Dezinc'd through-hulls

[zoidberg]

This is certainly the time of year when all good yotties should be having a hard look at the integrity of their through hulls.... when the boat is up on the hard and before you forget.

For anyone who hasn't seen the problem, here's an example, courtesy of Ramsgate Marine...

Any passing yacht surveyor or yard foreman can tell you how to do a robust check for pink rot.

 

[Ohlin Karcher]

How do you tell, if a plastic paddlewheel through-hull fitting is about to crumble or go brittle.. without risking invisibly cracking it with a hammer so it will break anyway? Buy a new one is all I can think of.

 

[zoidberg]

How do you tell, if a plastic paddlewheel through-hull fitting is about to crumble or go brittle.. without risking invisibly cracking it with a hammer so it will break anyway? Buy a new one is all I can think of.

Hi, OK! Now, I'm neither a marine injinear nor a competent yot surveyor ( where d'you find one o' they? ) but I'd have thought a little Critical Thinking, like wot we got tot in skool way last century, would figure in the provision of useful answers.

I have it on good, reliable authority that one Sarabande Of This Parish is the beezkneez at sorting out Risk Analysis Matrices ( as is Mr Google ). It seems to me that ( ISTMT ) a little cognitive exercise on the back of an envelope,or fag packet will point to the relative desirability of straight replacement vs 'near-destructive' testing. Isn't that wot surveyors do, anyway?

Then, when your manipulation of the matrix offers up a clear conclusion, consider carefully your emotive reaction to that objective pointer. Are you really quite pleased and relieved? Or d'you feel a bit disappointed? Ask yourself the hard question - 'Why?'

If the honest answer is 'I can't be bothered' or 'I don't want to afford that' or 'That points to an obligation I'd rather not have', then you have come closer both to a sound decision and to understanding it.

Seemples!

 

[Ohlin Karcher]

Food for thought and music to the ears, your sage advice Zoidberg has given me a flash of inspiration! I will first buy a replacement, then test the old one, in situ, to its limits, then beyond.. to cataclyslic failure followed by utter annihilation into microcosmic shards!
( All to be filmed and published, the title, hmm.. "Don't be a Victim of the Paddlewheel of Death! Exclusive Exposé! The Secret Danger Lurking In Your Bilges!" )

 

[jiris]

Hi, OK! Now, I'm neither a marine injinear nor a competent yot surveyor ( where d'you find one o' they? ) but I'd have thought a little Critical Thinking, like wot we got tot in skool way last century, would figure in the provision of useful answers.

I have it on good, reliable authority that one Sarabande Of This Parish is the beezkneez at sorting out Risk Analysis Matrices ( as is Mr Google ). It seems to me that ( ISTMT ) a little cognitive exercise on the back of an envelope,or fag packet will point to the relative desirability of straight replacement vs 'near-destructive' testing. Isn't that wot surveyors do, anyway?

Then, when your manipulation of the matrix offers up a clear conclusion, consider carefully your emotive reaction to that objective pointer. Are you really quite pleased and relieved? Or d'you feel a bit disappointed? Ask yourself the hard question - 'Why?'

If the honest answer is 'I can't be bothered' or 'I don't want to afford that' or 'That points to an obligation I'd rather not have', then you have come closer both to a sound decision and to understanding it.

Seemples!

I always admired the ability of some people to answer simple questions with the most complex answers possible .

 

[Ohlin Karcher]

I always admired the ability of some people to answer simple questions with the most complex answers possible .

Zoidberg can do it the other way round as well