Hunter sinks at Catalina due to bow cleat failure

[sailorboy1]

Crap happens. But I don't believe Tara's boat going onto the shore had anything to do with the boat.

I already posted that my boat during Hurricane Sandy pulled a 5,000 lb mooring block off the bottom and took it for a ride with no damage at all. But I bet this doesn't count

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Crap happens. But I don't believe Tara's boat going onto the shore had anything to do with the boat.

I already posted that my boat during Hurricane Sandy pulled a 5,000 lb mooring block off the bottom and took it for a ride with no damage at all. But I bet this doesn't count

If it was cement/concrete it weighed a lot less in the water, about half, and 2500-2600 submerged pounds is barely suitable for a 27-30 footer, which is likely why it got taken for a ride.......

Most dead-weight moorings are poorly designed (wrong shape) and made of cement/concrete which looses about half its weight in the water... Some towns actually require/recommend a minimum submerged weight and other jurisdictions have no clue how to size moorings so it becomes a debacle in a storm with boats dragging everywhere...

[Greatketch33]

I am not sure the reasons, but it seemed to me that the cement boats used to get most of the "Pick On" like attention; recently it appears to be Hunters.

A sailing buddy asked me this past summer, "Why do Hunters have a bad rep?"

I am ignorant of these boats other than by name only, but am keen to the amount of attention these boats seem to receive.

Regardless of boat type, it would be helpful to someday get a satisfactory report on the incident. This accident may have been avoided but maybe not as it sometimes difficult to predict such events to singularity conclusion.

[goat]

Originally Posted by Maine Sail

If it was cement/concrete it weighed a lot less in the water, about half, and 2500-2600 submerged pounds is barely suitable for a 27-30 footer, which is likely why it got taken for a ride.......

Most dead-weight moorings are poorly designed (wrong shape) and made of cement/concrete which looses about half its weight in the water... Some towns actually require/recommend a minimum submerged weight and other jurisdictions have no clue how to size moorings so it becomes a debacle in a storm with boats dragging everywhere...

........aaaaaaand it turns into an anchor thread


goat

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by goat

........aaaaaaand it turns into an anchor thread


goat

And if you shoot a steel anchor, with your on-board gun, the bullet may ricochet and sink a Hunter. A cement mooring will absorb the force of the bullet and splinter into tiny bits, not able to sink the Hunter, thus making shooting a concrete mooring far safer than shooting a steel mooring for surrounding boats......

[wgewaldii]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

Hi, guys,

It seems that we - collectively - have no idea why the unfortunate Hunter sank at Avalon.

...does anyone have any ideas about how to find out what actually caused the poor thing to sink? I, for one, would be interested to know...

Ann

Indeed the thread is well insulated from any facts that may be pertinent to the incident described in the first post. The loss of the boat would have required the filing of an incident report. Could be found here. https://cgmix.uscg.mil/iir

[autumnbreeze27]

Here's some pics of Taras mentioned earlier. There was a good pic of the bow showing a bunch of lines hanging off, including bright yellow thick mooring lines that had parted, but like the Hunter cleat comment, seem to be missing now.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Impressive... you must have wasted a couple of hours digging up my quotes from past threads, and then cutting them up and taking them out of context so they'd fit your agenda. Who's the one that's obsessed? Do you save all my posts and quotes??

Very, very strange...... indeed.


I think this might be a new record on CF for taking quotes out of context to make a point, if in fact.... you believe you did.

Nothing is out of context Keno. That's precisely why I told you and other readers to click the little blue arrow by your name in each quote to see that post in full.

When you say it. You own it.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by carstenb

Re cleats being ripped out, a couple of years ago a Halberg Rassy was tied to a dock on the island of Vejrø in a strom. Apparently the owner (on board) had not left enough slack in the line and with the winds approaching 50 knots, the upward motion of the swells in the harbour ripped his bow cleat out.

Halberg Rassys are generally considered "heavy cruisers" - but it could hold up to heavy swells.

Oh boy - now you've done it. That kind of thing only happens on Hunters and Beneteaus.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by carstenb

I also find it difficult to believe that a ripped out cleat would cause a baoa to sink. Unless the cleat actually held and the whole deck ripped out. Simply no way for enough water to enter through a hole made by a cleat. Assuming also the boat had its bilge pump turned on, then it would evacuate the water as it came in. So I simply don't believe the cleat caused the boat to sink. Some other catastrophic occurrance did.

Re cleats being ripped out, a couple of years ago a Halberg Rassy was tied to a dock on the island of Vejrø in a strom. Apparently the owner (on board) had not left enough slack in the line and with the winds approaching 50 knots, the upward motion of the swells in the harbour ripped his bow cleat out.

Halberg Rassys are generally considered "heavy cruisers" - but it could hold up to heavy swells.

Wow, not a very good example of a fair comparison. If a boat is tied to the dock there are huge snatch loads as the lines are much shorter than anchored or on a mooring. In 50 knots and large swells there are 3 things that could break 1) the dock 2) the line 3) the deck cleat. 1 is unlikely as docks are pretty strong. 2 Well if he had 3/4" plus dock lines these are unlikely to break 3 Well a cleat is probably the weak link in the chain.
If he had allowed a lot of slack to absorb some of the shock loads this may not have happened and if he had been on a mooring it was also unlikely to happen. Yes a broken cleat but not a similar situation. Did the whole assembly rip out as this would have taken a hell of a chunk out of his boat, it would have made more sense to think the cleat itself would have broken.

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by autumnbreeze27

Here's some pics of Taras mentioned earlier. There was a good pic of the bow showing a bunch of lines hanging off, including bright yellow thick mooring lines that had parted, but like the Hunter cleat comment, seem to be missing now.

If, indeed, the cleat ripped out on the Hunter, why didn't she wind up on the beach, as well?

Or, how did she just 'coincidentally' happen to sink in place, facing the same direction as all the rest of the boats still attached to their moorings?





Having said that, SUZIE Q appears to be a Hunter 460... To my eye, the placement and potential lack of structural integrity of those bow cleats appears to be pretty sketchy...

They couldn't be mounted directly on the foredeck, of course, because pretty much the entire foredeck on that thing is nothing more than a lifting lid for the anchor locker...

[sailorboy1]

Isn't it impressive the degree and effect people will put forth to trash Hunter?

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Isn't it impressive the degree and effect people will put forth to trash Hunter?

You know that this stuff never leaves the Web and it will over time start to hurt the brand. So why in the world does one of your spokesman keep starting threads that naturally lead to trashing his brand. Seems silly to me!

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

You know that this stuff never leaves the Web and it will over time start to hurt the brand. So why in the world does one of your spokesman keep starting threads that naturally lead to trashing his brand. Seems silly to me!

Fortunately, this only happens on this forum and I suspect most people never heard or read this obscure forum or understand how silly it is.

Some people sail; others post nonsense here.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

You know that this stuff never leaves the Web and it will over time start to hurt the brand. So why in the world does one of your spokesman keep starting threads that naturally lead to trashing his brand. Seems silly to me!

The bigger question is why the haters are so drawn to these threads with no skin in the game other that to be a hater.

These don't necessarily mean the brand gets trashed in the mind of potential buyers. For the most part the only reason I post on them is to provide a counter to the haters.

I was among the Hunter trashers and haters for years (I learned it here). Came time I wanted something better in a boat to cruise and live on. Couldn't afford a half million dollar used fancy boat, and didn't really want an old boat that I knew always had issues to deal with (seemed every one of those older boats had some common major known construction problem or a crappy layup). So I started looking at newer models and became attracted to a Hunter. So I got off forums and started doing some real research into the Hunter construction etc. I even started a thread here that ran for years before the haters finally wound it up to the point it got closed.

What I found were the facts didn't support the internet hate and that the modern Hunters were assembled very well. Yes they have some features unique to Hunter, but the guts of the boats are assembled in all the same manner that the other "better" boats are. But it doesn't matter because no matter how many Hunter owners report no problems there are always internet haters that will find some boat and use it as a reason why all Hunters are crap.

Heck just on this thread there was just a post to the effect that even with all the 1,000s of post year 2000 Hunters out there, to "their eye the cleat mounting is no good". Gee really do you have anything to support this?

My Hunter is 14 years old and in the 4 years I have had it there has been NO problems or issues with any part of the boat that Hunter made! And if the original owner had 1 it got fixed so completely that I have never seen any sign of a repair. This involves all the assembly items such as wiring and plumbing etc. on the boat. The boat suffers no flexing etc and there has never been anything to indicate the boat wasn't solid.

Yet on an internet forum my boat and all the other happy Hunter owner's boats are treated as unusual. The haters refer to happy owners basically as liars and idiots because our personal first hand experience doesn't support their ACE status.

An before you go and get yourself all worked up with some lame boat example of why I'm wrong; my position is always that not all Hunter models are a good choice for ones intended use. I would never suggest someone get a 30' Hunter and plan to cross an ocean (because I wouldn't suggest that for any 30' boat even though it is fact they can and do do it). But it is without question for anyone who is interested in anything other than being a Hunter recreational hater that there are lots of great Hunter boats out there than will do 99% (at least) of anything some boat costing 5 times as much will.

Hunter (and all other production boat) bashing is a sport. When I got into boating I read how close boaters were to each other, but you would never believe this if you read a boat forum.