Are Bavaria owners wusses when their keels fall off?

[photodog]

An Albin Vega

- W

There should be a worthy smugness icon.... :encouragement:

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I do think that the weakness in all the modern boats is the spade rudder... odvious potential failure point,

Is it though, I wonder? I see no reason why a spade rudder stock couldn't be as strong as the thinner skegs (say Sadler 32). The assumption that things you can turn must be weak seems flawed to me. (You might lose a bit off the bottom of the rudder, of course.)

Of course the skeg does protect from lines/tangles etc. - a benefit which is beyond debate IMHO.

There should be a worthy smugness icon.... :encouragement:

I haven't sailed one but can't help but love Vegas... ...as long as you tow a Bav 42 to sleep on once you drop the hook.

 

[photodog]

Is it though, I wonder? I see no reason why a spade rudder stock couldn't be as strong as the thinner skegs (say Sadler 32). The assumption that things you can turn must be weak seems flawed to me. (You might lose a bit off the bottom of the rudder, of course.)

Of course the skeg does protect from lines/tangles etc. - a benefit which is beyond debate IMHO.



I haven't sailed one but can't help but love Vegas... ...as long as you tow a Bav 42 to sleep on once you drop the hook.

If you look at all the losses on the narc and arc in recent years... They are almost universally spade rudder failures..

The legend 42 with the composite stock was the most astonishing... Quite why they thought this was a acceptable material for a rudder stock is beyond me.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

If you look at all the losses on the narc and arc in recent years... They are almost universally spade rudder failures..

The legend 42 with the composite stock was the most astonishing... Quite why they thought this was a acceptable material for a rudder stock is beyond me.

...and I was once on a boat with a spade rudder that actually sank because the bottom bearing fractured, so they certainly fail. However, I don't see why spade rudders couldn't be built as strong/stronger than many skegs, and I suspect many are.

 

[photodog]

Ouch.


Maybe it's paranoia!

 

[Simondjuk]

As far as Bavaria keel failures are concerned, I have no technical knowledge about what fails so don't intend to guess. I just know I see some being removed for serious repairs.

There are lots of Bavs in school and charter use, and virtually no Moodys. Groundings are all too common in the charter and school world, whereas I doubt the private Moody owner makes a habit of it. Had you considered that there could be some correlation between these facts and you seeing Bavs undergoing repairs to grounding damage?

On the subject of how well bolted on Bav keels are, I was looking at a 38 today, a later, lighter build one, which had struck an immovable, square-edged concrete block of Transit van proportions, apparently under engine at full cruising speed of perhaps 6 or more knots. The impact was on the very bottom of the deep lead keel fitted to the boat, hence applying maximum leverage to the fixing to the hull. From the marks on the keel, it looked like the impact stopped the keel pretty much dead, deforming the fin itself, dropping the bows, raising the stern and flexing the hull until the keel rode up over the block. The pitch change of the boat probably also helped the leading edge of the keel ramp up over the block. There is a big wrinkle in the upper trailing edge of the keel where it was compressed against the hull as the keel was forced backwards, and the last few inches of the upper aft mating face remain deformed at a downward angle of maybe 25 degrees. I presume that the forward keel bolts had been stretched and their backers drawn into the hull far enough to leave a gap of maybe 10mm between the forward upper face of the keel and the hull. The most eye catching thing was that the sealant bond between keel and hull was strong enough to peel the gelcoat off the laminate in an inch wide strip most of the way round the forward portion of the keel root. This is largely superficial damage, but looked pretty nasty as it was rather raggedy. The boat was sailed, on charter, for the rest of that weekend without the charterers noticing any ill effects. As I understand it, around a week later the boat was found with water lapping just over the cabin sole as a result of no bilge pumps having been left set to auto and the slow ingress of water around the damaged keel fixings. I was also told that there is no damage to the grid or its attachment to the hull, although I'd be wary of the veracity of this given how far the hull must have flexed. All in all, for a monster whack in just about the worst place on a deep fin keel, against a completely immovable object, I'd say it coped pretty well. If you're starting to deform the keel backwards along its stiffest axis before it comes off the boat or causes terminal damage to the hull, I'd say that it's pretty well bolted on to an adequately strong structure. As I say, this sort of thing happens rather frequently to charter and school boats, the majority of which are Bavs.

By comparison, a similar impact to an almost new Beneteau popped most of the grid off the inside of the hull. So perhaps Bavs aren't the softest boat out there when it comes to keels and their attachments afterall. The ill-conceived Match aside, maybe they never were the softest and simply have the dubious distinction of being the most abused.

 

[GrahamM376]

Well then you need to look at what causes inversions, Any boat will roll if struck by a breaking wave equal to its beam... It's the negative stability that's important to recovery.

Beam isn't the criteria for rolling but wide beam can stop it coming back up. Some boats will get knocked down if the height of the breaking wave is more than 30% of the boats length. Others will not until the breaking wave height is 60%. I assume by your comments that you've calculated the C of G and righting moment and the point of vanishing stability for both boats, to arrive at your decision that we'll both roll under the same conditions?

 

[photodog]

Beam isn't the criteria for rolling but wide beam can stop it coming back up. Some boats will get knocked down if the height of the breaking wave is more than 30% of the boats length. Others will not until the breaking wave height is 60%. I assume by your comments that you've calculated the C of G and righting moment and the point of vanishing stability for both boats, to arrive at your decision that we'll both roll under the same conditions?

Actually, your understanding is overly simplistic...

Extremes of design in yachts... Can lead to a resistance to capsize such as the HOBW can vary between 35-60 % of the loa, With narrow beams being less prone ...

However two points...

1) significant risk of capsize arises in the majority of cruising yachts at around the beam of the boat, and this is only altered by extremes in design...

2) the risk of capsize is not significantly effected in any yacht by design, even small variations of HOBW can make big differences to individual yachts... And you cannot really design a yacht to overcome the risk of capsize due to the nature of the conditions that lead to breaking waves...


This second point is the most significant.

By way of example.... On a 12 meter yacht risk of capsize
Arises in your numbers in breaking seas from 5 meters and is inevitable from 7...

Now, in open water you are unlikely to encounter breaking waves
Of such a height, as they are unlikely to be in shallow enough water to do so, But if you do there is a good chance were significant wave height is 6 meters, that you will encounter waves of 1.6 times the significant height... Ergo if you are in a sea state of 6 meter waves... Ergo f7 or s, you are likely to encounter waves as high as 9.5 meters...

So in a force 7 with breaking seas, you are likely to see wave heights between 6- 9 meters, and this , will capsize even the most extreme design, and the vast majority of moderate designs at even the lower end of the wave heights.

Even in significantly shorter seas, the variation of wave heights means that variation in design does not pose enough of a barrier to prevent inversion.


And in the open ocean were wave height is likely to be significantly higher, the design variations available on a 12 meter yacht become insignificant....

The point being that in reality, if you think that there is increased safety between different designs of yachts due to variations in positive stability, then you are coming from the issue from the wrong end of the stick.

Variations in negative stability however are significant, especially I feel for small craft in coastal areas were breaking waves of low height may be encountered...

As such for long distance offshore work I don't think that here is any difference in safety from risk of capsize between the two moderate designs being discussed.

I do note that when I chose our current boat I was concerned about stability due to cruising in coastal waters and the increased risk of encountering breaking seas in harbour entrances etc... And I chose the design of modern 31 fitter that had the best avs and stability curve of all the options available... And that was a Bavaria btw.

 

[wully1]

On the subject of how well bolted on Bav keels are, I was looking at a 38 today, a later, lighter build one, which had struck an immovable, square-edged concrete block of Transit van proportions, apparently under engine at full cruising speed of perhaps 6 or more knots.

I will be more than astonished if the floors inside this boat are not sheared and the hull cracked the length of the keel on both sides and also the interior furniture and wood work sheared off in the area around the keel.
I doubt any GRP boat with a fin keel would survive an impact like this without serious damage no matter what make it is.


On the way through the yard to my boat there are various makes of boats in various states of repair to the keel pans after groundings. The only similarity they have is that currently they are all ' AWB's ' Bavs, Bennies, Jaenneaus, Dufour.... Currently no Moody's or Halberg Rassy which are the second most popular makes of boats in the yard. ( numbers from Wullys Dodgy Surveys dot com ) The various other makes in the yard easily outnumber the AWB's but hardly ever feature in the repair shed.

Why is this? Apart from the slightly higher number of AWB's - are AWB owners more careless/ useless/ adventurous or more likely to let some idiot charterer loose on their boat?

Personally I would not buy a Bavaria or any French GRP boat ( apart from maybe an Amel) built after about 1984 as they just seem so flimsy and cheaply built, and getting cheaper and nastier looking - for the type of sailing 90% of us do they are perfectly adequate and the keels won't just fall off.

 

[GrahamM376]

Actually, your understanding is overly simplistic... .

I don't think my understanding is over simplistic, I treat rough seas with a great deal of respect. We've been out in sea conditions a few times where to turn beam on would certainly have rolled us, had 5-6m breaking seas for instance last time we left the Ria here. A good paper on effects of rough seas is here - http://www.oceannavigator.com/Ocean-Voyager-2011/Dangerous-waves-and-your-boat/

 

[ProMariner]

Maybe we should all just sail barges, after all, the rule is, if it sticks out, it gets knocked off. Not my fault, I don't make the rules.

If I crash into a wall in a car, I expect the car to lose, hopefully by enough to allow me to survive. All these AWB's at least made it to the yard, usually without fatality, so, no problem.

Lots of things could be done to make driving, and sailing, safer. The opportunity cost of these things make them, currently, uneconomic.

I am very glad I live in a world where, should I chose, I can trade safety for, e.g., performance, or light airy interiors, or better passage speed under power. The fittest will survive.

"the problem engineers have, when designing systems to be fool proof, is they invariably underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools"
Douglas Adams.

or to put it simply, you can make anything fool proof, but you can't make it t**t proof.

If you designed and build a boat so the keel was guaranteed in all conditions, a small number of folk would use the opportunity to throw away their charts, and be even drunker, ultimate safety gain : zero.

 

[markhomer]

Quote Originally Posted by photodog View Post
They both sail like lorries to begin with.... ( no insult intended...)


No insult intended !!!!! ,, what was the intention then !


what a load of uniformed *******s gets spouted with such authority . both boats are capable of very good sailing performance upwind and down , the B38 as I have one and spend more attention to is particularily known for its performance anyone that claims otherwise is a fool and ready for a surprise if they ever come up against one .

I think the misconceptions arise because many are sailed by relatively inexperienced sailors , they can be a handful to those new to the game , the concept of pulling sails in upwind seems an alien concept to some , backstay kicker and outhaul too .

Ive raced for over 40 years dinghys , cats and monohulls and cant complain about performance , though the nut on the helm sometimes goes the wrong way ! , 7.5knts + upwind usual and max 13.5 down , sustained surfing (white sailed ) .

but hey keep calling them Lorries and scare folks about keels falling off, lets folk like me have far bigger and newer boats for our money .

Its a horror to think those considering buying boats research forums such as this .



Back under my rock I go !

 

[GrahamM376]

If I may ask, what level of MCA coding does your boat comply with out of the box and as supplied by the manufacturer, and what is it?

Didn't know the answer to this so for interest's sake asked a surveyor friend who codes boats for a living, this is his reply:-

As to coding, Cat 1 (150nm from a safe haven) would be ok I think. Cat 0 (unrestricted) is rather tougher. I'd need to see if there are existing STIX stability numbers etc. for the Moody. I think it likely you could achieve it.

Except for Stix, which has to be carried out by the coding authority, it's all (for the diligent and not easily bored reader!) in a document called MGN 280 which you can download from the MCA (Marine Coastguard Agency). I guarantee if you can't sleep you will after reading that.

 

[dom]

Ive raced for over 40 years dinghys , cats and monohulls and cant complain about performance , though the nut on the helm sometimes goes the wrong way ! , 7.5knts + upwind usual and max 13.5 down , sustained surfing (white sailed ) .

Gosh that's quick! ....as quick upwind as something like a race-specced First 47.7, and you'd blow it away on a white-sail broad reach. Are you sure?

 

[sighmoon]

I doubt any GRP boat with a fin keel would survive an impact like this without serious damage no matter what make it is..

Dehler managed no significant damage at 6.8 kts on the keel. The impact is recorded at 5:30:


Just saying.

 

[wully1]

Dehler managed no significant damage at 6.8 kts on the keel. The impact is recorded at 5:30:


Just saying.

Hmmm... Dehlers video of a Dehler undergoing crash tests. Let me think about that.

 

[Tranona]

Didn't know the answer to this so for interest's sake asked a surveyor friend who codes boats for a living, this is his reply:-

As to coding, Cat 1 (150nm from a safe haven) would be ok I think. Cat 0 (unrestricted) is rather tougher. I'd need to see if there are existing STIX stability numbers etc. for the Moody. I think it likely you could achieve it.

That comment would apply equally to Simon's Bav 38 - and indeed most mainstream production 38 footers. Cat 0 is much more difficult with sub 12m or so because LOA is a big factor in STIX - the bigger the boat the higher the STIX and the ability to fit watertight bulkheads and additional equipment such as 2 liferafts. As I suggested earlier, there is a big difference between a boat being able to undertake ocean passages and being able to meet commercial standards to take paying customers on such voyages.

Many people choose older style boats because that is what they have, what is available or what they can afford. However there is a much wider range of boats available now, particularly for those with less constrained budgets and it is not difficult to see just by observation that many people choose more modern designs.

 

[markhomer]

Quote Originally Posted by markhomer View Post

Ive raced for over 40 years dinghys , cats and monohulls and cant complain about performance , though the nut on the helm sometimes goes the wrong way ! , 7.5knts + upwind usual and max 13.5 down , sustained surfing (white sailed ) .
Gosh that's quick! ....as quick upwind as something like a race-specced First 47.7, and you'd blow it away on a white-sail broad reach. Are you sure? Quote Ends


in my cat blow it away up down back n forth ,

Not even comparable !!! with b38 obviously !!!!

not point as high as race specced 47.7 , but certainly the B38 has decent speed powered up flattish water, but if yur 47.7 isnt doing much better you got a problem ! ,, the 40.7 i race normally does 7.5-8 + pointing higher and getting to these speeds quicker , 47.7 should do much better ,one up here did ,

offwind get real why you asking , cant you read ??

, I said 13.5 knt sustained surfing , was downwind as I said , not across (I know the trap your setting there !) ,pretty hard to sustain surf on a reach .

white sail reaching f4-5 8-9 knts , thats about it .

my point being it provides pretty fast sailing for what it is .

Would go faster with ten folk on the rail ,carbon sails , beefed up rigging etc , and still obviously not as fast as 47.7 . B38 would fall to bits I expect with those extreme loads
aint built for it and why would you .

as I say Ive raced over 40 years , I have got a slight scooby about what im talking about .

 

[dom]

Quote Originally Posted by markhomer

...the 40.7 i race normally does 7.5-8 + pointing higher and getting to these speeds quicker , 47.7 should do much better ,one up here did ,

offwind get real why you asking , cant you read ??

, I said 13.5 knt sustained surfing , was downwind as I said , not across (I know the trap your setting there !) ,pretty hard to sustain surf on a reach .

.

Hitting 7.5 kts+ on a beat would pace a 40.7 quite easily (see Farr design's polars on P3 of this link.)
http://www.blur.se/polar/first407_performance_prediction.pdf

The 40.7 is tweakable, but at some point the laws of aero- and fluid-dynamics start to object. Off-wind the 40.7 can just about deliver 12.5kts+ at 140 degrees true, but only with colored sails up; the apparent wind will be pulled forward. Go deeper and the apparent wind starts to fall off and you go slower.

I've nothing at all against Bavs, but you might want to check the calibration of your speedo.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I don't see why spade rudders couldn't be built as strong/stronger than many skegs, and I suspect many are.

..and on reflection the Spade Rudders on modern Southerlys must be built to take a real bashing when they take to the ground. The designer must have taken account some shockloading with waves plus the possibility of a bit of rock on a patch of mud putting a massive percentage of the boats weight on one rudder. I'd say Southerly rudders support my hypothesis.

if it sticks out, it gets knocked off. Not my fault, I don't make the rules. If I crash into a wall in a car, I expect the car to lose, hopefully by enough to allow me to survive. All these AWB's at least made it to the yard, usually without fatality, so, no problem. Lots of things could be done to make driving, and sailing, safer. The opportunity cost of these things make them, currently, uneconomic. I am very glad I live in a world where, should I chose, I can trade safety for, e.g., performance, or light airy interiors, or better passage speed under power.

Nice post, thanks for sharing it.

Didn't know the answer to this so for interest's sake asked a surveyor friend who codes boats for a living, this is his reply:-
As to coding, Cat 1 (150nm from a safe haven) would be ok I think. Cat 0 (unrestricted) is rather tougher. I think it likely you could achieve it.

So you didn't ask if the Bav would? Confirmation bias.

Gosh that's quick! ....as quick upwind as something like a race-specced First 47.7, and you'd blow it away on a white-sail broad reach. Are you sure?

Surfing at 13.5 knots doesn't seem extreme. I've surfed at that on far smaller boats. You might think 7.5kts upwind on flat water is a bit high but it's ball park, isn't it? What are you quibbling about - 1knot?

Maybe, maybe not. Don't know what the Bavaria SA/D is but it does have a deeper keel which will help it to roll. Not realy bothered anyway.

If by 'Roll' you mean 'self-right' then don't forget the high volume in the aft cabin on the Moody will do a lot to help it right.