Here's a guy with some firm views

Fr J Hackett said:

I have to say I agree with him on many points and after looking at the Pure 42 a supposedly high latitude cruising ( expedition ) yacht I am more so in agreement.
Click to expand...
Problem is that almost nobody else in the current boat designing/building/buying of bluewater yachts scene agrees with him. The test of robustness of a proposition (hesitate to call it a theory) is whether it can be disproved and on this score there is plenty of evidence in the form of maybe hundreds of boats with the characteristics he disapproves of are successfully sailing around the world. Almost none of them have had a keel drop off and of those tiny numbers that have there is usually a very sound explanation that has little to do with the fact that the keel was bolted on. He claims such boats are prone to broaching - again without any evidence. Surely people who spend somewhere between half a million and a million on such a boat for their round the world trip will have convinced themselves it will do the job and maybe make a bit of a stink if it did not. You never or rarely hear through magazine articles, forums, youtubes etc owners of such boats bitching about how conned they were - only non owners saying how awful boats that they don't actually own are in this respect.

He would be in good company on this forum because as we know there are several contributors who think the same as him, and in just the same way are unable to support their criticism with actual facts.

He does however have a point about T keels, but they are unusual on most boats aimed at the offshore market. He simplifies the issue of catching ropes and nets etc. Having spent 30 years involved with that issue I can say that all boats whatever the underwater arrangements are vulnerable in some way or another, including long keel and propellers in protected apertures. In fact what got me engaged in the subject was picking up a piece of net which hooked round the propeller of my long keel boat filled the aperture jammed the rudder and stopped the engine.. While pots are increasingly being used in deeper water, they are predominantly a coastal phenomenon and not high risk for world girdlers. Incidentally many (most) of the serious bluewater builders fit rope cutters to their boats to minimise the consequence of picking up a rope. Not foolproof - indeed did not help the second time I picked up a line between pots which wrapped around the keel, missed the saildrive and crossed over around the rudder. That was a relatively long fin keel with raked leading edge and a spade rudder, but a skeg would not have helped.

Telling that he suggests buying older boats rather than the latest designs because they conform to his prejudices, just as many poster here suggest. If that were indeed the way to go then none of these newer designs would exist and the old ones would still hold sway - but they don't and no matter how many scare stories people like him trot out the reality is that buyers/owners consider the new designs superior for their needs.
 
Tranona said:
Problem is that almost nobody else in the current boat designing/building/buying of bluewater yachts scene agrees with him. The test of robustness of a proposition (hesitate to call it a theory) is whether it can be disproved and on this score there is plenty of evidence in the form of maybe hundreds of boats with the characteristics he disapproves of are successfully sailing around the world. Almost none of them have had a keel drop off and of those tiny numbers that have there is usually a very sound explanation that has little to do with the fact that the keel was bolted on. He claims such boats are prone to broaching - again without any evidence. Surely people who spend somewhere between half a million and a million on such a boat for their round the world trip will have convinced themselves it will do the job and maybe make a bit of a stink if it did not. You never or rarely hear through magazine articles, forums, youtubes etc owners of such boats bitching about how conned they were - only non owners saying how awful boats that they don't actually own are in this respect.

He would be in good company on this forum because as we know there are several contributors who think the same as him, and in just the same way are unable to support their criticism with actual facts.

He does however have a point about T keels, but they are unusual on most boats aimed at the offshore market. He simplifies the issue of catching ropes and nets etc. Having spent 30 years involved with that issue I can say that all boats whatever the underwater arrangements are vulnerable in some way or another, including long keel and propellers in protected apertures. In fact what got me engaged in the subject was picking up a piece of net which hooked round the propeller of my long keel boat filled the aperture jammed the rudder and stopped the engine.. While pots are increasingly being used in deeper water, they are predominantly a coastal phenomenon and not high risk for world girdlers. Incidentally many (most) of the serious bluewater builders fit rope cutters to their boats to minimise the consequence of picking up a rope. Not foolproof - indeed did not help the second time I picked up a line between pots which wrapped around the keel, missed the saildrive and crossed over around the rudder. That was a relatively long fin keel with raked leading edge and a spade rudder, but a skeg would not have helped.

Telling that he suggests buying older boats rather than the latest designs because they conform to his prejudices, just as many poster here suggest. If that were indeed the way to go then none of these newer designs would exist and the old ones would still hold sway - but they don't and no matter how many scare stories people like him trot out the reality is that buyers/owners consider the new designs superior for their needs.
Click to expand...
I agree with nearly all the points you make except the issue of wide sterns and broaching. Fat wide sterned boats are demonstrably more prone to broaching than more conservative sterned ones.The problem can be mitigated with twin rudders but that has its own problems in boat handling at slow speeds. Maybe not a problem when crossing oceans but so called blue water yachts spend a tiny proportion of their life actually crossing oceans!

His dismissal of all bolt on keels is nonsensical.
 
john_morris_uk said:
I agree with nearly all the points you make except the issue of wide sterns and broaching. Fat wide sterned boats are demonstrably more prone to broaching than more conservative sterned ones.The problem can be mitigated with twin rudders but that has its own problems in boat handling at slow speeds. Maybe not a problem when crossing oceans but so called blue water yachts spend a tiny proportion of their life actually crossing oceans!

His dismissal of all bolt on keels is nonsensical.
Click to expand...
Actually there is a lot of evidence that wide sterned twin rudder boats are much less prone to broaching than old narrow sterned IOR boats with rudders further forward.
The Beken of Cowes and even early Rick Tomlinson calendars were full of pictures of spectacular spinnaker breaches, often death roll to windward.

Rock steady twin rudders and asymmetrics going at twice the speed downwind have forced them to look at more artistic photos instead.
 
dunedin said:
Actually there is a lot of evidence that wide sterned twin rudder boats are much less prone to broaching than old narrow sterned IOR boats with rudders further forward.
The Beken of Cowes and even early Rick Tomlinson calendars were full of pictures of spectacular spinnaker breaches, often death roll to windward.

Rock steady twin rudders and asymmetrics going at twice the speed downwind have forced them to look at more artistic photos instead.
Click to expand...
That may be true. However the average blue water boat crew might not be as skilled at keeping the boat under the sails as some of those racing crews. Using narrow sterned boats with the rudder set forward isn’t a killer argument either?
 
john_morris_uk said:
That may be true. However the average blue water boat crew might not be as skilled at keeping the boat under the sails as some of those racing crews. Using narrow sterned boats with the rudder set forward isn’t a killer argument either?
Click to expand...
Surely nobody hand steers offshore in cruising boats. And the wide stern twin rudders have proven superbly stable under autopilot.

Just listened to half the video and concluded pure b####ks.
When he started he approached lots of organisations and people seeking quotes to support his views, especially on "bolt on keels". He only used the handful that agreed with his prejudices and buried the other comments.

I crossed the pond on a friend's beautiful X Yacht. The keel was bolted to a steel subframe that also took the rig stresses. Excellent engineering. And super smooth crossing.

I wonder how many Kraken yachts have actually sailed round the world vs other makes. Very few ( have there been any?). Meanwhile others are going sailing round perfectly safely.
 
john_morris_uk said:
I agree with nearly all the points you make except the issue of wide sterns and broaching. Fat wide sterned boats are demonstrably more prone to broaching than more conservative sterned ones.The problem can be mitigated with twin rudders but that has its own problems in boat handling at slow speeds. Maybe not a problem when crossing oceans but so called blue water yachts spend a tiny proportion of their life actually crossing oceans!

His dismissal of all bolt on keels is nonsensical.
Click to expand...
Things have moved on with fat sterned boats. subject was sprt of discussed in the thread below that atsrted comparing mass production boats with up market ones. I have some sympathy with your view from my first Bavaria which (particularly with its shallow keel was a bit of a handful in a breeze. However much of that can be mitigated by reducing sail such as having a 115% genoa rather than 135%. Not suffesting the boat is a good choice for bluewater, although many of the same basic design are in use for that. Now though such features as chines and fuller forward sections have led to better balanced heeled waterplanes and fractional rigs with smaller headsails have led to reductions in in the shift of CE and CLR when heeled.

Agree of course about bolt on keels. Like many who take on extreme positions he talks only about what might happen rather than what does. So to sell his ideas and boats he needs to find like minded people with deep pockets and perhaps not so many of those around.
 
Those boats cost a fortune. It's more convenient (and lets face it economically possible) for people to buy a cheap boat and argue it's the best in the world than to face the obvious.

First off look at the material in the keel, if it is cast iron it tells you something about the design brief. There is no reason to produce an iron keel except to make an inexpensive boat, none. The argument for encapsulated keels is more nuanced but not by much, an encapsulated keel has almost all the advantages except cost.

.
 
Encapsulated keels don’t offer the same manoeuvrability or performance so cost definitely isn’t the only consideration. Whether those are important to blue water sailors is a debate, but from a pure design perspective there are many considerations
 
Whilst I have happily sailed many boats with bolt on keels, and my previous boat had a swing keel, it is not right for Trinona to constantly go one about their being no evidence of issues with bolt on keels.

Cheeki Rafiki Keel Failure - Marine Surveyor Study - IIMS

The ISAF started a review following the cheeky rafiki incident where they identified 72 yachts with keel failure and 25 deaths. They thought that was an under report as many more as often a sinking is very rapid with little chance to fire off a mayday or have one picked up.

I follow a marine surveyor, ben sutcliffe, on youtube
who sees many damaged fin keels. Very good video here on the issues caused by groundings.

It is clearly a vulnerable area and not right just to wave away. However whether worth paying for a Kraken or just taking good care of a well engineered bolt on keel boat is entirely up to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top