rib
Well-Known Member
and tranona your one that has debated this before at great length why didnt you just say been done to death before look here.
Bavaria lost keel again
- Thread starter Annabell
- Start date
Bav34
...
You just get funnier and funnier.
rib
Well-Known Member
?
rib
Well-Known Member
bav whats funny ?
Tranona
Well-Known Member
Your late night stream of consciousness is providing amusement for some. Not sure what you had for a nightcap but it does seem to take you away from reality!
Monique
Well-Known Member
You Sir are now a certified idiot. This is now a fact known by everyone in this community.
Occasionnally, it is better to shut up and have people think you are an idiot than to write the above and prove it.
You simply cannot desist from this campaign of disinformation and (self admitted) windups. From your chaotic and disgraceful abuse of the English language I have managed to deduce which report you read.
The esteemed German professor of material science who investigated the Match 42 keel loss did some basic academic number crunching using the known strengths of GRP laminate and the structural requirements for yachts as stated by the main international design body. As a preamble to his report the professor concluded that 8mm would in theory be sufficient for the loads involved. Prior to the incident the original Bavaria layup was 13mm.
There is no evidence that Bavaria had been or had intended to use 8mm laminate in this hull area.
The report also found evidence that the sharp edges of the keelbolt backing plates had cut through the laminate under load. There is an engineering term for this that I cannot recall.
We now know the fitting of the keels was a bodged job undertaken by local shoreside labour. The Bavaria fitted backing plate on my Match 35 has a rolled rounded edge.
Last edited:
jordanbasset
Well-Known Member
Good post but unfortunately facts and first hand knowledge will not stand against an individuals prejudice.
noelex
Well-Known Member
13mm is pretty thin for a 35 foot yacht around the keel area without an exotic lay up. In the good old days when manufacturers accepted that people occasionally made mistakes and hit inconvenient things, well over an inch was common. I have seen 1.75 inches on smaller yachts with much less draft.
Last edited:
Tranona
Well-Known Member
Thickness of layup is not necessarily an indicator of strength. Before the engineering properties of composites were fully understood, it was common practice to just pour in more resin and glass because it was cheap. In some cases it was completely unnecessary to take the loads and in other cases it gave the illusion of strength.
Think you will find the layups of modern production boats (not just Bavaria) are engineered to standards set by classification societies such as Lloyd or ABS, which specify not just thickness but the way the loads (which are not necessarily correlated with draft) are distributed through the structure. Perhaps more importantly the boats are built to those standards under controlled conditions. A far cry from most mouldings from 40 or 50 years ago.
Seajet
...
You Sir are now a certified idiot. This is now a fact known by everyone in this community.
Occasionnally, it is better to shut up and have people think you are an idiot than to write the above and prove it.
Harsh but fair.
It is and I address that point on post 111 in this thread, see the monocoque reference.
Also note that owners of Match 38's and 42's should now be sailing around in hulls with +20mm in this hull area following the recall.
I missed this gem of F.U.D.
For the record Bavaria Yachts was owned for 20+ years by the family that founded it and was then sold to a private equity group called Baine Capital (I think) for 1.2 billion Euro or Dollars in 2005/2006.
Then the credit crunch struck and the vast over valuation of the private equity acquisition was exposed. The people funding the deal wanted out asap and sold the debt at a small percentage of its face value. This was all high level wheeling and dealing and NOT a 1 billion operating loss reflecting badly on designs or the manufacturing operation.
Mr Cassandra
Well-Known Member
I think you will find it hard to overcome the prejudices on the forum over the fine marque
If you profile the people knocking Bavaria you will come to the conclusion they are a little bit jealous
rib
Well-Known Member
monique..have alook at post 105/106/110 and in particulair post 131.now if you know about bav can you code a 47 for a ocean xing.cos i might even buy one for a business venture.bet thats got you confussed,and thanks for the cert i certainly desevre it
Tranona
Well-Known Member
The Coding requirements can be found on www.dft.gov/mca/blue.pdf If you know anything about boat design and construction you should be able to work out from that whether the boat you are interested in is suitable for Coding at the level you require. A qualified MCA recognised surveyor can then advise you how best to meet the requirements for your boat.
Doubt Monique (or anybody else who knows anything about boats) would be "confused" by your question, even though most of what you write is in any case confusing. The question you asked is simple. The answer is in the paragraph above.
rib
Well-Known Member
im not after the requirements,just want to chat to someone who has done it on a 47,as ive come across a snag and want to see if it can be over come
Tranona
Well-Known Member
Then asking randomly here when you have a very specific question is perhaps not the best way of getting advice. Suggest you ask your coding surveyor as he will have to issue the certificate so better to have reliable advice from an expert source.
rib
Well-Known Member
but i thought this place was over run with experts !!anyway thanks for your replys i know your trying to be helpfull.i,ll leave it there ta
Talulah
Well-Known Member
Could you start a new thread with the snag you've found? It might prove interesting. Others may have come across it on other boats. Presumably nothing to do with keels.