HMS Bounty in trouble... - Page 104 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > Out There > Vessels Lost, Missing, or in Danger
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree718Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1031  
Old 11-29-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,160
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodhunter View Post
A question. The original Bounty was 91 feet on deck had a 24-foot beam, drew 13 feet and had a displacement of 215 tons. The new Bounty was 120 feet on deck, had a 30-foot beam also drew 13 feet and had a displacement of 412 tons. Wonder what if any effect upsizing the Bounty had an effect on the ship's seaworthiness.
---------------------
Seems to me that everyone refers to the ship as the HMS Bounty. As far as I know she was never part of the Royal Navy (or any other navy for that matter). Just a quibble but I find it annoying
You are right. The original was the HMS Bounty because it was a Navy boat even if it was not designed to be one. The replica, as you said, was just a bad replica and makes not any sense to call her "Her (or His) Majesty Ship", specially in Republican America.

Regarding seaworthiness given all things equal, a bigger ship is a more seaworthy ship. Regarding the Bounty it all depends of how it was made bigger: It was made bigger according the designs of a Naval Architect? and even so it would have to be one experienced in the designs of that type of ships, I mean old wooden ships. I guess that it would not be anyone that would be confident in what regards scantlings on a wood XVIII century ship design.

Regards

Paulo
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1032  
Old 11-29-2012
MarkofSeaLife's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,972
Thanks: 25
Thanked 39 Times in 36 Posts
Rep Power: 4
MarkofSeaLife is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Where do you have seen that notice about change in ballast? I am just curious about that. The ballast on this boats should be the one that he was designed to have.



Paulo
Paulo, do you read other people posts in this thread?
Well read this post carefully, and the posts after it, 1029 etc. because I would like some thoughtful comments not just people fobbing the idea off. If its been rebalasted to lighten it so the ship does not need to go through a safety inspection we have a extremely worrying situation!

Quote:
Originally Posted by casey1999 View Post
I read on the "wooden boat forum" where the Bounty was reballasted recently. The 80,000 lb of lead was removed from bilge and 65,000 lb "shoe" was added (I assume attached to the exterior of the keel). I assume the calculation would show moment arm would be the same for the two ballasting methods. The coast guard did have an issue during an inspection with the ballasting calculations (for the reballasting) but they were corrected on paper. Interesting though why the ballasting change.
chef2sail likes this.
__________________
Sea Life
Notes on a Circumnavigation:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1033  
Old 11-29-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,160
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkofSeaLife View Post
Paulo, do you read other people posts in this thread?
Well read this post carefully, and the posts after it, 1029 etc. because I would like some thoughtful comments not just people fobbing the idea off. If its been rebalasted to lighten it so the ship does not need to go through a safety inspection we have a extremely worrying situation!
Sorry about that I did not have saw it.

Originally Posted by casey1999
I read on the "wooden boat forum" where the Bounty was reballasted recently. The 80,000 lb of lead was removed from bilge and 65,000 lb "shoe" was added (I assume attached to the exterior of the keel). I assume the calculation would show moment arm would be the same for the two ballasting methods. The coast guard did have an issue during an inspection with the ballasting calculations (for the reballasting) but they were corrected on paper. Interesting though why the ballasting change.


That can eventually gave the same RM but I am not sure it would not increase roll also.

On fact I have done the same to an old traditional boat that I owned, but in my case I increased RM. putting more ballast on the outside of the keel I got a much more stiff boat, able to carry more sail but a boat that with the sails down rolled a lot more. I had also heard saying that one of the things that gave to the aluminum French centerboarders such a good dynamic stability was the fact that they have all the ballast inside the boat and that make them roll less. I am no sure about this though.

Regards

Paulo

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 11-29-2012 at 12:39 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1034  
Old 11-29-2012
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,780
Thanks: 3
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

I'm in the process of seeing what I can find out on the reballasting, but in the process I found this and thought it was interesting:

"Restoring HMS Bounty II
HMS Bounty underwent a major three-phase restoration project from 2001 to 2006 after being purchased by the HMS Bounty Organisation LLC. The first phase of the refit was to replace the hull, which at the time was so damaged the vessel was taking on 30,000 gallons of water an hour.

From the "for sale" advert:

HMS Bounty for sale: a piece of cinematic history
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1035  
Old 11-29-2012
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,780
Thanks: 3
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

This was from Chaparral site (post #17):
HMS Bounty II - Chaparral Boats Owners Club

"Ever since they rebuilt the hull a few years back, she has been floating higher in the water as a result of reduced ballast and new lighter engines. That may be the reason since in her original form she would have gone down like a rock!."

Hard to find all the facts, but I am sure CG report will address.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1036  
Old 11-29-2012
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,780
Thanks: 3
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by casey1999 View Post
I read on the "wooden boat forum" where the Bounty was reballasted recently. The 80,000 lb of lead was removed from bilge and 65,000 lb "shoe" was added (I assume attached to the exterior of the keel). I assume the calculation would show moment arm would be the same for the two ballasting methods. The coast guard did have an issue during an inspection with the ballasting calculations (for the reballasting) but they were corrected on paper. Interesting though why the ballasting change.
Here is link to the shipyard work done to make ballast change:
Shipyard Log: August 2007

From above:
"The Bounty’s current protector is Bob Hansen. When he first brought her to us in 2001, Bounty had been leaking upwards to 30,000 gallons of water an hour at her pier. Our job was to rework the hull from the waterline down. During this recent visit to the shipyard, the scope of work included: Fastenings; 7,000 trunnels (locus wood dowels)
Keel: 54,000 lbs lead"

Not sure why the difference between 54k lead and reported 65k lead. I assume the internal lead was removed and then a lead shoe attached to outside of keel.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1037  
Old 11-29-2012
chef2sail's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,828
Thanks: 28
Thanked 53 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 7
chef2sail will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to chef2sail
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Do not government inspect private cars condition?PCP
Yes, but that is left up to the states indigually and there are many variations. Some like Alaska, Montana, Texas....there is little real inspection except brakes. Some like Pa, MD California it is more extenisve. Each state sets its qualifications and its not very strict. Each state also has different poluultion control standards too...even some states the counties are different.

The government here is less likely to set national standards for many reasons. Unlike European countries it is hard to police because of the immense size is one. Getting politicians to agree on a national policy will be next to impossible. Getting them to place restrictive regs is almost considered by some un-American Its hard to have concensus here..
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
___________________________
S/V Haleakala (Hawaiian for" House of the Sun")
C&C 35 MKIII Hull # 76
Parkville, Maryland
(photos by Joe McCary)
Charter member of the Chesapeake Lion posse

Our blog-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


“Sailing is just the bottom line, like adding up the score in bridge. My real interest is in the tremendous game of life.”- Dennis Conner
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1038  
Old 11-29-2012
chef2sail's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,828
Thanks: 28
Thanked 53 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 7
chef2sail will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to chef2sail
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
30,000 gallons of water an hour.
Thats insane,,500 gallons per minute...
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
___________________________
S/V Haleakala (Hawaiian for" House of the Sun")
C&C 35 MKIII Hull # 76
Parkville, Maryland
(photos by Joe McCary)
Charter member of the Chesapeake Lion posse

Our blog-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


“Sailing is just the bottom line, like adding up the score in bridge. My real interest is in the tremendous game of life.”- Dennis Conner
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1039  
Old 11-29-2012
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
Flatballer is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkofSeaLife View Post
Paulo, do you read other people posts in this thread?
Well read this post carefully, and the posts after it, 1029 etc. because I would like some thoughtful comments not just people fobbing the idea off. If its been rebalasted to lighten it so the ship does not need to go through a safety inspection we have a extremely worrying situation!
Removing ballast from inside the ship and putting it outside would actually raise the gross tonnage, not lower it. There are things you can play with to reduce your tonnage and it's possible they did that for regulatory reasons, but the ballast is unrelated.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1040  
Old 11-29-2012
smurphny's Avatar
Over Hill Sailing Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Adirondacks NY
Posts: 2,672
Thanks: 48
Thanked 56 Times in 54 Posts
Rep Power: 6
smurphny is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodhunter View Post
A question. The original Bounty was 91 feet on deck had a 24-foot beam, drew 13 feet and had a displacement of 215 tons. The new Bounty was 120 feet on deck, had a 30-foot beam also drew 13 feet and had a displacement of 412 tons. Wonder what if any effect upsizing the Bounty had an effect on the ship's seaworthiness.
---------------------
Seems to me that everyone refers to the ship as the HMS Bounty. As far as I know she was never part of the Royal Navy (or any other navy for that matter). Just a quibble but I find it annoying
As I have been saying right from the start here: If you make a hull larger, the draft must also change. The righting moment is changed drastically if the depth of the weight is not changed in proportion to the overall change in size of the hull. That's why the extreme rolling motion is evident in that video. I wonder if this boat could have pointed up very far in even a 15 knot wind. There was just not enough hull in the water and not enough weight low enough to keep her from heeling over wildly.
__________________
Alberg 35: With a philosophical flourish Cato throws himself upon his sword; I quietly take to the ship.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rhodes Bounty ll white rabbit Introduce Yourself 3 1 Week Ago 05:00 AM
New Member - Hardin 45 ( 44 voyager bounty ) Bianchi Introduce Yourself 9 01-29-2011 09:33 PM
HELP!! , Need move a boat NC to WA (Rhodes Bounty II, 40'10 x 28' x 10'3" x 5'9") sailandoar General Discussion (sailing related) 1 08-23-2006 01:11 PM
Bounty Windjammer Spectacle (Boothbay Register) NewsReader News Feeds 0 06-23-2006 03:15 PM
April 28, 1789, Aboard the HMS Bounty: NewsReader Mass Bay Sailors 0 04-28-2006 01:15 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:43 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.