New Tender for Blue Angel

[BartW]

Bart, you've shown the option I support in line with the front edge of the cockpit seats, which could make it a bit awkward to shuffle in when the table is there. Could they go at the back of the seat, or is that too far back? I seem to remember the Sunseeker supports are mounted on the GRP moulding behind the seats.

yep, the drawing was a rough scetch, quickly made last night, but I have checked, the poles can be more backwards,
the exact position has te be carefully fixed (approx 10cm between the pole and the railing tbc)

but we actually never use that bench for the table,
its possible to move the table there, but did it only ones iirc
the SS fixing plates haven't been mounted yet for that table position, I still have them,

We prefer to sit on the bench on the other side;
there are often lady's onboard who prefer to sit in that corner, protected for a breeze.

without that old bench, the cockpit would look better and more "airy"
but we are used to the extra storage space, for foldable chairs, cockpit covers, fishing rods, passerel railing,
so the old bench will stay there.

 

[BartW]

is there any mileage in having supports which are temporary (i.e. only installed when the RIB is loaded) and when at anchor or in a marina for any length of time they can be taken down and the aesthetics restored.

not really, upstairs on the FB is her home base, she's there 99% of the year

 

[BartW]

Not sure how we are going to cope with a Jetski as well though and I'm not intending lifting the Jetski onto the FB.
In our home berth though, the Jetski will probably spend most of its time on one of those plastic docks.

you need a new boat Mike, something like this fe:

oh yes, and this picture prooves that the overhang on a C70s still has some headroom for extra weight :encouragement:
(this boat in these pics is one year younger then Blue Angel)

 

[BartW]

so it's much better to make them look substantial: I'd rather go for 80 than 60mm, in fact.
And since after all also the deck is wooden built on BA, you might check if it's possible to fit a couple of poles also under the deck, 'kinda extensions of the above poles, going down to the hull and attached to the stringers.

all agreed.

 

[BartW]

IF you got to seriously strengthen the f/b cantilever, and IF you're considering redoing the f/b teak, THEN and only THEN, I'd sand the teak down a bit (I guess it's the ready made teak faced ply like I have (rather had) in the decks) and apply a 200+gr/m2 mat with epoxy and then get some new teak on top. This will help by strengthening the upper skin of this complex construction .

Vas,
the strength is in the side "tubes" there is no teac,
the surface in between, the FB floor where the teac is, doesn't add any strength against cantilver,
the overhang in this position is very thin (approx 10cm thick) compared to these tubes approx 40cm height.
and is constructed with small wooden beams in the width direction.

 

[vas]

Vas,
the strength is in the side "tubes" there is no teac,
the surface in between, the FB floor where the teac is, doesn't add any strength against cantilver,
the overhang in this position is very thin (approx 10cm thick) compared to these tubes approx 40cm height.
and is constructed with small wooden beams in the width direction.

I know, but imnsho strengthening the floor WILL strengthen the whole cantilever. I'll report when I finish doing mine

anyway that was an idea IF you were going for a re-teak on the f/b floor.

cheers

V.

 

[BartW]

Your comment above gives me a thought: there are several canados 70/23 in Antibes. I will take a look and see what tenders they have. I think Highlander, opposite my boat, has a Novurania 400 with Yam 50, which is 50kg lighter maybe than 430+70. BTW, the Yam 70 is by far the lightest 70 4T ever made; it weighs same as a Yam 50/60 within a few kilos

Highlander is a younger boat iirc, >2000 I guess she has a GRP superstructure, no real comparison,
but if you see a older C70s, C23, C24 <1999 with heavy tender on top, pls let me know,
thanks !


yes that Yam 70 is key in this size Rib.

 

[BartW]

anyway that was an idea IF you were going for a re-teak on the f/b floor.

I hope that all circ's are ok to fit new teak in 2..3 year
at least thats the plan today, because the teak is actually OK as it is now.

On BA, this is solid teak, originally 12mm but now only 6..7mm left,
glued on marine ply,
so plan is to take off all old teak,
replace eventual bad patches of the ply if needed,
and then sealing it all with epoxy or synthetic rubber, or... tbc
and then place new teak on top. ...

 

[scubaman]

Hi Bart,

Some thoughts just for consideration. When we were looking at the Fleming some time ago, she had severe cracks in the gelcoat on the areas marked with red arrows on the pics. In the cockpit they are just out of picture, on the underside of the overhang, where the back wall of the saloon meets the overhang.

My thought then was that eg. in head seas, the hull flexes and the substantial side pillars force the upper deck to move in different 'sync' to the rest of the superstructure.

According to the surveyor these cracks were more a cosmetic concern but the gelcoat had actually cracked away so there must have been quite a bit of flexing. Furthermore, when I walked on the overhang it squeaked under the foot and didn't feel reassuringly rigid.

I'm not sure if it's doable, but one consideration might be to put some dampening on the pole mounts (maybe on top, hidden inside the overhang) to reduce the sudden shocks of hitting a wave?

Of course, the wooden superstructure is more flexible to begin with, but just something to consider.

 

[rafiki_]

Not a bad suggestion Scuby. Bart, you can get closed cell polyeurathane that is used in damper mountings on top end cars. These damp out the higher frequency vibrations, the sort likely to cause cracking in your structure. As I understand it you are an acoustics specialist, so you may be familiar with this type of material. If you have a look, ensure you go for the closed cell material, as this will not absorb water. There are cheaper open cell versions, but these collapse very quickly and of course absorb water. Bayer will be a supplier.

 

[BartW]

. When we were looking at the Fleming some time ago, she had severe cracks in the gelcoat on the areas marked with red arrows on the pics. In the cockpit they are just out of picture, on the underside of the overhang, where the back wall of the saloon meets the overhang.

I'm quite surprised to hear about these cracks,
while there are 2 supports for the FB overhang on each side on this Fleming,
The vibrating and fletching should be a lot less than in my case where there are no supports.
I can honestly confirm that there are no such crack's nowhere on BA's FB overhang.

there is / was just one leak in the FB overhang:
there is a big remove-able panel in middle of the FB overhang, right above the cockpit, where also is such a panel,
these panels can be removed for lifting engines or genny's from the engine room,
these panels are nicely covered with teak, and nicely integrated in the other teac floor.

There is one seam, parallel and close to the cantilever line of the overhang; there was a leak from the FB to the cockpit.
problem was that the recaulking of that seam had been done without the weight of the tender on top,
so the seam was a bit more "open" when the tender weight was on top, which caused that leak !
Last spring we took out the caulking from that seem, put the tender in place, (overhang is bended a bit down, and the seam goes open a bit)
and filled the seam again with caulking. and now this is completely water proof.


I think that I wouldn't have to worry too much about 100kg extra weight,
but the discussions on here convinced me to place the Option 1 Poles anyway,
I don't think these poles need to be isolated,
I think that a solid (80mm) and stiff pole between the FB overhang and the cockpit floor and perhaps even the stringers on the bottom of the hull
would be a good improvement of the total stiffness of the boat, better then that it ever has been,
and so far I've never had any problem with that.

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

I think that I wouldn't have to worry too much about 100kg extra weight,
but the discussions on here convinced me to place the Option 1 Poles anyway,
I don't think these poles need to be isolated,
I think that a solid (80mm) and stiff pole between the FB overhang and the cockpit floor and perhaps even the stringers on the bottom of the hull
would be a good improvement of the total stiffness of the boat, better then that it ever has been,
and so far I've never had any problem with that.

Is this the kind of pole you had in mind, to increase stiffness on board...?

 

[Pinnacle]

JTB - you are a naughty boy!

 

[BartW]

Is this the kind of pole you had in mind, to increase stiffness on board...?

thats exactly what I had in mind Jimmy, with the right support and finish on each side

 

[newWave]

The supports will need some more tanning in order to fit the white gellcoat of BA propperly.
Though previous areal pictures of BA showed sufficient tann if I remember correctly. But then I was admiring BA's lines

 

[jfm]

Goog going Jimmy

BartW, check this out. Its a Canados 82, from 1987 the all-wood era, and the owner has fitted poles. (A bit too thin - he should have listened to MapisM ). I'm pretty sure these are not original Canados 82 spec, so they have been retrofitted. And he doesn't even have as big a cantilever as Blue Angel

 

[MapisM]

That's nothing, she doesn't seem to have a crane up there, too!
Re. thickness, LOL, yeah. If asked, I would have advised also to fit the poles straight vertical.
I guess they tried to follow the angle of the superstructure, but that shouts afterthought from a distance...
Btw, there's something to be said also re. the swim platform extension, but that's another chapter.

PS: not to mention that vertical poles are just the ticket, for the usage JTB suggested...

 

[BartW]

, I would have advised also to fit the poles straight vertical.
I guess they tried to follow the angle of the superstructure, but that shouts afterthought from a distance...
Btw, there's something to be said also re. the swim platform extension, but that's another chapter.

yes
the poles are also in a difficult / wrong position for handling the lazy lines ....

and the steps and swimplatform are a retrofit, I have an article on that,
Some of the guy's that worked on my transom steps, worked on these at Canados.

In Sanary sur mer is a Versilcraft "Giamiaca" with exactly the same mod,.... not my cuppa.

 

[BartW]

not to mention that vertical poles are just the ticket, for the usage JTB suggested...

indeed, perfect for S & E

 

[Pinnacle]

indeed, perfect for S & E

Good job they don't look at the Forum or you would both be in the poo.

Doesn't mean you're wrong though!