

Everything looks very light and very fragile, from ropes to all gear. Yes the boat is very light but also very strong. Off course this is an extreme case but any guy used to look at 30 or 40 years old boats will have an hard time to understand what is proper built or not on a modern boat. Even someone used to modern boats and modern technology and products will have sometimes to ask to a technician why this and that is made like that and how it manages to do the work and perform the job it was designed to do. Precision and information is incomparably better on the design of new boats.

The same happens with cars. Go and have a look at the weight of a 40 year old car and compare it with the weight of a modern car with the same interior space and the difference will be HUGE. Of course modern cars not only perform better as they are far more reliable.

Old cars have been ditched out and that does not happen but suppose that still existed a mechanic or a owner that only worked or know about old cars with its apparent solidity and big weight. Put him in front of a modern car and the guy will be sure that the new car is incredibly fragile, that would break in no time. He would judge the new car for what he knows about old cars, old technology, less informed design and outdated materials. He would not be able to make a fair encasement of the new car, its performance and reliability.

Why do you think it is different with boats?