Production Boats and the Limits - Page 344 - SailNet Community
 2284Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #3431 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
Senior Moment Member
 
SloopJonB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: West Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 13,262
Thanks: 91
Thanked 129 Times in 124 Posts
Rep Power: 9
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

He points also that none of those boats sunk or disappeared

That brings up an interesting point - is there any sort of record on the Interweb of boats that have been lost or abandoned? That might tell more of a story than the successful ones.

That 40' Delphia is a gorgeous boat - how "contemporary" is it?
bobperry likes this.

I, myself, personally intend to continue being outspoken and opinionated, intolerant of all fanatics, fools and ignoramuses, deeply suspicious of all those who have "found the answer" and on my bad days, downright rude.
SloopJonB is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #3432 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
grumpy old man
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,893
Thanks: 4
Thanked 185 Times in 173 Posts
Rep Power: 9
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

Jon:
That sounds like your afternoon assignment. That's going to be tough. Not sure quitting and crashing were well publicized.

" Wooo Hooo! Look at me on the rocks!"

Please visit my blog. It's fun to read.


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

Bob's Blog ....

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


Please also visit my new web site
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bobperry is offline  
post #3433 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
Top Sekret Ninja Sailor
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhat near Naptown
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 6 Posts
Rep Power: 12
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by SloopJonB View Post
He points also that none of those boats sunk or disappeared

That brings up an interesting point - is there any sort of record on the Interweb of boats that have been lost or abandoned? That might tell more of a story than the successful ones.
But the unsuccessful ones may be due to lack of skills by the sailors, bad maintenance, or even bad luck. And not due to the construction or design of the boat.
bobperry likes this.
slap is online now  
 
post #3434 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
grumpy old man
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,893
Thanks: 4
Thanked 185 Times in 173 Posts
Rep Power: 9
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

And the successful ones may be a function of pure luck and good weather. Lots of variables.

Please visit my blog. It's fun to read.


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

Bob's Blog ....

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


Please also visit my new web site
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bobperry is offline  
post #3435 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
Catalina 400 MKII
 
Scotty C-M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Santa Cruz, California
Posts: 812
Thanks: 8
Thanked 72 Times in 68 Posts
Rep Power: 7
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

A very interesting post, PCP. It does prove some interesting points. Most interesting to me is that there is a long list of production boats making serious passages. I agree that there are many other lists of boats that are "marginal" that are also doing so. As pointed out, the sailor's skills are the real bottom line. However, true to the topic of this thread, "The Limits of Production Boats", there are significant numbers of production boats, as you showed anecdotally and with some (rather basic) statistics, that are out there.

As I've watched this discussion, I've mostly stayed silent. I will however, share an opinion. I can't afford many of the boats that are talked about as "true BBBs". I'm a simple guy. Got a family, retired from 34 years as a public school teacher, and can barely afford the boat I do have. I'd love to have a fancy boat, but not really. Nor do I want to get one of the "build it yourself for pennies" really rough boats. I also like the accomodations of more modern designs. The Catalina 400 is the perfect middle ground for me. With the proper preparation it would take me anywhere. It might not take you anywhere, but it represents a reasonable alternative for a fellow like me, both financially and seawothynesswise (I just made that word up!). I also love my boat. It makes me warm and tingly inside.

A side note: The sea is a whole lot bigger than any boat made, much less our little pleasure sailboats. You just can't engineer, or build, a boat to be able to "take anything". ALL boats are a series of compromises and trade offs. I've really enjoyed different takes on what make acceptable compromises. There have been some great boats discussed here. Looking forward to more of that.
Scotty C-M is online now  
post #3436 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 342
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 5
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

De skulle på langtur, men så gikk det galt. - Båtforumet - baatplassen.no

Hit a marked jetty.


1984 MacGregor 25

I don't know what I'm doing.
XSrcing is offline  
post #3437 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
Less Senior Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bangor, Maine
Posts: 1,442
Thanks: 39
Thanked 50 Times in 50 Posts
Rep Power: 9
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

Read this recently by a NA about a "newish" boat (designed circa 200) that isn't a pizza boat, but was moving in that direction.
Interesting.

"On the down side, a wide stern increases wetted surface and makes a boat sticky in the light stuff. Heeled over, a wide, low-deadrise stern coupled with short aft overhang can give you a transom that drags and gurgles, sucking the bay along with you. It can also force the boat to roll bow down as it heels, which can give you a demanding helm. Most of these issues can be handled with prudent design, but it's tricky. I prefer a more moderate approach to beam aft. The D/L of this design is 210 (using the displacement listed for the beavertail keel model). The range of positive stability is listed as 125 degrees, and that's textbook normal for this type of boat."
bobperry likes this.

Ocean- that which covers 3/4 of a world made for man, who has no gills.
seaner97 is offline  
post #3438 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
Administrator
 
Jeff_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 8,844
Thanks: 41
Thanked 436 Times in 366 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff_H View Post
Originally posted by Don190: "I'll wait for you to provide a link to support this made up statement of yours."

In that discussion, Hunter was asked about their outward flange hull to deck joint. They said that they chose it because it was easier to manufacture and easier to repair if damaged. They did not say it was weaker than other hull to deck joints. On the contrary, with modern glues they said that they achieved an equal strength. They acknowledged that there was a limit to how strong an outward flange joint can be because of the limits to the area of the faying surfaces. And they readily admitted that an outward flange joint is more likely to be damaged and suffer weakening due to fatigue over time.
Jeff
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don0190 View Post
Yes I have read that discussion so:

yes - it is easier to build
yes - is is easier to repair
no - it is weak
yes - it is easier to smash (about the same as smashing your hull into anything)

The points being it not weak and it is easy to repair if you do. It really all that easy to smash it as the whole join is protected with a rubber rail and the only part of it that can be smashed in normal use is the aft section if one to to see how hard they can back into something.

Just how easy is it to repair an inward flange leak? Can you even get to most of it with out taking the inside of the boat apart?
Don,

Lets be clear here about what I was saying. I was trying to clear up what Hunter has said about that joint in reference to Shockwave's comments. I was not trying to describe the pluses and minus's of the outward flange hull to deck joint in detail.

If you have read that discussion you should be aware that your statements " it is easier to smash (about the same as smashing your hull into anything)
The points being it not weak and it is easy to repair if you do." ....gloss over both what was said, and the realities of the situation.

What was said is that the kind damage that occurs when a boat rolls against a solid object (like a piling or edge of a dock) might leave scrapes on the side of boat with an inward facing flange, vs a boat with outward facing flange literally tearing off the hull to deck joint. In follow-up discussions, a number of people who managed, or owned or worked in boatyards and several marine surveyors weighed in that this is a pretty common occurrence with outward facing flange joints. It is not the same as an inward facing joint.

Similarly, both Hunter and the follow-up discussions agreed that a horizontal impact on the rail, creates a large force (perpendicular to the glue surface and a bending moment on the glass) which tries to pry the joint apart (rather than the sheer forces of a inward flange) and so are much more likely to damage the joint as well. This is so common in Catalina's that it has a name (The Catalina Smile).

But that is only a part of the story. In a outward flange joint, the laminate makes a near perpendicular turn out to the flange. For aesthetic reasons that turn is a very sharp turn and the glass cannot be made appreciably thicker at that turn or else the rubber would get to be be very clumsy. The result is that there is a large concentration of bending forces that occur where the flange rotates horizontally and that takes a toll over time.

In the follow-up discussion, several of the surveyors and boat yard personnel posted images and discussion on this topic. While only anecdotal, they did tell a clear story. The most dramatic was a boat which rolled against a dock and it's outward flange caught a piling top. It tore the hull parallel to the joint for a distance of only a foot or two. The surveyor who told the story said that the repair was approved according to his recommendation to cut and grind back the hull and joint to a point beyond which delamination was observed. The rubber rail was removed and the yard began cutting and grinding with each extension of the length being removed being approved by the surveyor. After incremental approvals, the area cut away extended approximately 6 feet either side of the impact and there was still noticeable delamination in the hull matrix parallel to the joint. On observing the exposed gelcoat on the joint beyond the cut open area, there was nearly continuous stress cracking, suggesting that the delamination condition extended most of the length of the boat and on both sides of the boat, in other words it was not the result of this or any other impact, but from the service stresses on the boat. At that point the insurance company refused to pay for any repairs beyond those which has previously been incrementally approved.

Similar stress cracking was observed and images posted from other boats by the boat yard personnel.

This is not a minor issue to be dismissed lightly. So while Hunter claimed that the joint is as strong as a inward flange joint, that may be true when that joint starts life, but it will weaken over time more rapidly than a typical inward flange (since the inward flange does not experience routine withdrawal and bending loads on the magnitude of an outward facing flange, has larger radiuses, can be and typically is made heavier than the hull laminate, and can have larger mating surfaces) and will be significantly more likely to incur significant damage over time.

Hunter's response to that discussion is that their boats are designed for a specific user and price point, and that their typical user does not expose their boats to the regular hard use that higher end boats are designed for.

So while it may be argued that any one owner might roll the dice and decide to take a boat with an outward facing flange offshore, and come back without damage, the risk in doing so goes up over time.

On the current point being debated, I am very much a subscriber to the idea that the fact that a particular boat manages to sail mostly around the world does not mean that that design is particularly well suited for offshore work. My typical example of a small plywood boat with a concrete external fin keel that I knew well, and which made it to Miami from Australia does not provide any proof that this boat was an ideal vessel for such a voyage.

Jeff
seaner97 and skygazer like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay
Jeff_H is online now  
post #3439 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,111
Thanks: 1
Thanked 226 Times in 186 Posts
Rep Power: 10
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
You imply that not many modern main market production boats are being taken offshore but they are among the ones that are more used to circumnavigate (or made extensive passages) and I guess that even in your book that has to mean sailing offshore, some examples:
Well, it was not my intention to imply that whatsoever, I was simply addressing the mention of the parade of boats transiting one very specific portion of the Intracoastal Waterway, when compared with outbound's list of boats he's seen prepping for the offshore passage from New England to the Caribbean...

Make no mistake, there are plenty of "Bluewater Boats" motoring down that stretch of the Ditch, as well, with jerry cans lining the rail... But for those heading for the Eastern Caribbean offshore for the winter, it makes little sense to proceed south on the ICW beyond Beaufort/Morehead City. The only logical exception, is if one is late into December or January, in which case Don Street's route from Jacksonville is a viable option... There's nothing at all 'wrong' with heading down the ICW, it's a wonderful trip, but it bears little resemblance to heading direct from the NE to Bermuda and beyond, offshore... The overwhelming percentage of East coast snowbirds will do very little actual sailing over the course of 1,000 miles or more, and then wait for a flat calm day to motor across the Stream from FL to the Bahamas, if that's where they're headed...

East coast American sailors are remarkably 'spoiled', in that regard... No other coastline in the world that I'm aware of has such a network of protected waterways over such a great distance, and many of us do most of our sailing in comparatively benign and protected waters such as Chesapeake Bay, or Long Island Sound... Entirely different ballgame than the Atlantic coast of France, for example, or South Africa, where even the shortest daysail puts you right out into the open ocean... By contrast, the equivalent for a New England snowbird heading down the East coast of crossing the Bay of Biscay, or battling the Aghulas Current around South Aftrica, is the 'treacherous' 120 mile run down the coast of New Jersey... ;-)

Yup, we're spoiled, alright... biggest challenge many of us face is squeezing under a 65' bridge at high tide, or making the next hourly bridge opening on time...

;-)
Ninefingers likes this.
JonEisberg is offline  
post #3440 of 5353 Old 11-07-2015
PCP
Senior Member
 
PCP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,466
Thanks: 21
Thanked 114 Times in 97 Posts
Rep Power: 16
 
Re: Production Boats and the Limits

I waited very patiently for this post to be edited or even erased:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine Sail View Post
Wow, I suspect we have a couple of individuals here who suffer from the Dunning-Kruger Effect and Bob is not one of them....


"The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein relatively unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate. Dunning and Kruger attributed the bias to the metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their own ineptitude and evaluate their own ability accurately.

Dunning and Kruger proposed that, for a given skill, incompetent people will:

*fail to recognize their own lack of skill
*fail to recognize genuine skill in others
*fail to recognize the extent of their inadequacy
*recognize and acknowledge their own lack of skill, after they are exposed to training for that skill"


Some here entirely lack the ability recognize when they are being rude, obnoxious, condescending, arrogant, pompous, self-centered, conceited, self righteous, insulting, egotistical & are preaching and talking down to others as if it is everyone else in the world who is wrong and not them...

Perhaps some introspection is in order...
I fail to understand how a collective insult directed to the ones that don't have the same opinions as Bob (since Bob is explicitly left out) is less severe than and individual insult since the object of the insult is clear. The post above as no substance besides insulting others as a group. How can that post remain a after the previous warning Faster had posted saying that the moderators would not allow precisely that type of posts?

Hollow words I would say:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faster View Post
Folks..
Guitar Guy made a comment a few posts (pages?) back that the mods have gone to sleep. Not true, but there's no question that the tone of this thread has become far more appropriate for PRWG than General Discussion, which is unfortunate. The topic, however, is not PRWG.

That it's devolved largely into personality issues is a shame because the potential for meaningful dialogue is being lost among the ridicule and name calling. ...
I suggest that the participants reel in it significantly and keep the personal comments and ridicule out of the discussion. If we must, we will wade in and start editing and deleting such commentary - perhaps we're a bit late on that score - but we can try to get back on course. ...
For similar reasons we've had to close other 'popular' threads in the past.. hoping we don't need to do the same here.
After that post I received an email from a member saying that he was not participating more on this thread neither on this forums. He was not on the disposition of being insulted and bullied and asked me why I was still participating on this Forum?

He is right, it is time I do the same. Hope is the last thing to die and I was really hopping that post of Faster to have any meaning and that moderators really were interested in maintaining a civil level of discussion preventing that, on the lack of valid arguments, insults and bullying were used as last resource.

Unfortunately that is not the case and even if I have been participating here on the last 11 years and made a substantial contribution, including most of the more popular thread on sailnet ever, I cannot stand bullying, bad manners, incivility and rudeness. I had suffered that for a while waiting something to be done, but it is really too much and nothing had changed.

So, I left you with :
"a modern design built for bluewater sailing"" or is it a "Pig?" (you can chose among them the most inadequate qualification).


With "the ultimate sailing machine"


and sailboats with a ""bloated tennis shoe look"":





If you are among the few ones that cannot understand the sad irony of this, you can always do something about it: trow some more insults at me!





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

Last edited by PCP; 11-07-2015 at 02:55 PM.
PCP is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CE Category A Production Boats ARE Blue Water Boats smackdaddy Boat Review and Purchase Forum 342 11-22-2017 10:29 AM
Resale value: production vs semi-production WindyT Cruising & Liveaboard Forum 44 12-16-2016 02:18 PM
Production buckets and the limits Bene505 Cruising & Liveaboard Forum 91 10-29-2014 11:38 PM
What $ value goes beyond Production Limits? sea_hunter General Discussion (sailing related) 43 02-08-2012 05:57 PM
Modern Production Boats Don Casey Seamanship Articles 0 12-13-1999 08:00 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome