Oceanis 485 steering failure

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by minaret

Really thought this was a universal view. Seems his own people are the most upset about it.

I thought this was about boating? I'm sure you can find a political forum.

[ontherocks83]

Originally Posted by Polux

What do you mean not designed for Ocean service? Ocean service in my book is to sail offshore, out of the protection of the shore and except for the smallest of the Oceanis they are certainly intended to be sailed offshore, even occasionally to cross Oceans on the right season.

You are messing things up, what I said was that they are not designed to do a circumnavigation, not that they cannot do it, as many have done. Obviously on a boat that is not designed as a voyage boat and cost a fraction of one, more maintenance and more breakage is to be expected.


This has nothing to do with what I have said above.


That is plain untrue. It is you that has the funny idea that a small sailboat (less than 80ft) can be suitable for "unrestricted ocean service". In what concerns me I find that idea completely absurd. The sea can create conditions that will endanger any small sailboat.

Saying that not all sailboats have the same seaworthiness and are able to face the same conditions. Stability that comes with good design and size is one of the main factors and makes bigger boats, in what regards that, more seaworthy than smaller ones, namely in what regards risk of capsize by a breaking wave.

Another factor is the strongness of the boat and even if normally the crews can take less than the boat and most boats are abandoned not because they are sinking but because there the crew is afraid that may happen due to conditions, that can make some difference. But what is indubitably true is that boats that are abandoned because they are actually sinking do to breakage are just a small proportion of the total of abandoned boats.

Regarding rudder breakage, it is one of the more frequent reasons to abandon boats, at pair with mast breakage, even if both less frequent than fear as main cause. Among those that are abandoned after rudder breakage, the ones that are abandoned due to the risk of imminent sinking is a small percentage of those abandons.

The last and probably more frequent cause of sinking is boats in bad condition and among those the bigger quantity are old boats that many consider that because they were once seaworthy boats, they continue to be seaworthy 30 years later, without a necessary very expensive maintenance.

On the last ARC, with several Oceanis and many other mass production boats the only one that sunk was one of those, a 44ft ol Moody:

On past but recent editions I can remember other "bluewater" old boats having big problems, the case of steel Motiva that had lost the rudder or a Roberts over 50ft yacht abandoned.

Stop. Seriously. No one said unrestricted ocean service. 80 feet c'mon your getting ridculous. And now youre bringing in all the other reasons people abandon ship. We're not talking about that we're talking about this crappy ass rudder that only you and bene seem to love. Stay on topic. You are talking in circles about nothing and any credibility you may of had pages ago is so far gone its not even funny. At this point id be suspect of taking your advice about a pie recipe never mind anything boating related. Youve flip flopped so drastically that I dont think you even know where you stand you just want to argue.

P.s. Im still waiting for that quote about me not trusting any person in the marine industry and also for a response to my sky question. Is it blue?

im here all night........waiting.............................. ....................and still waiting

[Terra Nova]

I'd like to think there is a special place in hell for any boat designer/builder that allows such junk out the door. But perhaps that is for a religious forum?

[estarzinger]

Hey MarkJ (and any other full time cruisers here), if you are still reading this thread - question for you - how many times do you go aground (say per year or per 5 years)? Let's count any accidental grounding at all, including very soft bumps.

I would think it averaged about once a year for me.

[four winds]

Approaching six years of coastal now, with a few gulf crossings.

Stopped keeping count after the first dozen, and none in the last couple of years, I think. Always in mud or sand and usually near shore mid tack trying to use all available waters. Sailing for miles with a couple of feet below the keel is normal in my area.

Always tacked away with little delay. Just an oopsie. Except a couple of times I really screwed the pooch and plowed her in good while motoring. Luckily having enough power to back out.

Was surprised at haulout last year how little damage existed on the bottom of the the keel, practically none.

Course I'm not a real cruiser by a sometimes CF metric. Never crossed an ocean and probably never will.

[ontherocks83]

Pol let me add this too. There was a back and forth earlier between you and someone sles about how strong a rudder should be and what type of abuse it can take.

On my last boat a 1983 Catalina 30 the rudder was sheared off over 25 years ago. The previous owner a friend of ours had his wife driving and she missed a marker. A wave cleared the keel over a rock but the rudder ran into it full speed. The rudder then floated away. 25 years later there was still no water leaking in from the rudder post and the only damage that manifested 25 years later was the upper rudder bearing in the edge of the aft seat 1 foot above the deck level started to get some wobble and play from the fiberglass breaking down. Now that is how you make a rudder. Maybe you can email that to bene.

Also being on a lake the ice would shift the marks and we ran aground and hit rocks with the keel more times then I can count. Many of them at full speed. Some bringing us to a dead stop some skipping over the top of them. Wild guess how many times we had to fix the keel to hull joint? Zero! Just fix the lead at the impact sight and call it a day. THAT is how you build a boat.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Hey MarkJ (and any other full time cruisers here), if you are still reading this thread - question for you - how many times do you go aground (say per year or per 5 years)? Let's count any accidental grounding at all, including very soft bumps.

I would think it averaged about once a year for me.

Evans, we've never made a study of that statistic, so take this info with a grain of salt...

Soft groundings, likely around 2-3 times a year... depends where we were cruising that year, of course. We don't worry about them much, and have usually gotten ourselves out of the situation. Twice we were inside Lake Macquarie when the water level dropped a bit, and we became firmly stuck at the dropoff shoal trying to exit, where we had safely (barely) entered not long before, and those two times we required aid to get off. Embarassaing!

Hard groundings, as in coral heads or reefs: three times total in 33 years. Once in Kaneohe bay at HW on a king tide... the reef markers were submerged and we were strangers to the area (and to coral... our first tropical cruise). That was a bugger to get out of, requiring help from another cruiser in a larger boat, a local VMR type (who got the tow rope around his prop, so I had to "rescue" him) and about 6 big Hawaiians who happened by in a sampan. With the locals physically lifting the stern and the ketch pulling like hell we slid off backwards, with only dings in the lead to s how for it.

The other two were in Fiji, in very bad visibility conditions (leaden overcast, no wind and all the reef markers missing due to a cyclone). We knew we were at risk, were going very slowly and were able to self-rescue. Incidentally, those two groundings were the stimulus for buying the Interphase Probe FLS. That much maligned instrument has been at least partly responsible for our not having had a hard grounding since then (around 20 years ago).

As I said, we don't worry too much about soft groundings. The folks who brag about never going aground, and those who decry the seamanship of anyone who does are likely not often in strange waters, or ones with indifferent charting or shifting banks. Real life cruising often involves all of those features, and to completely avoid the chance of a grounding keeps one from leaving the yelllow brick road.

But hell, Evans, you know all that!

Jim

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by Polux

What do you mean not designed for Ocean service? Ocean service in my book is to sail offshore, out of the protection of the shore and except for the smallest of the Oceanis they are certainly intended to be sailed offshore, even occasionally to cross Oceans on the right season.

You are messing things up, what I said was that they are not designed to do a circumnavigation, not that they cannot do it, as many have done. Obviously on a boat that is not designed as a voyage boat and cost a fraction of one, more maintenance and more breakage is to be expected.


This has nothing to do with what I have said above.


That is plain untrue. It is you that has the funny idea that a small sailboat (less than 80ft) can be suitable for "unrestricted ocean service". In what concerns me I find that idea completely absurd. The sea can create conditions that will endanger any small sailboat.

Saying that not all sailboats have the same seaworthiness and are able to face the same conditions. Stability that comes with good design and size is one of the main factors and makes bigger boats, in what regards that, more seaworthy than smaller ones, namely in what regards risk of capsize by a breaking wave.

Another factor is the strongness of the boat and even if normally the crews can take less than the boat and most boats are abandoned not because they are sinking but because there the crew is afraid that may happen due to conditions, that can make some difference. But what is indubitably true is that boats that are abandoned because they are actually sinking do to breakage are just a small proportion of the total of abandoned boats.

Regarding rudder breakage, it is one of the more frequent reasons to abandon boats, at pair with mast breakage, even if both less frequent than fear as main cause. Among those that are abandoned after rudder breakage, the ones that are abandoned due to the risk of imminent sinking is a small percentage of those abandons.

The last and probably more frequent cause of sinking is boats in bad condition and among those the bigger quantity are old boats that many consider that because they were once seaworthy boats, they continue to be seaworthy 30 years later, without a necessary very expensive maintenance.

On the last ARC, with several Oceanis and many other mass production boats the only one that sunk was one of those, a 44ft ol Moody:

On past but recent editions I can remember other "bluewater" old boats having big problems, the case of steel Motiva that had lost the rudder or a Roberts over 50ft yacht abandoned.

This is almost magnificent. You manage to combine a strawman with a false and misleading reductio ad absurdam, in a big attempt at misdirection by hand waving argumentation.

You did notice that earlier in this same thread I enumerated my collision damage and flooding mitigation equipment, amounting to a total capacity of approximately 1200 liters per MINUTE, no?

So… you are presuming to lecture me, in my Oyster 55 with its massive steel bearing at throughhull, 10cm or so diameter massively built stainless rudderstock, terminating in another steel bearing at the deck, which itself is around 7cm deep at that level, and below terminating in a truly gynormous excellent quality shiny bronze bearing at the foot of a full skeg, bolted through with five massive bolts into a steel flange running internally the length of the skeg into the hull… you waste your typing lecturing me, with this arrangement, and a boat which is never and nowhere less than 3cm SOLID dry glass, up to several times that in most areas, with exceptionally overbuilt bronze seacocks etc etc… you presume to be telling me, despite all this, that my 1200 liter per minute pumping capacity plus all the other flood and collision mitigation equipment aboard is something I did without consideration? Of course, I just presume that my boat can never sink. Sigh.

Nice try at a bizarre distraction. It ain't cutting it. The discussion is about the utter CRAPness and I do mean CRAP, Garbage, toy, junk, sham, of a bearing support structure on the Beneteau models in question. And you response is to say: any ship can sink, and to argue that, to me.



As to your denial of the relevance of families relying on such boats for their safety in transoceanic and remote sailing, it is itself denied. Your words are DIRECTLY relevant, as they may indeed influence the decision making of a pair of adults with children in accepting such bearing structures and similar as being adequate for Ocean service. In that regard your words are DIRECTLY implicated in the real world. People consult these sites for guidance, you know?

Paolo, congratulations. You just hit a new low.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by ontherocks83

Stop. Seriously. No one said unrestricted ocean service. 80 feet c'mon your getting ridculous. And now youre bringing in all the other reasons people abandon ship. We're not talking about that we're talking about this crappy ass rudder that only you and bene seem to love. Stay on topic. You are talking in circles about nothing and any credibility you may of had pages ago is so far gone its not even funny. At this point id be suspect of taking your advice about a pie recipe never mind anything boating related. Youve flip flopped so drastically that I dont think you even know where you stand you just want to argue.

P.s. Im still waiting for that quote about me not trusting any person in the marine industry and also for a response to my sky question. Is it blue?

im here all night........waiting.............................. ....................and still waiting

The marine industry is like any other, profit driven. Some mfg. rely on pushing as much **** out the door, with glitz and some believe in repeat business and referrals. I guess your mistrust is warranted. I guess being selective is the answer. The Sky is black.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Soft groundings, likely around 2-3 times a year...

One thing I took away from the Cheeky report is that even some groundings which the owners consider 'soft' provide enough shock load or torque to damage the plexus glue type assemblies - no problem for your boat or for Hawk, but potentially fracture less than perfect/thicker glue bonds of structural grids and and rudder supports and such.

Hard groundings, as in coral heads or reefs: three times total in 33 years.

Interesting. We also have had 3 hard groundings, but over less time - 20 years. One was in remote uncharted waters. We should have been more careful but were tired and wanted to get the anchor down. One was a serious navionics e-charting error. There was a clear hazard on the official paper chart that simply was not on the navionics. And the final one was just simply operator error. We cut a corner to closely in deep fog and hit a perfectly charted ledge.

But hell, Evans, you know all that!

Yea, but I actually had never gotten a sense for how often other cruisers hit the bottom. It never came up in discussion much.

Jim

........

[monte]

No bottom touches yet (touch plexus) but then maybe I'm a bit more careful than if I had a yacht built like this one
http://youtu.be/YIglL5vks4g

[Valmika]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Can you please email back to Marion regarding why those rudders tubes come loose under mistery citcunstances?? instead of hammering the thread with the same song,,,,,,

OK It is Mystery, not mistery, circumstances, not citcunstances. I cannot defend all Beneteau's but lets face it, by shear numbers there are a lot of them out there, a lot of them cruising, and a lot of them doing just fine. La Vagabond a 435 (they did have rudder problems in episode 3) Liz Copeland wrote a number of books on a circumnavigation she did on a B38 with her husband and two kids. I have got 10 of thousands miles on mine with no issue. By almost everyone's ones own admission they were the number one charter boat for years racking up thousands of days at sea many times with a crew that was not too experienced. I would expect that statistically we would be seeing a lot more problems then we are. Maybe they aren't rated for crossing oceans (but I think they are) but then either were the outriggers that the Polynesians used to travel to distant islands.
I hope this is not the Neil Pryde that built my sails because you were recommended by Beneteau USA . I can't believe this thread is going on so long. I can't believe I finally got drawn into this silly debate. Can't we all just sail.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Mark Killam

OK It is Mystery, not mistery, circumstances, not citcunstances. I cannot defend all Beneteau's but lets face it, by shear numbers there are a lot of them out there, a lot of them cruising, and a lot of them doing just fine. La Vagabond a 435 (they did have rudder problems in episode 3) Liz Copeland wrote a number of books on a circumnavigation she did on a B38 with her husband and two kids. I have got 10 of thousands miles on mine with no issue. By almost everyone's ones own admission they were the number one charter boat for years racking up thousands of days at sea many times with a crew that was not too experienced. I would expect that statistically we would be seeing a lot more problems then we are. Maybe they aren't rated for crossing oceans (but I think they are) but then either were the outriggers that the Polynesians used to travel to distant islands.
I hope this is not the Neil Pryde that built my sails because you were recommended by Beneteau USA . I can't believe this thread is going on so long. I can't believe I finally got drawn into this silly debate. Can't we all just sail.

I don't think this is a silly debate not even a waste of time as far Beneteau owners or anyone willing to buy a Beneteau is aware of this issue, shear numbers and lots doing fine jada jada, yes, as far it don't happen to you or me all is ok he? and not , this is not the Neilpride sailmaker who build your sails sorry,, Take it sporty , this and others forums are to change info and express opinions , ideas.... Cheers.

[monte]

Sure Mark, no one is bagging all beneteaus, but it does help to show how design flaws can lead to major failures. It's a crappy design that just happens to be on a beneteau. Fortunately it seems like a newer design and shouldn't effect older designs, and probably not too expensive to make it decent, but definitely worth the expense to do so. Our lagoon comes from the same parent company and there's a few stupid cost cutting items I altered immediately, like bilge pump systems and no bilge pump alarms. Hopefully these newer boat designs will be amended given the obvious defects of the current design.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by monte

Sure Mark, no one is bagging all beneteaus, but it does help to show how design flaws can lead to major failures. It's a crappy design that just happens to be on a beneteau. Fortunately it seems like a newer design and shouldn't effect older designs, and probably not too expensive to make it decent, but definitely worth the expense to do so. Our lagoon comes from the same parent company and there's a few stupid cost cutting items I altered immediately, like bilge pump systems and no bilge pump alarms. Hopefully these newer boat designs will be amended given the obvious defects of the current design.

I concur that this is a very informative thread. I know that for my next boat, this is certainly a point I will take a close look at; in other words, the whole rudder assembly.