Entering a liferaft

I daresay a separated fo'c'sle is handy if there's anything hazardous on board, too. Not the average London Boat Show visitor's concern, but an ocean-going yacht might want to store chemicals/maintenance products away from the crew's living/sleeping quarters.

I'd put a work-bench with vice and router on the Osprey, if I had room. I could surely use one!
 
dancrane said:
Pretty sure I heard that if Captain Smith had steered Titanic straight into the berg, rather than trying to avoid it, the ship wouldn't have been lost. He'd have had to kill himself anyway though, bringing her into New York with a crumpled nose.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's probably correct. Titanic was subdivided by watertight bulkheads. However, the problem was that enough of them were breached so that she took a bow-down attitude, and water overtopped bulkheads and entered compartments that hadn't been breached. The glancing blow with the iceberg opened seams along a sufficient length of the hull that too many forward compartments were breached. If she'd hit head on, then it is probable that only one or two compartments would have been breached, and she would have remained afloat. However, I'm sure the massive shock of hitting the iceberg head on would have caused major damage to the machinery and deaths and injuries to people. An officer on the bridge qould know that a head-on collision would certainly cause death and destruction; a near miss (which is what they hoped for!) would just be a one-liner in the log. Tragically, the attempt to miss made the sinking inevitable. Bob Ballard's book on the discovery of the wreck gives an excellent description of the sequence of events that led to the sinking.

That said, how many of us, knowing we were on a head-on collision course with an immovable object would NOT attempt to turn away? I very much doubt that Captain Smith had time to do the cold-blooded calculation of water ingress and stability before giving an order!
 
RORC Offshore special regs:
3.13 Watertight Bulkheads
multihulls also see OSR 3.05 Mu0,1,2,3,4
3.13.1 A hull shall have either a watertight "crash" bulkhead within 15% of LOA from the bow and abaft the forward end of LWL, or permanently installed closed-cell foam buoyancy effectively filling the forward 30% LOA of the hull. Mo0Mu0,1,2,3,4
3.13.2 Any required watertight bulkhead shall be strongly built to take a full head of water pressure without allowing any leakage into the adjacent compartment. Mo0Mu0,1,2,3,4
3.13.3 A yacht shall have at least two watertight transverse main bulkheads in addition to any bulkheads positioned within the forward and aft 15 percent of the boat's LOA. Mo0
3.13.4 Outside deck access for inspection and pumping shall be provided to every watertight compartment terminated by a hull section bulkhead, except that deck access to extreme end "crash" compartments is not required. Mo0
3.13.5 An access hatch shall be provided in every required watertight bulkhead (except a "crash" bulkhead). The access hatch shall have means of watertight closure permanently attached to the main panel, or lid, or cover of the hatch. The closure shall not require tools to operate. Mo0
a) An access hatch should be capable of being securely shut within 5 seconds Mo0
3.13.6 It is strongly recommended that: Mo0
a) an extreme end "crash" bulkhead should be provided at the stern. If practicable the aft "crash" bulkhead should be forward of the rudder post. Mo0
b) after flooding any one major compartment, a yacht should be capable of providing shelter and sustenance for a full crew for 2 weeks in an essentially dry compartment having direct access to the deck Mo0
c) compartments between watertight bulkheads should be provided with a means of manually pumping out from within the hull from a position outside the compartment
Click to expand...

Non of which helps if you lose your keel.
 
AntarcticPilot said:
...how many of us, knowing we were on a head-on collision course with an immovable object would NOT attempt to turn away? I very much doubt that Captain Smith had time to do the cold-blooded calculation of water ingress and stability before giving an order!
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's right. I bet lots of collisions ashore and at sea would be less serious if the driver or captain didn't try to prevent them, but it's so counter-intuitive, it never happens.
 
dancrane said:
I daresay a separated fo'c'sle is handy if there's anything hazardous on board, too.
Click to expand...

At one point the design included (again inspired by Stavros) a dedicated vented paint locker one side, balanced by a similar garbage locker on the other. Being a steel hull, paint is a fact of life, and a decent place to stow non-ditchable rubbish is one of those things you don't think about till you've spent at least a couple of weeks at sea. But, while essential in a ship, I decided this was probably a bit more complexity than the size of boat really warranted.

Pete
 
dancrane said:
I'm sure that's right. I bet lots of collisions ashore and at sea would be less serious if the driver or captain didn't try to prevent them, but it's so counter-intuitive, it never happens.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I've read some instructions somewhere which advised masters, if collision had become inevitable, to try to take it end-on rather than scraping along the side.

Pete
 
prv said:
...a dedicated vented paint locker...while essential in a ship, I decided this was probably a bit more complexity than the size of boat really warranted.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I've known some heads compartments which justified powerful venting and careful separation from the rest of the accommodation. :rolleyes:

Daydream believer said:
(Closed-cell foam buoyancy) seems to work----The mini transat boys will tell you all about it I am sure
Click to expand...

Although, those boats aren't exactly overweight, are they. Maybe BBG knows whether the practice is only just achievable - and mightn't transfer to bigger & heavier yachts?

EDIT: Oh, I thought BBG had contributed here earlier. My mistake.
 
Last edited:
dancrane said:
Hmm. I've known some heads compartments which justified powerful venting and careful separation from the rest of the accommodation. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The imaginary boat includes quite a well-appointed heads compartment (including a fibreglass moulding into which the bowl is mounted to provide maximum ease of cleaning). But it also incorporates, as part of the design related to staying the mizzen and connecting the self-steering, a steel framework overhanging the transom by a couple of feet. Much of this would be infilled with timber slats to provide a seat - and the final refinement is for the outermost section of seat on the starboard side to hinge up and reveal a varnished mahogany loo seat :D

No shortage of ventilation there :)

Pete
 
Here is the mollymawks' more prosaic - but very functional - version:

2-The-long-drop-with-the-head-of-the-self-steering-just-visible-on-the-left.jpg


If conditions were such that a lifeline was needed, it would be more of a bidet than a lavatory!

EDIT: I originally got the idea from a yacht (I think French?) featured in PBO, which had the long-drop incorporated into the bow pulpit. Just like my design, it had a solid piece of timber on top as a step for when moored bows-to, which hinged up and forwards to reveal the varnished seat. The lid jammed in position against the two halves of the pulpit and provided a backrest to the throne.

Pete
 
Last edited:
prv said:
If conditions were such that a lifeline was needed, it would be more of a bidet than a lavatory!
Click to expand...

Indeed...although...if the worst happened and one fell backwards from inebriation (or exertion?), it would be bad enough, watching your boat sail gently away from you...worse, if you had to swim amongst your recent evacuations! :eek:
 
dancrane said:
Indeed...although...if the worst happened and one fell backwards from inebriation (or exertion?)
Click to expand...

That's why the one in the photo above has a sort of basketty cage around it, and mine would have the back of the bench seat.

(Incidentally, the reason it's on the starboard side is because the stern anchor stows on the port side of the transom, in the manner of a landing craft, and one wouldn't want it catching the outflow.)

Pete
 
What the French crabbers used to have, we called it a 'crapoo', (Frenchman = Johnny crapoo, from crapaud. Don't know when they became frogs, oh whoops am I racist?)
 
Tony Cross said:
It is bloody difficult from the water wearing foulies and an inflated lifejacket. On my sea survival course it took quite a while for all 8 of us to get in, though there was a lot of laughing and joking going on. If we had to do it for real I guess it would be quicker. I do remember us all sitting in the raft pretty tired afterwards when the instructor said "I want everybody back in the water and we'll do it again, this time we'll assume I have a broken leg". One of the younger lads said what we were all thinking, "you're going to drown mate".....
Click to expand...

RGIT, mid 80s, they had a swimming pool with big fans, a wave maker and a high, as I thought, diving board. There was a life raft in the pool, us in full offshore kit and some sadistic barstewards with fire hoses. Cue fans, 50 kt winds, cue wave maker, big waves, cue lights off, cue us, up to diving board, jump off in to pool and then side stroke to raft. Sadistic bastewards aim fire hoses at mouths till we remember training and cover rmouths with a free hand to allow us to breath! Reach life raft, we help one in and then they help the rest in, mainly a scrabble over the tube, that was it, scrAbbleover tube with a bit of diving rescue technique, ie bounce up an down to let bouyancy launch you in, then do whatever we were supposed to do, IIRC find knife to cut lanyard, shut entrance and sit there getting seasick for gods sake! in a pool in Aberdeen! I didnt disgrace myself but one guy did!
Stu
 
prv said:
Because usually you want to use the space for something more useful.

A proper foam-fill using mostly inaccessible spaces is one thing, but filling all your lockers with old pop bottles is something else and a real pain on a boat you want to live in for a week, or two, or more.

Pete
Click to expand...

Some singlehanders do that with the fore and aft cabins and just use the main saloon for the crossing.
 
If one wanted to provide emergency buoyancy on a small AWB then the answer would be to have a number of inflatable bladders
positioned in the bow cabin & the aft cabins.
These would have their own inflation bottles & would be stored under bunks etc
They could even have hydrostatic valves (but not if the kids are still bed wetting !!!)
I would assume a bottle would inflate about 1 metre of bag so a 31 ft boat displacing 4.5 tones would need 5 of them, 2 in the bow & 3 in the stern. Possible an extra one in event of one failing to inflate
The crew could certainly jettison excess weight(dog, kids, mast, sails accessories etc) to help & could remain in the centre of the boat
There is still the problem of hypothermia as the boat would not float much above deck level & everybody would be soaked
The bags would be forced against the underside of the deck But would not right the boat if the keel fell off. However, they would trap themselves in the bunks so would not need to be secured
Having the bags inside the boat would sort all the problems of attaching straps etc & they could be stored in sealed bags
It would not be beyond the capabilities for a manufacturer to make the bags bow & stern shaped to give max efficiency
Just do not have a row with the wife when she is holding the inflation cord & you are in bed -otherwise you will end up as a pancake stuck to the ceiling
 
Uricanejack said:
if you get a chance to see one of your rafts inflated it would be worth while.
Come to think of it I have not seen mine inflated or a youtube video if it inflated. but they are all quite simillar
Click to expand...

At first service the wife arranged to be present during inflation & videoed it so we could all see what it looked like in advance

As an aside---We have also had a trial inflation of life jackets when the bottles were old
My son & I tried to get her to strip off & get in the bath but she refused, but did agreed to stand in the living room & try it

That was a bit of an eye opener as the explosive inflation hurt her chin
But the real shock was when we realised that the inflation cord was wrapped around the valve & no amount of pulling would inflate the bottle
Furthermore she could not see the problem whilst wearing the jacket
Now I check that this is not caught up on all the LJ's on board
 
Last edited:
Storyline said:
Thanks for the replies. The Crewsaver raft has been recently redesigned with larger stability pockets as the previous model had come in for some serious criticism and I am relying on the brand name to reassure me that this has been done properly. Surprisingly there is no information online as to what exactly are the specs of this new version and the only reason I think there is no internal ladder is because of the pbo test but they tested the 6 man version which was an early new production model.

.
Click to expand...

It amazes me how many tests done by PBO on yachts & other equipment & something is found missing
The standard reply from manufacturers being " Oh this is a pre production model later ones will have that"
I often wonder how many of the " pre production" versions get sold before the deficiency gets corrected

Did Crewsaver really not know how big the stability pockets should be & what system should be provided for entry before they made the first model for production?
Or were they just blindly making something with no pre planning or thought & waiting to see what reaction it got.
If so, that demonstrates that they did not have much of a clue about what they are making & that one should not rely on just their name
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

boatmike
Merry Fisher 695
Replies
3
Views
207
Bouba
Bouba

Share this page

Top