Hunter sinks at Catalina due to bow cleat failure

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by colemj

Is this the model of boat that sunk? Someone said it was a newer model Hunter, but the Simpson-Lawrence Horizon 1500 windlass in your picture hasn't been made since ~1998.

If it is the same model, then you have a point.

If it isn't the same model, then I don't see the connection, and don't agree that you can paint with such broad strokes unless you can show that the construction and build are very similar.

Mark

A Hunter owner from Long Beach over on SailboatOwners has identified SUZIE Q as being a 460, so I'm relying on that info... Looks to be the right model to me, though there appear to have been some changes in the styling of the window treatments on the newer models... Looks like the model was introduced back around '99 or 2000, the one showing the SL windlass is listed as a 2000 year model... It appears that the 460 morphed into their 466 in 2002, so it's possible other changes were made... Both the pics I posted were from listings for a couple of 460s for sale...

[rgscpat]

An interesting bit from Catalina's Avalon Harbor instructions:
"• For security purposes and to prevent the bow hawser from accidentally falling off the cleat, use a small diameter line to tie a cleat hitch over the hawser."
Boating Tip #38: Mooring « Aquatic Consulting Services

How would tying a security line over the cleated hawser affect chafe?


And how well would a big hawser loop with a security line tied on top, fit on some modern, not-too-generous cleats?

[Stu Jackson]

Back on page 17 or so, someone mentioned travelers on Dufours. When we bought our then-12 year old Catalina 34 in 1998, we were fortunate enough to have the PO save and give to us 12 years of Mainsheet magazine, the quarterly publication that includes "tech tips" on all sizes of Catalinas, written by owners.

I read them all.

In one was a discussion about travelers being ripped out of Catalina 30s, mentioning that other models had this issue, which was that the travelers were screwed into an embedded plate, but only one screw each side. In an uncontrolled gybe, they could give way and, obviously, in some cases they did, so the owner wrote it up. With pictures.

There was also a proposed solution, which was to buy two long 9 inch bolts, and drill through the traveler fiberglass support and bolt it down, in addition to the existing screws. Within a month or two of buying our boat, we did it.

In addition to reading the magazine, I became involved with our C34 Association and our website, where we've spent literally decades documenting the issues that appeared in the magazine, posting most all of the articles online, and engaging in a daily forum/message board, much like this, in many cases repeating (more than a few times) the basics each skipper should be aware of.

Fast forward to 2006, last race of a hotly contested National Regatta, where the last upwind leg became the win-or-lose leg for the entire four day event. We were neck and neck with our competitor. We both had 1986 boats, his was #108, we are #224. All of a sudden his mainsail dropped down and he lost a lot of boat speed. His traveler track had pulled out!

Point being that the information about that "fix-it" was available for almost 20 years, in print before the internet, but certainly available to the skipper of #108, who I'd personally mentioned this to during a cruise the prior year!!!

The importance of the internet in helping skippers perform basic "enhancements" that admittedly should have been done by the factory, and in many cases have been, but can't be done for already purchased boats, can't be minimized.

Owners associations have been trying to get the word out for years. Some associations are more cohesive than others.

But we can't make 'em read it, and even if they do, we can't make em actually DO the work, can we?

Maine Sail and I (and many others) have been promoting many basic boat issues for years, such as wiring harness connectors, ammeters in cockpit panels, basic electrical system design, and a raft of other issues that we've collected on our particular website as "Critical Upgrades - Do These or Else!" and remain amazed at how relatively many skippers still haven't gotten the word, as easy as we've tried to make it for them. Most all of the are safety issues.

We'll keep trying.

One point about this Hunter-thing: like all production boat manufacturers, not all models are built the same. This should really be taken into account. The scantlings on our Catalina 22 and our 25 are quite different than those on our 34, just as I would suspect the ones on a Hunter 49 (and I've read Michael's complete log as well as his European canal cruises) are different than other Hunters. One size fits all never works over the whole size range of any builders.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by SailAllDay

I'm a prospective Hunter 44DS buyer, looks like the Kevlar reinforcement didn't help much for Susie Q. Could this just be a gimmick?

"Hunter’s structural grid and interior bulkhead design are bonded into place,
complemented by Kevlar-reinforced hulls, for top-notch structural
strength and integrity."

This is talking about Kevlar reinforcement in the hull whereas the recent discussion is about deck integrity and cleats potentially ripping out of the deck. Quite different.

cheers

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by downunder

This is talking about Kevlar reinforcement in the hull whereas the recent discussion is about deck integrity and cleats potentially ripping out of the deck. Quite different.

cheers

I think the question was related to the pictures with the bow holed

[ryon]

Originally Posted by RTB

They just supply the pendant with the thimble (eye). Probably, all that splicing is to keep their display lines from going walkabout. In reality, one just uses 2 dock lines. From the cleat though the thimble and back to same cleat. One each side, getting them as equal as possible. The center, extra line is for storm conditions.

Ralph

What is the thinking on this? When you double a line out and back you allow for both legs to take an equal strain. But this? Not only is there no strain equalization between the legs, there is a central cow hitch that can be worried from side-to-side.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

I think the question was related to the pictures with the bow holed

Fair enough, I was staying with the thread title.

[KnuckleDragger]

Originally Posted by downunder

Fair enough, I was staying with the thread title.

Do yourself a favor and google "Hunter factory tour". A lot of your questions will be answered there. Specifically, Hunter uses a Kevlar laminate in the hull from bow to keel. This is in the below waterline area only. Not the topsides, so would not have helped in this instance. (The laminate above the waterline is cored with end grain balsa.) In general, FRP construction is not prepared to endure prolonged bashing in such conditions that were present that day.

[OldFrog75]

Originally Posted by downunder

Fair enough, I was staying with the thread title.

Given the mooring system in Avalon, once you realized waves/weather were coming, would it make sense to remove the pendant loop from the single bow cleat, run a dock line through the pendant loop, and cleat hitch on both bow cleats thereby creating a bridle of sorts? Then take up any additional slack with the stern pendant - or would the strength of a dockline be inadequate for the load with 6-8 foot waves?

[KnuckleDragger]

Originally Posted by OldFrog75

Given the mooring system in Avalon, once you realized waves/weather were coming, would it make sense to remove the pendant loop from the single bow cleat, run a dock line through the pendant loop, and cleat hitch on both bow cleats thereby creating a bridle of sorts? Then take up any additional slack with the stern pendant - or would the strength of a dockline be inadequate for the load with 6-8 foot waves?

Was the owner on the boat at the time?
Don't remember if this has been stated.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

At 5.50 show how backing plates are glassed..

Actually, this was a pretty good video. Did you notice that the bulkheads are bonded AND tabbed (at 5:00)? You and minaret must be impressed.

I looked at the part about the aluminum backing plates. So, they look like they are added over the full thickness of the deck laminate...glued into place, then glassed over and rolled out. The one in the video that is being rolled looks to be maybe 1/4" to 3/8" thick?

So, questions...

1. Is this a good technique?
2. Is the aluminum plate itself thick enough?
3. Is the problem we see in this sunken Hunter due to the backing plate being to0 small area-wise (4") - or just the laminate and core being too thin - or both?

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by CarinaPDX

I think the "rub" is at least in part the direction that yacht designs have gone as a result of cost pressures, particularly in vying for the bareboat charter business (which is a large part of the market in Europe and elsewhere). Brands like Jeaneau and Bavaria were considered to be above average a few decades ago; as the volume shifted to the charter companies and competition heated up, brands that wanted to stay in the volume charter boat market needed to get the costs down while delivering attractive boats with layouts that suited the charter business (many berths/staterooms, good sailing characteristics, easy/inexpensive maintenance) and would still look good at the end of heavy charter use in 5 years. The resulting designs are highly engineered, lightweight, and fast as well as low cost. Features tend to be designed into the molds rather than added later with expensive fittings and labor (Hunter has been particularly innovative in this regard), and of course the manufacturing process has become highly automated for these volume suppliers. It can be argued that the contemporary yachts are in fact a lot "better" (by many measures) than the old ones. And Jeaneau, Beneteau, Bavaria and Hunter are right at the front of these developments.

So back to the "rub": the older designs have more handcrafted woodwork, while newer boats tend to have more white fiberglass. Older boats were built strong everywhere and thus survive accidents better (like the boats having their bows chewed up against the dock, or anchor chain out of the roller cutting into the bow). The extra weight tends to give a vessel a seakindly motion (and slower forward motion). Builders who still build in the older ways produce beautiful handcrafted boats (and in fact the older boats by Jeaneau and Bavaria had some very nice woodworking), but I would be reluctant to claim them to be better - at least from an engineering, performance, and cost POV. They are/were overbuilt and arguably under-engineered. Newer boats perform wonderfully - until stresses are placed on them which the engineering did not intend. Grounding a modern sailboat can result in quick hull failure, while an older design may survive for days before failing - but does it really make sense to carry all of that weight around just in case you do something stupid? Same with smashing the bows into concrete floats or letting the anchor chain jump the roller and saw through the hull. Modern hulls are engineered to keep the water out; other loads are taken to bulkheads and liners, or if in the hull through local reinforcement using modern materials such as unidirectional glass. Thus Beneteaus have become known for oil-canning and Jeaneaus have used kevlar for impact resistance - such is the nature of the designs. But I would not expect trouble unless the boat is put into a situation that it should not be in.

The point I am working up to is that these new designs often appear less robust and crafted than the older ones, and so get (often undeserved) criticism. I would have you look at higher-end brands of production boat, and compare what they build today with what they use to build, and you will find they too are lighter and more engineered than their older models. In fact I believe the differences in quality today between expensive boats like HR and inexpensive Hunters and Bavarias is small (I'll put on my helmet now) - such is the advantage of high volumes supporting more engineering and automation. Of course there are differences, such as more wood and cabinet-work, on the expensive boats - but I don't see that as a hit on the others. And for long-term cruising I would be making upgrades on any production boat (or any boat full stop).

BTW when I returned 5 years ago I was shocked to learn from a local boat electrician that Hunters come from the factory with isolation transformers. Other manufacturers save a few hundred per boat by using galvanic isolators. So how many of the expensive yachts today come with iso xfmrs?

Full disclosure: I built, beginning in 1978, and still own and live aboard one of the beautiful, heavy, old-fashioned boats. I wouldn't trade - mostly because there is too much of me in it. I appreciate the virtues of the old designs. I also appreciate that to replace this 31' boat with one professionally built today to the same design would take well north of half a million dollars, and would still require a lot of maintenance. It is perfectly rational to buy a 40' modern boat for a lot less, skip all the maintenance no longer needed, and go cruising with a lot more money in the pocket.

Greg

This is one of the best posts I've ever read on this subject. Thanks Greg.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by RTB

Me too, since I called the broken cleat BS.

I also noticed in Maine's post - "Only one cleat was in use at the time and it took all the load. It could have just as easily been the mooring pendant that failed, as happens most often."

For anyone else picking up a mooring when expecting storm conditions, one line attached to a bow cleat is not the proper setup. I NEVER attach one line to the pendant. Anyone that has moored in Boot Key has seen their nice, big, display, showing the proper way to adjust your lines. Recommended Mooring Tie Up for Storms

Maybe it would have saved the Hunter in this thread, or maybe not. But there is a right way and a wrong way to do some things. I hope this helps someone else in the future, since there are probably a few future cruisers reading this, that have never picked up a mooring.

Ralph

Awesome info. I've saved the link. Thanks Ralph.

[neilpride]

I remind you that i never say Hunter dont tab the bulkheads with Fg and cool if they do, whats your point ?


Regarding your others questions, i dont like to much any kind of alloy glassed and covered with Fg , Ip try that with Chainplates and Irwin to, there is no way to see if they are in good condition or not without grind the FG, Aluminium nevere should encapsulated in Fg and in contact with SS screws..

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by SailAllDay

True, I don't know when Hunter started reinforcing their hulls with kevlar. Susie Q is a 2001 Hunter 460. The Hunter I'm looking at is from 2007. I've been lurking for a long time researching on the forums. Thanks for the kind welcome

Sail - watch that video that Neil posted. It's really good. The kevlar is at and below the waterline for reinforcement against impact (where you really want it) - as part of a solid glass layup. Above the waterline, the hull is cored for stiffness and weight control (which is also good).

The latter is why you see the punctures/damage you do in those photos above the waterline. That's also why the laminate looks "thin" there: