Peter Johnstone

PLEASE SAY A PRAYER FOR RAINMAKER'S CREW

Recommended Posts

Sooooooo....is the "official" story that they had one working engine and one with a fouled prop? I guess we'd have to conclude that as the only logical circumstance given the comments made by those "in the know" at this point...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm truly saddened by the complete lack of HARD facts in this sad situation.

 

Over the years, I've received tremendous value from my time here on SA.

 

I truly enjoyed the evolution of the Flying Tiger 10m. Bought one. Had the great pleasure of meeting Bob Perry -- and enjoyed a great dinner at his place on the sound. SA gave me a lot of great experiences....

 

I've learned SO much from this awesome community.

 

I'm writing this from Guam onboard my amazing boat. An Atlantic 55. I've crossed the pacific, heading for the Palau, then the Philippines in a couple of days. So far my journey has been a safe one. No doubt, some of my decisions where made based on knowledge absorbed in the time spent reading here on SA. I want to keep sailing safely and was truly hoping to add to my knowledge base from informed analysis.

 

There was a bit of good dialogue generated over in the Cruising Anarchy forum concerning big cats/heavy weather -- but it's fizzled because there's no FACTS to digest from Rainmaker to help add to the knowledge base.

 

I really thought that SA stood for FACTS. Really good analysis by a great community of people FAR more knowledgeable than myself. My goal is to sail many more 10s of thousands of SAFE miles on my awesome, and very much cousin to a GB (albeit the poor cousin!), boat.

 

I'm truly asking myself what's hapoened to SA? Have I learned anything at all to help me with my goal of keeping my voyage safe? Nope. Wondering if it's worth investing my time here anymore.

 

I've gotta say, this isn't the SA of old.... Am I outa line here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too am absolutely amazed to keep checking in here only to mind more nothing.

That's a bummer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooooooo....is the "official" story that they had one working engine and one with a fouled prop? I guess we'd have to conclude that as the only logical circumstance given the comments made by those "in the know" at this point...

Yes. And with only one working engine they could only manage to go around in a big counter clockwise circle, like a NASCAR race, so they abandoned ship .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post Colin D and pretty much my thoughts.

 

This is the SA editors own words about what Sailing Anarchy is:

 

The currently available sailing publications and web sites are often filled with stories that are something less than insightful. Oh sure you can read from some expert on how to win every race that you’ve ever entered, but the real stories about people and events in this sport are either ignored or whitewashed. When was the last time your read an Editorial that didn’t put you to sleep? Many boat reviews are nothing more than politically correct spin to ensure the advertising revenue is not jeopardized. It’s time to change all that. Sailing Anarchy will present topics, ideas and, critiques that have never been written about before. Anywhere.

 

Are they just words, not meant to actually mean something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post Colin D and pretty much my thoughts.

 

...

 

Are they just words, not meant to actually mean something?

They mean that puff pieces are believed for a while. "A while" has finished.

 

Now the only value of the site is in the forums. In which somehow nobody in the GB loop is posting.

 

PLEASE SAY A PRAYER FOR THE GUNBOAT SHAREHOLDERS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops I'm not lurking anymore...

 

Facebook has a pic of her on the hard... uploaded 2 hours ago.

 

17886_1561545134096889_39905630377555372

 

 

that's a GB 60

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post Colin D and pretty much my thoughts.

 

This is the SA editors own words about what Sailing Anarchy is:

 

The currently available sailing publications and web sites are often filled with stories that are something less than insightful. Oh sure you can read from some expert on how to win every race that you’ve ever entered, but the real stories about people and events in this sport are either ignored or whitewashed. When was the last time your read an Editorial that didn’t put you to sleep? Many boat reviews are nothing more than politically correct spin to ensure the advertising revenue is not jeopardized. It’s time to change all that. Sailing Anarchy will present topics, ideas and, critiques that have never been written about before. Anywhere.

 

Are they just words, not meant to actually mean something?

 

More applicable when written, before all the ads, when it was far more of a hobby for the Ed than anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Great post Colin D and pretty much my thoughts.

 

This is the SA editors own words about what Sailing Anarchy is:

 

The currently available sailing publications and web sites are often filled with stories that are something less than insightful. Oh sure you can read from some expert on how to win every race that you’ve ever entered, but the real stories about people and events in this sport are either ignored or whitewashed. When was the last time your read an Editorial that didn’t put you to sleep? Many boat reviews are nothing more than politically correct spin to ensure the advertising revenue is not jeopardized. It’s time to change all that. Sailing Anarchy will present topics, ideas and, critiques that have never been written about before. Anywhere.

 

Are they just words, not meant to actually mean something?

 

More applicable when written, before all the ads, when it was far more of a hobby for the Ed than anything else.

 

 

 

 

- are you conveying the skipper's account or critiquing the events based on his account?

- who have you interviewed/questioned about it? Is it just skipper focused or will you be addressing the design issues and appropriateness of marketing issues that people have raised here and elsewhere? eg are you talking to the designer? Hall?

- what sort of communication have you had with Johnstone and GB since the event?

- are you consulting with anybody on the content of your draft before it goes out, and who?

- why are the players commenting to you and not elsewhere?

Hey Clean, did you not want to answer these questions?

 

 

I'll let you answer them yourself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

- are you conveying the skipper's account or critiquing the events based on his account?

- who have you interviewed/questioned about it? Is it just skipper focused or will you be addressing the design issues and appropriateness of marketing issues that people have raised here and elsewhere? eg are you talking to the designer? Hall?

- what sort of communication have you had with Johnstone and GB since the event?

- are you consulting with anybody on the content of your draft before it goes out, and who?

- why are the players commenting to you and not elsewhere?

 

Hey Clean, did you not want to answer these questions?

I'll let you answer them yourself

Man, you're awesome. You don't even pretend to be competent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

There was a bit of good dialogue generated over in the Cruising Anarchy forum concerning big cats/heavy weather -- but it's fizzled because there's no FACTS to digest from Rainmaker to help add to the knowledge base.

...

 

Or possibly because of childish posts from dipshits. Here's how it ended.

 

 

 

Estar: ... but really not appropriate for this gunboat design given the vulnerability of the back face of the saloon ...

 

Maybe it was a 71kt gust:

 

 

Builder Peter Johnstone, who left his family’s J/Boats yacht empire to start Gunboat, says the safety fears about multihull yachts are overblown. Johnstone says he’s navigated through 70-knot gales in the North Atlantic by hauling down the sails, closing in the mammoth salon and pulling up the centerboards that help the boat track straight through the waves. When a rogue wave hits from the side, he says, the Gunboat just skids sideways with it, instead of absorbing tons of water on the deck like a monohull. http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2014/09/11/on-a-gunboat-catamaran-you-can-have-your-martini-and-30-knots-too/

 

Seems to me that skidding sideways would be hard on the rutters.

 

 

And might make the Harlisaki tip over.

 

Sorry, wrong thread, carry on.

 

 

 

 

I was having a little fun, but since I brought it to PJ's thread in Multihull Anarchy, what about that issue?

 

How will the rudders handle skidding sideways down the face of a large wave?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

...

 

There was a bit of good dialogue generated over in the Cruising Anarchy forum concerning big cats/heavy weather -- but it's fizzled because there's no FACTS to digest from Rainmaker to help add to the knowledge base.

...

Or possibly because of childish posts from dipshits. Here's how it ended.

 

 

 

Estar: ... but really not appropriate for this gunboat design given the vulnerability of the back face of the saloon ...

 

Maybe it was a 71kt gust:

 

 

Builder Peter Johnstone, who left his familys J/Boats yacht empire to start Gunboat, says the safety fears about multihull yachts are overblown. Johnstone says hes navigated through 70-knot gales in the North Atlantic by hauling down the sails, closing in the mammoth salon and pulling up the centerboards that help the boat track straight through the waves. When a rogue wave hits from the side, he says, the Gunboat just skids sideways with it, instead of absorbing tons of water on the deck like a monohull. http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2014/09/11/on-a-gunboat-catamaran-you-can-have-your-martini-and-30-knots-too/

Seems to me that skidding sideways would be hard on the rutters.

 

 

And might make the Harlisaki tip over.

 

Sorry, wrong thread, carry on.

 

 

I was having a little fun, but since I brought it to PJ's thread in Multihull Anarchy, what about that issue?

 

How will the rudders handle skidding sideways down the face of a large wave?

Rudders are retractable too. If it's real snotty we'll pull a foot or two of rudder up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Man, you're awesome. You don't even pretend to be competent.

 

 

I definitely do not pretend to be competent at answering douchebags. I was really good at that...and then I quit the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Man, you're awesome. You don't even pretend to be competent.

 

I definitely do not pretend to be competent at answering douchebags. I was really good at that...and then I quit the law.

You were really good at law? Are you sure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?? you dangled us for a week for this? Ok, we thought the weather was fine, the boat is bitchin, couldn't see the front sail, really loud.

Wow, I feel very enlightened now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if some people would read their own scrivel before postin they would not have to ask who the douche is or who is competent or or

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nearly 2pm in the afternoon and a squall comes through where you can't see the jib. These don't come from nowhere......

 

My Next question to Chirs would be why didn't anyone wake you before it it was on RM? What were your standing orders regarding heavy weather?? Was the radar on? What was the squall front like before it hit?

 

The internal steering position onboard these boats create a false sense of security. If we have squalls around of 40kts this ain't no joke and crew should be alert especially onboard a performance multihull. But it seems the inside steering position takes you away from the connection to the outside world.

 

Sitting behind a wheel, autopilot on steering to apparent wind angles, looking at digital readouts on your B&G's and crew sipping coffe while it comes through in 40kt squalls doesn't sound overly safe. Each to their own though.

 

How dense was the air before it hit! What was the air temp and how much did it drop before the squall hit? These are things you'd only know when helming outside and it's shit to be outside (we did it in winter with snow) but it does give some warning of what's approaching.

 

Some more indepth details would be great.

 

Cheers,

 

Ssssspirit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody with a question you won't answer is a douchebag?

 

Nope. Guys who run around in the forums following my posts with nasty shit for 8 years are douchebags. But at least they help keep the lights on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

part two is exciting

Classic, your like a drift net, you catch all the fishes..... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

better news; i had to quit when i got to 2100 words, so there will be a part 3!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

better news; i had to quit when i got to 2100 words, so there will be a part 3!

cool.....

congrats on the soon to be parents.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

better news; i had to quit when i got to 2100 words, so there will be a part 3!

 

That's what I was asking in the other thread. How many parts and how many words is Great Expectations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to. Or what? Or people who want to know what happened might actually find out? Surely that's got to be stopped no matter what the cause.

 

You weren't a good lawyer. Hell, you weren't even a lousy lawyer. But it was your finest hour ...

 

Now you're just a lout who won't even claim to be good at anything. At least you understand that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The internal steering position onboard these boats create a false sense of security.

 

Yes, probably the single most dangerous innovation in modern multihulls.Yep. Can be. I have an Atlantc 55 -- it has two steering stations. When it turns to shite, I use the outside steering position because the situational awareness inside really sucks... Also, the outside station is conventional cable (vs. hydraulic on the inside wheel) so much better to feel loading on the rudders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The internal steering position onboard these boats create a false sense of security.

Yes, probably the single most dangerous innovation in modern multihulls.
Yep. Can be. I have an Atlantc 55 -- it has two steering stations. When it turns to shite, I use the outside steering position because the situational awareness inside really sucks... Also, the outside station is conventional cable (vs. hydraulic on the inside wheel) so much better to feel loading on the rudders.

 

Excellent point...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Estar: ... but really not appropriate for this gunboat design given the vulnerability of the back face of the saloon ...

 

Maybe it was a 71kt gust:

 

 

Builder Peter Johnstone, who left his familys J/Boats yacht empire to start Gunboat, says the safety fears about multihull yachts are overblown. Johnstone says hes navigated through 70-knot gales in the North Atlantic by hauling down the sails, closing in the mammoth salon and pulling up the centerboards that help the boat track straight through the waves. When a rogue wave hits from the side, he says, the Gunboat just skids sideways with it, instead of absorbing tons of water on the deck like a monohull. http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2014/09/11/on-a-gunboat-catamaran-you-can-have-your-martini-and-30-knots-too/

Seems to me that skidding sideways would be hard on the rutters.

 

 

And might make the Harlisaki tip over.

 

Sorry, wrong thread, carry on.

 

 

I was having a little fun, but since I brought it to PJ's thread in Multihull Anarchy, what about that issue?

 

How will the rudders handle skidding sideways down the face of a large wave?

Rudders are retractable too. If it's real snotty we'll pull a foot or two of rudder up.

 

 

Interesting. Are these in a giant cassette like a beach cat? Do they make them retractable to make the boat beachable, to allow sideways skidding, or for some other reasons? Can you bring them all the way up when fighting a fish to eliminate any possibility of fouling? Or when fighting a mast, as the case may be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The internal steering position onboard these boats create a false sense of security.

Yes, probably the single most dangerous innovation in modern multihulls.
Yep. Can be. I have an Atlantc 55 -- it has two steering stations. When it turns to shite, I use the outside steering position because the situational awareness inside really sucks... Also, the outside station is conventional cable (vs. hydraulic on the inside wheel) so much better to feel loading on the rudders.

 

Excellent point...

 

 

Hell, it ain't just on multihulls, either... With the proliferation of full cockpit enclosures on cruising boats today, it's astonishing how insulated from their surroundings many drivers of such boats have become inside their clear vinyl cocoons...

 

Few better examples of this, than when running a faster powerboat on the ICW... Coming up behind the vast majority of fully enclosed boats plowing along, it is virtually guaranteed they'll be completely unaware of your approach, until you've gotten their attention with a horn signal, a VHF call, or having to run far enough up alongside until you're in their peripheral vision...

 

Even folks like Hamish and Kate Laird, who run high latitude charters in places like Antarctica and Greenland aboard their Chuck Paine-designed expedition yacht SEAL, declined to have an inside steering station, feeling it is far more important to be on deck in such harsh environments, in order to be better attuned to changing conditions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yep. Can be. I have an Atlantc 55 -- it has two steering stations. When it turns to shite, I use the outside steering position because the situational awareness inside really sucks... Also, the outside station is conventional cable (vs. hydraulic on the inside wheel) so much better to feel loading on the rudders.

 

Colin -

 

Curious your perspective on the CW forward cockpit design. I agree the general idea that outside steering stations provide better situational awareness. But with the forward cockpit it was still quite limited compared aft cockpit designs. Don't get me wrong. I liked the theory of it but did not find the reality so appealing. With the forward cockpit and the closed pilot house just behind you blocking wind and sound and vision, I still felt cut-off from what was happening. Could not feel the breeze strength or shifts well, could not see or hear the waves well till they were on us, etc... and most of the Atlantics I have seen have fairly limited instrumentation in the forward cockpit so the outside helm didn't have that as an aid as well. I absolutely get you on the difference between the hydraulic and cable steering. Miss my tillers on these big cats which is why I love some of the Outremers. Anyway, my conclusion was that upwind the forward cockpit design was wet, and downwind (where you typically find yourself in survival conditions) it was still not much (if any) better in terms of situational awareness than the inside pilothouse. Wondering if you encountered same with re limitations of the forward cockpit of the Atlantic and what if any changes you made to address it.

 

Not bashing CW or the Atlantic series. I am more a CW fan than GB (though I feel the GB team and crew are getting short shift from many folks including you but that's SA I guess).

 

Wess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colin D makes an excellent point in regards internal steering. IMO there are various trends in multihulls (and a few leaners, Beneteau SENSE comes to mind) that for my part, I wouldn't go to sea with:

 

1. halyards/lines which are led beneath panels/beneath deck

2. engine access hatches in the transom/sterns rather than from within the boat
3. open design of the cockpit area, no bulwarks/raised crossbeam area between the pit and the sterns
4. forward cockpit - I shudder to think of these things filling with water when a big greenie comes aboard
5. large salon windows

6. Bluff/vertical window/cabin fronts

 

It is also worth considering that had RM deployed a sea anchor, there might have been some control/stability in regards the freighter alongside (was RM moving violently, laying beam on?); also might have allowed the crew to clear props etc; might have allowed a relatively calmer situation to wait out the worst to effect repairs/prop clearance

 

 

in regards steering, I too would like a tiller option, but the Whitlock boxes my boat has are pretty damned kewl

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my impulse rant on design and seaworthiness, heavily influenced lately by this thread and the various, intriguing opinions from a multitude of different backgrounds. I know it's not a completely perfect comparison but just bear with me:

 

Why do we think of yachts so much differently than cars? Statistically, even if you sail a lot (full time living), one is far, far more likely to die in or be involved in a potentially fatal automobile accident than in a boating accident. So I'm wondering if everyone commenting on the safety vs dangers of these designs is as picky about whatever car is in their driveway (presumably all Volvos and monster trucks?). I'm guilty of being a snob about boats, but I just realized that I have never once taken safety into consideration while buying or riding in a car (other than the driver, and one farm truck that should probably have been condemned).

 

As with cars (I would say even more so), everything in boat design is a compromise. Every time you step in either car or boat you are entrusting your life to it - there is a real potential that you may be put in a situation where your life depends on the design and construction of that vehicle. So with cars, they will all have basic standards of design, minimum required loading/crash ratios, basic safety equipment, etc. And assuming that they have come from a reputable company, they are marketed as accepted as 'safe enough'. Beyond that, it's all just a preference of features and priority of design compromises, that each individual has to decide on for himself. So maybe the Prius slower than you'd like it to be when merging onto a busy interstate. Or maybe the F-350 is impact-proof but has a higher tendency to roll over. Or maybe you have a Huge (numbers, not weight!) family and need that minivan with cup holders and DVD players. You buy what you need and want, and are satisfied that the car has been built to reasonable standards with necessary safety equipment, then you put your wife and kids in them and go play chicken with your lives on a highway with drunks doing 95. Would you buy a Lamborghini and refuse to take it on the freeway because you were nervous about its crash stability in collisions over 50mph? I'm guessing not. Cuz if so, the. You'd be the guy driving the Volvo instead. Does that the mean that we can start a new thread judging and condemning cars that 'shouldn't be on the road' because they are not 'the safest that a car can possibly be"? Don't think so. Would take a lot of incidents with that model to catch attention like that.

 

So too, with boats. Clearly GB makes a quality product, with "millions of miles sailed" according to the company, and minimal accidents or failures. Now is a Gunboat a "Volvo of the sea"? Of course not. Neither is a CW, Atlantic, J Boat, Beneteau, or most other production boats out there. Want a Volvo for the sea? - check out a K&M Besteaver.

 

i see it as one big compromise, between absolute safety and 'acceptable safety'. Buy a well made product, from a reputable yard, make sure she has the proper safety kit, and guess what - going to see is always a dice roll ain't it? All we can do is minimize risks but there is no perfect boat, just that one that is 'perfect for you'. There are plenty of boats that have been sailed around the world many times that we would look at and cringe at the thought of sailing across a bay in. Sir Robin point in case - if someone attempted an ocean passage today in Suhali, this forum/jury would seem them with definity as a loon. A rescue during that trip and he's a negligent D-Bag risking USCG lives. But he sails around the world and survives he's a hero!

 

Point is, there's no point really and no one is right or wrong. If there were a perfect boat that covered every option and every priority without compromise, they would surely be the only boat builder left, right? So buy/sail quality shit and take all the right kit, make sure you're competent enough to handle the boat and weather (or hire someone who is) and say your prayers. For me, my comfort level is on a mono-slug with a comically large displacement and a keel that keeps the right side up no matter what, and a heavy metal rig that will heel over and spill wind for hours before she breaks. But then again maybe one day my little Bene gets overtaken by a deep nasty low that a multi was able to outrun.....!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The comparison is intriguing, certainly. But there are cars designed for different conditions, and courses, and it would be inappropriate to use a Porsche 911 on off road surfaces, or to take a prius onto the racetrack. It should also be pointed out that when you step out of the car, you are not immediately in a potentially lethal environment. Furthermore, the safety features built into roads, traffic signals, 911 services and drivers education courses do not find strong parallels in your comparison. The USCG covers a tiny portion of navigable waters, just as an example.

 

My point has been that just as it is inappropriate to take the 911 off road, it may not be appropriate to play tag with winter weather systems in the north Atlantic with a GB55. Those routing choices make more sense for Jeeps on land, and catamarans with more substantial enclosures out of Hatteras. If Toyota starts an advert campaign claiming their cute fuel efficient car is capable on the Baja course, that would be trigger my questioning attitude as well! (I don't think that comparison is fair to the GB55, but it helps to illustrate my point.)

 

The GB 55 is the ideal boat for all of the sailing I'd like to be doing. But for surviving a N Atlantic winter storm? I'd much rather be in a more substantial vessel. I therefore think of the GB55 as a coastal cruiser. If I were the owner of a GB 55 I'd make sure my crew took my opinion into account when making routing decisions, especially if my son(s) were aboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair points and yes my comparison has limitations clearly.

 

Would you drive a convertible coupe on the interstate?

 

Cuz I still hold that it is pretty similar. Not at all the car I would wanna be in a crash in. It's for cruising town and maybe some rural parkways. But I wouldn't think twice about jumping in one for a road trip down 95. It's all fine till it's not and it is literally gambling with stats, but somehow we live with that as far as cars are concerned.

 

Not picking at a bone here at all just intrigued by my own (and other's?) rationale compared to other 'every day shit' we do!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep - in fact they already have. Dudes a great sailor, dealt with an extreme situation professionally and kept everyone safe, and is now all the wiser and more experienced for it.

 

You can call it a mistake all ya want man, but hundreds of yachts exit the E Coast during the Winter Including ALL of the superyachts that are restricted to the NE region until November due to hurricane season and insurance. Maybe a higher risk later in the season sure, but you pick the window that you can get and it looked like a good one when they left. No worse than leaving early in September and catching a hurricane coming at ya - ever heard of Sandy?

 

And what's your deal with young captains? Do I need to rattle off a list of the famous 'young' offshore skippers of the world? Wtf do you consider young and anyways do you even know how old CB is? And does it matter? Wanna talk ocean miles? Cuz that's a more relevant number than age, and I bet his number is higher than yours in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

In this case the crew and owner pulled the boat in front of two weather freight trains only to have gear failure that slow the vessel in the path of the roaring freight trains. The captain hit the eject button for all and survived. Will another owner hire him?

 

 

I liked your 'Alaska' analogy better, parking in front of a freight train sounds suicidal, and this wasn't that. The captain prepared well, planned pretty well, and unfortunately got caught by a storm he didn't/couldn't outrun. Like Harold (Music Man), many skippers would like the sadder but wiser skipper. He is a solid sailor by every account, and all of us (even Newbies Who Know it All) probably have much to learn. Can't wait for Part Deux.

 

Hope its not part duh.

 

BTW, what are you gonna do when you've posted >200 times? Once a Newbie, always a newbie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way - be point of my first posts wasn't to actually compare specific boats to specific cars, only to raise the subject about how we think about standardS differently. But It's pretty ridiculous to compare a Gunboat to a Miata.

 

And would you have said that if RM made it safe and sound to the Carib? Or did you just write off the boat as a 'Miata' after the fact because something happened. What if 5 55's made it down and up 5 times? Then what? And what if one then went down same conditions? Still Miatas? And do you honestly think a skipper of that caliber would be negligent enough to drive a 'Miata' into that passage? Perhaps there is a lower limit for that boat and perhaps they found it, but yoI've gotta admit that you would have been in a lonely corner if you were naysaying the boat from her launch. She's not my favorite boat but I sailed her offshore in October and I'd have taken her offshore again with no qualms. Especially with that particular 'young captain' .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fair points and yes my comparison has limitations clearly.

 

Would you drive a convertible coupe on the interstate?

 

Cuz I still hold that it is pretty similar. Not at all the car I would wanna be in a crash in. It's for cruising town and maybe some rural parkways. But I wouldn't think twice about jumping in one for a road trip down 95. It's all fine till it's not and it is literally gambling with stats, but somehow we live with that as far as cars are concerned.

 

Not picking at a bone here at all just intrigued by my own (and other's?) rationale compared to other 'every day shit' we do!?

 

 

In this case the crew and owner pulled the boat in front of two weather freight trains only to have gear failure that slow the vessel in the path of the roaring freight trains. The captain hit the eject button for all and survived. Will another owner hire him?

 

 

This sock is a/k/a Canal Bottom and I've just sent off a note to the Ed to clean the sock drawer. What a pussy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

In this case the crew and owner pulled the boat in front of two weather freight trains only to have gear failure that slow the vessel in the path of the roaring freight trains. The captain hit the eject button for all and survived. Will another owner hire him?

 

 

I liked your 'Alaska' analogy better, parking in front of a freight train sounds suicidal, and this wasn't that. The captain prepared well, planned pretty well, and unfortunately got caught by a storm he didn't/couldn't outrun. Like Harold (Music Man), many skippers would like the sadder but wiser skipper. He is a solid sailor by every account, and all of us (even Newbies Who Know it All) probably have much to learn. Can't wait for Part Deux.

 

Hope its not part duh.

 

BTW, what are you gonna do when you've posted >200 times? Once a Newbie, always a newbie?

 

 

Part two has been up all day. sailinganarchy.com

it would be inappropriate to use a Porsche 911 on off road surfaces

 

Yet another SA genius strikes!

 

5586674026_2ee667d078.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Newbie Knows / Canal Bottom - you entirely avoided the most important question I posed directly at you:

 

1) since you seem to "know it all", how old do

You think CB is?

 

2) how old do you think 'he should be'

 

3) how old would he have to be for you to disregard/not even mention his age?

 

4) how experienced and competent must a captain be before others look like complete fools for bringing up his age as a skape goat because they don't know enough about a particular situation to make an educated critique on the factors that actually mattered!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well played Clean sweet Porsche. Bet he's got a ditch kit ie. Spare tire in the trunk just in case some unforeseen shit happens - Cuz that shit happens off-road.. Didn't keep him in the garage though did it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot more info in part two. Useful, learned some stuff, as I am sure GB has as well. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

By the way - be point of my first posts wasn't to actually compare specific boats to specific cars, only to raise the subject about how we think about standardS differently. But It's pretty ridiculous to compare a Gunboat to a Miata.

 

And would you have said that if RM made it safe and sound to the Carib? Or did you just write off the boat as a 'Miata' after the fact because something happened. What if 5 55's made it down and up 5 times? Then what? And what if one then went down same conditions? Still Miatas? And do you honestly think a skipper of that caliber would be negligent enough to drive a 'Miata' into that passage? Perhaps there is a lower limit for that boat and perhaps they found it, but yoI've gotta admit that you would have been in a lonely corner if you were naysaying the boat from her launch. She's not my favorite boat but I sailed her offshore in October and I'd have taken her offshore again with no qualms. Especially with that particular 'young captain' .

 

My sister along with many loved her Miata, just as many luv their 911 soft top. My point is going alone with the plan to beat a front in the Alaskan winter comes with risk. Same with this Gunboat 55 the plan was to ride any issue downwind, with no other possible exit path. The young skipper got all that and within 10 minutes of the boat unable to make real forward progress made the call to get the passengers and crew off. No matter how secure they cleaned up the boat. Two weather freight trains would overrun them for two days or more. Eject!

1) More Cooper Mini's have driven North of the Arctic Circle than GB55's have sailed past Hatteras in winter.

 

2) Both had different motivations, but both were dumb moves. Using the wrong tool for a needed job only lasts so long.

 

3) The second time they tried it, one Mini out of a convoy was left abandoned in a Northern Quebec ditch, even a front end loader couldn't drag it out after a day & half with 20 bodies helping.

 

4) Your average Facebook Mom could take one look at a Mini and know it was the wrong tool to drive to the Arctic Circle in January. Your average weekend warrior sailor could say the same about the GB55. And did. Many times.

 

It could have made the trip, and on any other day it probably would have.

 

That doesn't mean a Mini should drive North of the Arctic Circle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-180-0-13987600-1424929720.jpg

Porsche 959

 

I don't know, Porsche seemed think it was Ok.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-19044-0-14176300-1424931445_thumb.pngpost-19044-0-03724200-1424931472_thumb.jpgpost-19044-0-91546100-1424931498_thumb.jpg

He's safe tho, that's a paved road.

Somebody forgot to tell these guys to stay on paved roads......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yep. Can be. I have an Atlantc 55 -- it has two steering stations. When it turns to shite, I use the outside steering position because the situational awareness inside really sucks... Also, the outside station is conventional cable (vs. hydraulic on the inside wheel) so much better to feel loading on the rudders.

 

Colin -

 

Curious your perspective on the CW forward cockpit design. I agree the general idea that outside steering stations provide better situational awareness. But with the forward cockpit it was still quite limited compared aft cockpit designs. Don't get me wrong. I liked the theory of it but did not find the reality so appealing. With the forward cockpit and the closed pilot house just behind you blocking wind and sound and vision, I still felt cut-off from what was happening. Could not feel the breeze strength or shifts well, could not see or hear the waves well till they were on us, etc... and most of the Atlantics I have seen have fairly limited instrumentation in the forward cockpit so the outside helm didn't have that as an aid as well. I absolutely get you on the difference between the hydraulic and cable steering. Miss my tillers on these big cats which is why I love some of the Outremers. Anyway, my conclusion was that upwind the forward cockpit design was wet, and downwind (where you typically find yourself in survival conditions) it was still not much (if any) better in terms of situational awareness than the inside pilothouse. Wondering if you encountered same with re limitations of the forward cockpit of the Atlantic and what if any changes you made to address it.

 

Not bashing CW or the Atlantic series. I am more a CW fan than GB (though I feel the GB team and crew are getting short shift from many folks including you but that's SA I guess).

 

Wess

Hey Wess,

 

This thread is going in so many different directions right now, I'm hesitating to open-up yet another side thread!

 

First off, I'm a SERIOUSLY conservative sailor. I have no deadlines or schedule. For example, six weeks ago, we left PNG heading for Palau. On our way there, saw some stuff in the forecast that made me uncomfortable, so diverted to Guam. Glad we did, because the weather I saw developed into a full storm and dumped on the pope during his visit to the Philippines...! Six weeks later, we've enjoyed our time here in the good ol' USA. Ordered and had delivered a new Genoa, did lots of projects, and ready to continue on to Palau.

 

On 'Segue'' we have COMPLETE sailing instruments in the front cockpit -- including a redundant MFD chartplotter/RADAR. Actually, better instrumentation outside than in. On passage, particularly at night, the watch stander is always outside. While we have great visibility inside, the tinting of the glazings in the pilot house is such that it's pretty much impossible to see potential obstacles.

 

Going back to situational awareness. Due to the composite construction -- and its attendant awesome noise-proofing -- being outside in the cockpit -- forward OR aft -- gives me all the input I need to let the hairs on the back of my neck do their job! Inside, it's absolutely astonishing how quiet it is -- in even the gnarliest conditions. The biggest advantage of the front cockpit is that ALL the controls are right there... Banging in a reef takes 40 seconds. Blowing the main sheet takes 1.

 

In terms of "wetness". Yeah, driving upwind hard can get a little wet. 'Though less than you might think. Watching the footage from the Volvo, we're much drier in comparison. This is due to the beam of the boat as well as the spray rails. Most of the nasty stuff gets blown off to leeward. Where we can get wet is beam reaching with lots of whitecaps. If a whitecap hits us just right, we get a pretty good dunking!

 

We have full-length bench seats in the front cockpit, so watch standing is hardly a chore. It's the best place on the boat!

 

I dunno. I really like the security of sail handling in the middle of the boat -- right at the base of the mast.

 

Someone posted "yeah, but if you take a green meanie, it would fill the cockpit". Yep. Sure. Same as an aft cockpit. There are six 3" scuppers. And in conditions where the cockpit could fill, you can count on the forward watertight door being closed! Don't know how long it would take to drain, but not worried about it. The cockpit isn't that large!

 

I don't want to, in ant way, fuel the CW vs. PJ debate. I respect the Gunboat. The 60 is sweet. It's not for me. If I want to race, I race in a race boat. I bought FT10m #26 to race. Had a blast -- and did get caught in a true microburst while doing the Lake Ontario 300 a few years ago -- with all the rags up. Was quite amused to watch the masthead anemometer reporting 5 knots while it was under water!

 

Where am I going with this? Not sure. I absolutely love my boat. Well, actually, it's my home -- live aboard full time. Did briefly consider a gunboat, but it was out of my price range. After many thousands of miles, I'm as happy today as the day when I put down my offer on 'Segue'. She's a TOUGH girl. She'll take anything the elements will throw at her. Yes, she can do 300+ days, but I don't ask her to do that. 200 is fine for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an obvious issue here with the amount of glass in the GB55's coachroof, and what happens when it gets broken. Not many boats have quite as much glass, but what about the hydraulics?

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat, but hydraiulics have been widely used for years: backstays, forestays, kickers, mast jacks, and clew outhauls. Plenty of boats have had hydraulic controls for most of that list, and plenty of them must have been dismasted.

 

So surely this hydraulic leakage-after-dismasting issue has been encountered before? Are there ways of avoiding it, apart from avoiding hydraulic controls?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yep. Can be. I have an Atlantc 55 -- it has two steering stations. When it turns to shite, I use the outside steering position because the situational awareness inside really sucks... Also, the outside station is conventional cable (vs. hydraulic on the inside wheel) so much better to feel loading on the rudders.

Colin -

 

Curious your perspective on the CW forward cockpit design. I agree the general idea that outside steering stations provide better situational awareness. But with the forward cockpit it was still quite limited compared aft cockpit designs. Don't get me wrong. I liked the theory of it but did not find the reality so appealing. With the forward cockpit and the closed pilot house just behind you blocking wind and sound and vision, I still felt cut-off from what was happening. Could not feel the breeze strength or shifts well, could not see or hear the waves well till they were on us, etc... and most of the Atlantics I have seen have fairly limited instrumentation in the forward cockpit so the outside helm didn't have that as an aid as well. I absolutely get you on the difference between the hydraulic and cable steering. Miss my tillers on these big cats which is why I love some of the Outremers. Anyway, my conclusion was that upwind the forward cockpit design was wet, and downwind (where you typically find yourself in survival conditions) it was still not much (if any) better in terms of situational awareness than the inside pilothouse. Wondering if you encountered same with re limitations of the forward cockpit of the Atlantic and what if any changes you made to address it.

 

Not bashing CW or the Atlantic series. I am more a CW fan than GB (though I feel the GB team and crew are getting short shift from many folks including you but that's SA I guess).

 

Wess

Hey Wess,

 

This thread is going in so many different directions right now, I'm hesitating to open-up yet another side thread!

 

First off, I'm a SERIOUSLY conservative sailor. I have no deadlines or schedule. For example, six weeks ago, we left PNG heading for Palau. On our way there, saw some stuff in the forecast that made me uncomfortable, so diverted to Guam. Glad we did, because the weather I saw developed into a full storm and dumped on the pope during his visit to the Philippines...! Six weeks later, we've enjoyed our time here in the good ol' USA. Ordered and had delivered a new Genoa, did lots of projects, and ready to continue on to Palau.

 

On 'Segue'' we have COMPLETE sailing instruments in the front cockpit -- including a redundant MFD chartplotter/RADAR. Actually, better instrumentation outside than in. On passage, particularly at night, the watch stander is always outside. While we have great visibility inside, the tinting of the glazings in the pilot house is such that it's pretty much impossible to see potential obstacles.

 

Going back to situational awareness. Due to the composite construction -- and its attendant awesome noise-proofing -- being outside in the cockpit -- forward OR aft -- gives me all the input I need to let the hairs on the back of my neck do their job! Inside, it's absolutely astonishing how quiet it is -- in even the gnarliest conditions. The biggest advantage of the front cockpit is that ALL the controls are right there... Banging in a reef takes 40 seconds. Blowing the main sheet takes 1.

 

In terms of "wetness". Yeah, driving upwind hard can get a little wet. 'Though less than you might think. Watching the footage from the Volvo, we're much drier in comparison. This is due to the beam of the boat as well as the spray rails. Most of the nasty stuff gets blown off to leeward. Where we can get wet is beam reaching with lots of whitecaps. If a whitecap hits us just right, we get a pretty good dunking!

 

We have full-length bench seats in the front cockpit, so watch standing is hardly a chore. It's the best place on the boat!

 

I dunno. I really like the security of sail handling in the middle of the boat -- right at the base of the mast.

 

Someone posted "yeah, but if you take a green meanie, it would fill the cockpit". Yep. Sure. Same as an aft cockpit. There are six 3" scuppers. And in conditions where the cockpit could fill, you can count on the forward watertight door being closed! Don't know how long it would take to drain, but not worried about it. The cockpit isn't that large!

 

I don't want to, in ant way, fuel the CW vs. PJ debate. I respect the Gunboat. The 60 is sweet. It's not for me. If I want to race, I race in a race boat. I bought FT10m #26 to race. Had a blast -- and did get caught in a true microburst while doing the Lake Ontario 300 a few years ago -- with all the rags up. Was quite amused to watch the masthead anemometer reporting 5 knots while it was under water!

 

Where am I going with this? Not sure. I absolutely love my boat. Well, actually, it's my home -- live aboard full time. Did briefly consider a gunboat, but it was out of my price range. After many thousands of miles, I'm as happy today as the day when I put down my offer on 'Segue'. She's a TOUGH girl. She'll take anything the elements will throw at her. Yes, she can do 300+ days, but I don't ask her to do that. 200 is fine for us.

 

Yea thanks for not making it a PJ/CW thing. Like some of the stuff both have done and cringe at some of the stuff both have done (or said). End of the day though I would be pretty happy with either boat.

 

I have sailed the Atlantics a bit but don't want to make this a tangent to the shit-fight that this thread is. Will drop you a PM when I get a spare second. I definately had a love hate affair wit the forward cockpit (and the inside station).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an obvious issue here with the amount of glass in the GB55's coachroof, and what happens when it gets broken. Not many boats have quite as much glass, but what about the hydraulics?

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat, but hydraiulics have been widely used for years: backstays, forestays, kickers, mast jacks, and clew outhauls. Plenty of boats have had hydraulic controls for most of that list, and plenty of them must have been dismasted.

 

So surely this hydraulic leakage-after-dismasting issue has been encountered before? Are there ways of avoiding it, apart from avoiding hydraulic controls?

There are, but adding complexity to hydraulics usually causes more problems than it solves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an obvious issue here with the amount of glass in the GB55's coachroof, and what happens when it gets broken. Not many boats have quite as much glass, but what about the hydraulics?

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat, but hydraiulics have been widely used for years: backstays, forestays, kickers, mast jacks, and clew outhauls. Plenty of boats have had hydraulic controls for most of that list, and plenty of them must have been dismasted.

 

So surely this hydraulic leakage-after-dismasting issue has been encountered before? Are there ways of avoiding it, apart from avoiding hydraulic controls?

 

Probably the closest I've ever come to falling off a large boat, was after slipping on an undetected hydraulic leak onto a side deck, at night... In flat calm water, @ 300 feet above sea level, on the freakin' ERIE CANAL, of all places... :-)

 

One of the primary reasons why I suggested the use of the tender as a possible means of attempting the transfer to the OCEAN CRESCENT... I think it's likely very fortunate that they never really had the opportunity to try to step off RAINMAKER and scamper up those cargo nets... One slip, someone falls in the gap between the boat and that steel wall, and you could easily have a someone crushed to death in an instant...

 

I'm very content to sail a boat of a size modest enough that I have no need of hydraulics whatsoever, other than the fluid that goes into my little Hurth gearbox... :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking of how many of the boats I have known had standalone hydraulic backstays. The hydraulic tensioner was simply a unit mounted inline between the stay and the deck fitting, with no connectors to anything else.

 

However, I know that bigger boats tend to have centralised hydraulic systems, which leaves hydraulic pipes and hoses vulnerable to a dismasting.

 

So, if adding mechanisms to prevent those hydraulics becoming dangerous just adds other dangers, would it be fair to say that hydraulics introduce an element of unseaworthiness to a boat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking of how many of the boats I have known had standalone hydraulic backstays. The hydraulic tensioner was simply a unit mounted inline between the stay and the deck fitting, with no connectors to anything else.However, I know that bigger boats tend to have centralised hydraulic systems, which leaves hydraulic pipes and hoses vulnerable to a dismasting.So, if adding mechanisms to prevent those hydraulics becoming dangerous just adds other dangers, would it be fair to say that hydraulics introduce an element of unseaworthiness to a boat?

Quick disconnect hydraulic couplers which seal when disconnecting could easily be placed in a convenient position in the lines. They also have a version which disconnect when the line comes under a predetermined load which are self sealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say not.

First off, dismasting is a big deal. My mast would kill you dead if it landed on you - it took 6 people to pick it up and move it around the yard. A mast coming down is not a routine event you would be planning for unless you are totally nuts. Not that you wouldn't have an emergency plan, but if you think odds are high the mast is coming off in the near future you already screwed up.

Second, you can plan hydraulics to be hard or easy to deal with. A hydraulic backstay adjuster and a boom vang can be separated from the rig fairly easily if you plan the attachment methods for this. You can get dry-break hydraulic fittings so you can get the hoses off without spewing fluid everywhere.

As for RM, all the glass, poor isolation of wiring from water, and external engine hatches were a far bigger deal than hydraulic fluid IMHO. They only had one good engine that they tangled up and the other one had issues that were not getting fixed in bad weather because of how the engines were accessed.

 

I was thinking of how many of the boats I have known had standalone hydraulic backstays. The hydraulic tensioner was simply a unit mounted inline between the stay and the deck fitting, with no connectors to anything else.

However, I know that bigger boats tend to have centralised hydraulic systems, which leaves hydraulic pipes and hoses vulnerable to a dismasting.

So, if adding mechanisms to prevent those hydraulics becoming dangerous just adds other dangers, would it be fair to say that hydraulics introduce an element of unseaworthiness to a boat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's not enough detail in the story to tell. IDK what hydraulics the GB has, or if the crew released the pressure before cutting the hoses. There is the potential for a big mess. I did a rough overnight race in a MORC boat years ago...diesel fuel coming out the vent onto the deck, mixing with green water we were taking aboard. Made the deck a skating rink. Half the crew was inexperienced, made me concerned enough to nix the spin on the ensuing DDW leg, we poled out the blade and played it safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say not.

First off, dismasting is a big deal. My mast would kill you dead if it landed on you - it took 6 people to pick it up and move it around the yard. A mast coming down is not a routine event you would be planning for unless you are totally nuts. Not that you wouldn't have an emergency plan, but if you think odds are high the mast is coming off in the near future you already screwed up.

Surely it's like a hard grounding? Something which only happens if you screw up badly, and should be rare, but which should also be survivable. If there are tweaks to be done which make it mote survivable, then when they are needed they will be very valuable.

 

 

Second, you can plan hydraulics to be hard or easy to deal with. A hydraulic backstay adjuster and a boom vang can be separated from the rig fairly easily if you plan the attachment methods for this. You can get dry-break hydraulic fittings so you can get the hoses off without spewing fluid everywhere.

I didn't know about them. But if they are available, was Rainmaker fitted with them? If no, why the omission ... and if yes, why the hydraulic fluid everywhere?

 

As for RM, all the glass, poor isolation of wiring from water, and external engine hatches were a far bigger deal than hydraulic fluid IMHO. They only had one good engine that they tangled up and the other one had issues that were not getting fixed in bad weather because of how the engines were accessed.

Yes, those were probably bigger issues. Tho from what we have heard so far the real killer issue may have the loss of the ability to seal the port hull. If you can't stop a hull from flooding, the rest is detail.

 

So it turns out that there were a lot of vulnerabilities on that boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat,

 

In the mast, just mainsheet and i think maybe outhaul. No more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat,

In the mast, just mainsheet and i think maybe outhaul. No more.

 

That's what I guessed. There's no vang.

 

So did your interviews establish whether there were dry-=break connectors for those two items?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat,

 

In the mast, just mainsheet and i think maybe outhaul. No more.

 

 

With seawater coming on deck it would not take much, the story reflects they went to work very rapidly with knives cutting whatever was connected. Then the story notes hydraulic fluid in the skippers eyes. Something was moving the fluid around whether that was line pressure or sea water/spray we have not been told.. yet?

 

Is there a reservoir with an electric pump or an old school manifold and hand pump? What happens when you cut or nick an automated hydraulic trim pressure line?

 

We tried to be as calm as we could, but it was all a bit chaotic; I grab my ceramic knife, open the forward sliding windows, and begin cutting all the running rigging and hydraulic hoses. I get hydraulic fluid in my eyes, and George steps in to finish cutting the hoses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

In this case the crew and owner pulled the boat in front of two weather freight trains only to have gear failure that slow the vessel in the path of the roaring freight trains. The captain hit the eject button for all and survived. Will another owner hire him?

 

 

I liked your 'Alaska' analogy better, parking in front of a freight train sounds suicidal, and this wasn't that. The captain prepared well, planned pretty well, and unfortunately got caught by a storm he didn't/couldn't outrun. Like Harold (Music Man), many skippers would like the sadder but wiser skipper. He is a solid sailor by every account, and all of us (even Newbies Who Know it All) probably have much to learn. Can't wait for Part Deux.

 

Hope its not part duh.

 

BTW, what are you gonna do when you've posted >200 times? Once a Newbie, always a newbie?

 

 

Part two has been up all day. sailinganarchy.com

it would be inappropriate to use a Porsche 911 on off road surfaces

 

Yet another SA genius strikes!

 

5586674026_2ee667d078.jpg

 

 

This video sums up this whole thread http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/motoringvideo/10330099/Spectacular-airborne-Porsche-rally-crash-caught-on-camera.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether Porches or others, rally cars have major modifications to prepare them for that purpose. It's like if a Gunboat was extensively modified and reinforced to handle winter storms in the N Atlantic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat,

 

In the mast, just mainsheet and i think maybe outhaul. No more.

It looks as though the lines were pressurized when he cut them resulting in fluid in his eyes, dry breaks would solve this problem.

The window breaking is a more serious failure....I'm sure safety glass will be spec'd in future and a 'roll cage' built into the carbon cabin roof might help save the glass in a rig failure....

 

As I'm sure you know the 911 in your pic is not your average street car 911, but is one built for use on off road rally stages with hd suspension, shocks, brakes and skids for underbody protection...

About as far removed from a 911 as the Gunboat is from Ellen's Kingfisher....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat,

In the mast, just mainsheet and i think maybe outhaul. No more.

It looks as though the lines were pressurized when he cut them resulting in fluid in his eyes, dry breaks would solve this problem.

The window breaking is a more serious failure....I'm sure safety glass will be spec'd in future and a 'roll cage' built into the carbon cabin roof might help save the glass in a rig failure....

 

As I'm sure you know the 911 in your pic is not your average street car 911, but is one built for use on off road rally stages with hd suspension, shocks, brakes and skids for underbody protection...

About as far removed from a 911 as the Gunboat is from Ellen's Kingfisher....

 

 

i'm suirprised they don't consider some sort of plastic for windows - just for weight alone

 

the glass on these boats must be one of the heaviest things on the boat - i would imagine you could save hundreds of pounds up pretty high by using polycarbonate, and it would be stronger too.

 

i know it scratches, and might look crappy after a few years..., but it could be on a regular replacement schedule - another consumable.., just like sails.

 

i'm sure the cost isn't an issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As I'm sure you know the 911 in your pic is not your average street car 911, but is one built for use on off road rally stages with hd suspension, shocks, brakes and skids for underbody protection...

 

 

Homologated. Was available directly from Porsche, including the lights and paint. Maybe '78 -82 in that trim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

One of the issues in Raimaker's dismasting was how the rig failure left broken hydraulic pipes leaking slippery (and toxic) hydraulic fluid everywhere. I dunno how many hydraulic controls were on boat,

In the mast, just mainsheet and i think maybe outhaul. No more.

It looks as though the lines were pressurized when he cut them resulting in fluid in his eyes, dry breaks would solve this problem.

The window breaking is a more serious failure....I'm sure safety glass will be spec'd in future and a 'roll cage' built into the carbon cabin roof might help save the glass in a rig failure....

 

As I'm sure you know the 911 in your pic is not your average street car 911, but is one built for use on off road rally stages with hd suspension, shocks, brakes and skids for underbody protection...

About as far removed from a 911 as the Gunboat is from Ellen's Kingfisher....

i'm suirprised they don't consider some sort of plastic for windows - just for weight alone

 

the glass on these boats must be one of the heaviest things on the boat - i would imagine you could save hundreds of pounds up pretty high by using polycarbonate, and it would be stronger too.

 

i know it scratches, and might look crappy after a few years..., but it could be on a regular replacement schedule - another consumable.., just like sails.

 

i'm sure the cost isn't an issue

The first gen of GB'S had exactly that. And they were replaced for exactly that reason. PJ himself didn't like the longevity of the carbonate windows on Tribe, they had a lifespan of months before looking like shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As I'm sure you know the 911 in your pic is not your average street car 911, but is one built for use on off road rally stages with hd suspension, shocks, brakes and skids for underbody protection...

 

 

 

Homologated. Was available directly from Porsche, including the lights and paint. Maybe '78 -82 in that trim?

Not included in the homologated SC was the Dakar 4wd tranny. Had three knobs on the dash to adjust power distribution on the fly. Stupid rare to find one, even when they were racing competitively. Was used as the basis for the 959 drive train and eventually the same system ended up as the Carrera 4.

 

But if you did have one of the dozen or so Dakar SC's, then yes, graded dirt, sand, or a moose trail in a Newfoundland bog was no problem.

 

RWD 911SC...those things will swap ends in a straight line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just would like to see a pic of the bitching Yellowfin they caught.

Been ages since I had a decent fish taco.

 

 

If the kid had a GoPro running on his head as others have suggested? I bet there are all kinds of shots of Taco mixed with glass and hydraulic fluid when the GB 55 went into the just slide and float across the wavetop mode. PJ has claimed GB have found the ultimate equation balancing performance and safety, even claiming that at 70 knots all you need do is drop the sails, lift the boards and basically make yourself some hot chocolate as the boat slides side ways and is unsinkable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no indication the boat sank or the hot chocolate was lost, so they're not totally wrong ;)

 

I just would like to see a pic of the bitching Yellowfin they caught.
Been ages since I had a decent fish taco.

 

 

If the kid had a GoPro running on his head as others have suggested? I bet there are all kinds of shots of Taco mixed with glass and hydraulic fluid when the GB 55 went into the just slide and float across the wavetop mode. PJ has claimed GB have found the ultimate equation balancing performance and safety, even claiming that at 70 knots all you need do is drop the sails, lift the boards and basically make yourself some hot chocolate as the boat slides side ways and is unsinkable...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would say not.

First off, dismasting is a big deal. My mast would kill you dead if it landed on you - it took 6 people to pick it up and move it around the yard. A mast coming down is not a routine event you would be planning for unless you are totally nuts. Not that you wouldn't have an emergency plan, but if you think odds are high the mast is coming off in the near future you already screwed up.

Second, you can plan hydraulics to be hard or easy to deal with. A hydraulic backstay adjuster and a boom vang can be separated from the rig fairly easily if you plan the attachment methods for this. You can get dry-break hydraulic fittings so you can get the hoses off without spewing fluid everywhere.

As for RM, all the glass, poor isolation of wiring from water, and external engine hatches were a far bigger deal than hydraulic fluid IMHO. They only had one good engine that they tangled up and the other one had issues that were not getting fixed in bad weather because of how the engines were accessed.

 

 

I was thinking of how many of the boats I have known had standalone hydraulic backstays. The hydraulic tensioner was simply a unit mounted inline between the stay and the deck fitting, with no connectors to anything else.

 

However, I know that bigger boats tend to have centralised hydraulic systems, which leaves hydraulic pipes and hoses vulnerable to a dismasting.

 

So, if adding mechanisms to prevent those hydraulics becoming dangerous just adds other dangers, would it be fair to say that hydraulics introduce an element of unseaworthiness to a boat?

The dry break hydraulic fittings I have used in the past have needed to be depressurised before disconnect. This may be difficult if the rig is down using the conventional controls, particularly if the electrics are full of water.

It also requires the mast to break and fall in such a way that the quick disconnects are accessible. That would require design consideration pretty damn early

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct. If the hydraulic hoses are charged/under pressure, the quick connects will be very difficult to break open, and, relieving the pressure is most often accomplished electrically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would say not.

First off, dismasting is a big deal. My mast would kill you dead if it landed on you - it took 6 people to pick it up and move it around the yard. A mast coming down is not a routine event you would be planning for unless you are totally nuts. Not that you wouldn't have an emergency plan, but if you think odds are high the mast is coming off in the near future you already screwed up.

Second, you can plan hydraulics to be hard or easy to deal with. A hydraulic backstay adjuster and a boom vang can be separated from the rig fairly easily if you plan the attachment methods for this. You can get dry-break hydraulic fittings so you can get the hoses off without spewing fluid everywhere.

As for RM, all the glass, poor isolation of wiring from water, and external engine hatches were a far bigger deal than hydraulic fluid IMHO. They only had one good engine that they tangled up and the other one had issues that were not getting fixed in bad weather because of how the engines were accessed.

 

I was thinking of how many of the boats I have known had standalone hydraulic backstays. The hydraulic tensioner was simply a unit mounted inline between the stay and the deck fitting, with no connectors to anything else.

 

However, I know that bigger boats tend to have centralised hydraulic systems, which leaves hydraulic pipes and hoses vulnerable to a dismasting.

 

So, if adding mechanisms to prevent those hydraulics becoming dangerous just adds other dangers, would it be fair to say that hydraulics introduce an element of unseaworthiness to a boat?

The dry break hydraulic fittings I have used in the past have needed to be depressurised before disconnect. This may be difficult if the rig is down using the conventional controls, particularly if the electrics are full of water.

It also requires the mast to break and fall in such a way that the quick disconnects are accessible. That would require design consideration pretty damn early

 

 

 

I read wild slashing through the window???

 

I grab my ceramic knife, open the forward sliding windows, and begin cutting all the running rigging and hydraulic hoses. I get hydraulic fluid in my eyes, and George steps in to finish cutting the hoses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. So it seems that any such system requires both accessible dry-break connectors, and a mechanism to depressurise the system even when electrical power has gone ... or else a dismasting creates a bath of hydraulic fluid as hoses fracture or are cut.

 

Doesn't sound like great design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites