Lucky Duck
Well-Known Member
There’s a discussion on hull windows about 45 minutes in on the HR370 review video linked in that thread
Cat A ocean standard need full revision
- Thread starter geem
- Start date
lustyd
Well-Known Member
You seem awfully confident for someone with no real details.It was a Farr designed Bavaria 37 which was introduced in 2013, but stick to your pritt stick theory if you like
Ammonite
Well-Known Member
I was on the neighbouring boat and the skipper told me what happened. The whole dock was talking about it and they couldn’t go anywhere while it was repaired. But you're right. I didn’t have my MAIB hat on or photographic evidence
The point is that you shouldn't be able to forcibly remove a correctly bonded window without breaking it, unless you happen to be carrying a cheese wire or a multitool, which I'm pretty sure he wasn't. Something had clearly failed.
Whether this is an isolated incident I have no idea, although given the stated life of the sealant, which won't take into account a number of real world factors (frit design, differential thermal expansion, hull flex etc) I suspect it won't be, particularly as these boats age.
Sea Change
Well-Known Member
After a few seasons in the Caribbean we noticed that UV damage was far worse on the starboard side of the boat, because we're always at anchor with an easterly breeze. It would be interesting to see if these hull windows start failing more often on one side of the boat than the other...
Blueboatman
Well-Known Member
Reading back through this thread, interesting points of view aside, I think I was a bit rude to Tranona
For which I wish to apologise
Without friendly debate we’re stuffed.
Sorry Stuart,
Tim
The latest YM Halberg 370 review is interesting as ‘young’ master Rassy gets to says they worked hard to incorporate hull stiffening in their new hull aperture designs. So my take is that they saw flexing as a greater potential problem than adhesion per se.
I wonder if in 10 years time someone will build an all acrylic, one piece moulded hull as a project and then just paint the shady bits where privacy is required !
For which I wish to apologise
Without friendly debate we’re stuffed.
Sorry Stuart,
Tim
The latest YM Halberg 370 review is interesting as ‘young’ master Rassy gets to says they worked hard to incorporate hull stiffening in their new hull aperture designs. So my take is that they saw flexing as a greater potential problem than adhesion per se.
I wonder if in 10 years time someone will build an all acrylic, one piece moulded hull as a project and then just paint the shady bits where privacy is required !
geem
Well-Known Member
That was the side that popped out on our friends Jeanneau 45DS.
Roberto
Well-Known Member
Or take inspiration from the Abyssbox window, a pressurised tank showing tiny animals living at 1-2km depth, the transparent window holds 127 tons about the weight of an Airbus (so they say), should be enough for the most demanding conditions
Rappey
Well-Known Member
Bonded windows with glass can last, the closest example would be a grp car with bonded front and rear windscreens which can easily last 35 yrs but one big difference is all the bonded areas are usually covered by a trim and the glass has frits ( the black baked on ceramic dots) using a urethene sealant.
I would assume many bonded boat windows start leaking so the owner has them resealed rather than ignore it until they fall out and likewise with a keel that seeps.
This would remove many failing keels or windows from the statistics ?
I would assume many bonded boat windows start leaking so the owner has them resealed rather than ignore it until they fall out and likewise with a keel that seeps.
This would remove many failing keels or windows from the statistics ?
potentillaCO32
Well-Known Member
Really interesting thread. So there are a couple of structural things, or risks, to modern boats and ocean crossing. Mitigated by several other things, faster passage speeds, better weather forecasting and ability to scoot out of the way of bombs, more comfort (downwind at least)
There is one other weakness on modern boats that comes up regurlarly as a failure mode on the ARC and that is unsupported blade rudders.
Interesting take on them here, all about the dollars;
There is one other weakness on modern boats that comes up regurlarly as a failure mode on the ARC and that is unsupported blade rudders.
Interesting take on them here, all about the dollars;
dansaskip
Well-Known Member
Only three days - now what ocean are you thinking of crossing that only takes 3 days?
Must be a pretty small ocean - actually so small it is not an ocean at all
lustyd
Well-Known Member
No, the point is that you know nothing of the history of that window so you’re just imagining something to suit your position. Literally anything could have happened before your conversation including the perspex being replaced by an incompetent person using bathroom sealant.
lustyd
Well-Known Member
I wouldn’t be crossing in the 1970s that’s for sure. Most sensible folk get a forecast at least every day on long passages these days. If not multiple times a day.
geem
Well-Known Member
Of course, but sometimes you can't avoid a large LP system. They are sometimes too large to go around. Others are fast moving.
When the weather isn't defined LP and HP zones but complex, the models are often inaccurate. They sometimes change quite substantially from one day to the next. If you are undertaking a 3 week passage, what you thought you were going to get at the beginning of the passage can bare no resemblance to what you get near the end
Concerto
Well-Known Member
Strange comment about car windscreens as my last car had a leak start at the top of the screen. I bought the car at 6 months old and kept it for 12 years. During this time it was never involved in any accidents. Yet the bonding of the original screen started failing about 9 months before I sold it. Luckily for me I got a small crack from a stone and the screen was replaced, so solving the leak. The screen technician said leaks were quite common on 10+ year old cars.
dunedin
Well-Known Member
Mmmmm. Got any actual statistics to support your “regularly”?
Let’s look objectively at the ARC. Boats are replaceable, people are not.
With 300 or so ARC/ARC+ boats with over 1,000 people crossing every year, with varying expertise and boats, there are bound to be a tiny minority if incidents.
AFAIK no lives have been lost due to boats sinking on ARC or ARC+, irrespective of reason for sinking.
Sadly occasionally there have been lives lost. Somebody would need to check the precise data, but from recollection I would suggest the top 3 causes of fatalities are:
1) Head and/or chest trauma usually due to an accidental gybe, and impact with mainsheet and/or boom;
2) MOB - often related to another incident such as these accidental gybes, and/or due to more relaxed lifejacket / tether rules in hot weather
3) Medical emergency - such as heart failures etc (partly due to age profile of participants)
So if we wanted to change RCD coding rules to save lives - perhaps the top priority would be banning mainsheets in cockpits, mandating these ahead of the cockpit or on an arch, plus mandating booms above head height.
In terms of boats “frequently failing to make it”, as another poster suggested, there are again a tiny minority (less than one boat a year) which are abandoned or sunk for a variety of reasons.
To my knowledge none have (so far) been lost due to window failure. And for years there has been guidance to have plans to board missing windows - eg with panels from bunk boards.
A very small handful of boats have been abandoned due to water ingress after a spade rudder failed - at least one was a Hanse. However, the vast majority of boats making the crossing have spade rudders (including the one I crossed on) without any issue.
A few boats have been abandoned due to a variety of other reasons which meant the (remaining) crew did not feel able to continue and requested rescue. Sometimes due to skipper fatality or incapacity, sometimes due to technical issues that the armchair experts on here felt could have been managed and the boat sailed on.
To my knowledge zero boats on the ARC have been abandoned due to keel loss or multihull capsize.
So let’s try to avoid people putting forward their pet issues without them supplying some precise facts and statistics.
PS. In spite of the record above, whilst I was happy to cross on a solidly built boat with “bolt on keel” and spade rudder, personally I also would have some concerns about Oyster style massive hull windows low down. And although their track record is excellent, if I got hit by a very severe (and very rare) storm, I still feel more confident with a few tons of lead underneath than in a multihull - but that is just me.
PPS. As a statistician, I do worry slightly about the fact of global warming and the view of our more learned weather experts that the Hurricane season is getting more unpredictable. Each year there are 300 ARC/ARC+ boats, as well as at least the same again independent NARC boats, arriving off the Caribbean early December.
There is a low probability of a Hurricane in December. But if you run the event for a hundred years, the probabilities of a hurricane hitting the fleet start to increase.
With modern forecasting and satellite comms, perhaps the faster boats (aided by their fin keels and spade rudders, or fast multihull speed
) might be able to route out of the path. But not all will.
Last edited:
geem
Well-Known Member
New Zealand regulations have been changed as a result of the loss of thr Bavaria. You used to have to have storm board for windows of a certain size onboard. Now you need to fit them to go to seaMmmmm. Got any actual statistics to support your “regularly”?
Let’s look objectively at the ARC. Boats are replaceable, people are not.
With 300 or so ARC/ARC+ boats with over 1,000 people crossing every year, with varying expertise and boats, there are bound to be a tiny minority if incidents.
AFAIK no lives have been lost due to boats sinking on ARC or ARC+, irrespective of reason for sinking.
Sadly occasionally there have been lives lost. Somebody would need to check the precise data, but from recollection I would suggest the top 3 causes of fatalities are:
1) Head and/or chest trauma usually due to an accidental gybe, and impact with mainsheet and/or boom;
2) MOB - often related to another incident such as these accidental gybes, and/or due to more relaxed lifejacket / tether rules in hot weather
3) Medical emergency - such as heart failures etc (partly due to age profile of participants)
So if we wanted to change RCD coding rules to save lives - perhaps the top priority would be banning mainsheets in cockpits, mandating these ahead of the cockpit or on an arch, plus mandating booms above head height.
In terms of boats “frequently failing to make it”, as another poster suggested, there are again a tiny minority (less than one boat a year) which are abandoned or sunk for a variety of reasons.
To my knowledge none have (so far) been lost due to window failure. And for years there has been guidance to have plans to board missing windows - eg with panels from bunk boards.
A very small handful of boats have been abandoned due to water ingress after a space rudder failed - at least one was a Hanse. However, the vast majority of boats making the crossing have spade rudders (including the one I crossed on) without any issue.
A few boats have been abandoned due to a variety of other reasons which meant the (remaining) crew did not feel able to continue and requested rescue. Sometimes due to skipper fatality or incapacity, sometimes due to technical issues that the armchair experts on here felt could have been managed and the boat sailed on.
To my knowledge zero boats on the ARC have been abandoned due to keel loss or multihull capsize.
So let’s try to avoid people putting forward their pet issues without them supplying some precise facts and statistics.
PS. In spite of the record above, in this case whilst I was happy to cross on a solidly built boat with “bolt on keel” and spade rudders, personally I also would have some concerns about Oyster style massive hull windows low down. And although their track record is excellent, if I got hit by a very severe (and very rare) storm, I still feel more confident with a few tons of lead underneath than in a multihull - but that is just me.
PPS. As a statistician, I do worry slightly about the fact of global warming and the view of our more learned weather experts that the Hurricane season is getting more unpredictable. Each year there are 300 ARC/ARC+ boats, as well as at least the same again independent NARC boats, arriving off the Caribbean early December.
There is a low probability of a Hurricane in December. But if you run the event for a hundred years, the probabilities of a hurricane hitting the fleet start to increase.
With modern forecasting and satellite comms, perhaps the faster boats (aided by their fin keels and spade rudders, or fast multihull speed
dunedin
Well-Known Member
New Zealand are quite well known for their tendency towards extra rules and regulation (surprisingly for such a generally laid back and relaxed group of people).
There have been a number of cases of yachts which have managed to sail half way around the world to get to NZ, being banned from departing as they don't meet the many NZ "safety" rules.
noelex
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately the carrying storm boards seems to have declined in popularity despite the trend to larger and less well-secured glazing.
However, the extensive and inflexible NZ government requirements for offshore sailboats are not the way forward in my view. For our yacht, the fitting of storm boards prior to embarking on an offshore passage would likely be counterproductive.
noelex
Well-Known Member
Agreed, they are silly and inflexible government requirements. More rules are not the answer.
Fortunately, I think they are no longer required for boats not registered in NZ.
lustyd
Well-Known Member
We can either have more rules or accept the status quo 
