Swim platform issues

[jfm]

Firstly from new the platform as always gone up and down out of level, very annoying... Opacmare finally came by after the best part of a year and replaced some flow dividers and inserted some new parts.

Lozzer I think this is a common problem. I've heard about it from other Princess skippers and it happened on the show boat that Princess had at BMYS 2013

If you look at ASM's images you can see that the mechanisms just don't have enough stiffness sideways. When one arm descends faster than the other (can be due to various things, including poor installation alignment or a defect in the Opacmare units or rolling in waves) the effect is that both mechanisms bend inward, which makes the problem worse. As a piece of engineering take a look at the 3.5m long SHS cross bar on ASM's picture. What stupid design. That tie bar does absolutely nothing that the huge GRP platform itself doesn't do. The much better AB Technics system doesn't even have such a cross bar. So what's it doing, other than telling you that the designer wasn't the sharpest pencil in the drawing office? Get rid of it Opacmare, and make the two up/down units stiffer

For quick visual comparison here is AB Technics' unit. From 6mm plate mostly, and all the hydraulics are inside shielded instead of stuck out at the side and exposed to debris like Opacmare's

This is my problem with Princess: their designers design among the best looking things out there in the size range I'm interested in, and there are some really nice design features and modern infused construction and all that. Potentially fantastic boats, and the design of the Princess 56 is top rate, imho. Then someone in Plymouth saves a few quid by fitting rubbish hardware to the boat, like this platform mechanism or incandescent lighting or whatever, and lets the whole side down. It's so annoying, and as ever the buck stops with the owner

 

[jfm]

Good point. Didn't realise only part of the platform lowered. Looking at the geometry of the thing, there doesn't seem to be an easy way of extending the range of movement as there's no space for a longer ram. Ooops, sounds like only solution is to ballast the boat

The lower end of the hydraulic ram needs to be attached closer to the fulcrum of the boomerang shaped lower arm Mike. Then you'd have greater angular stroke. But to do that you have to redesign the whole thing. It would need to be stiffer, and maybe have more powerful hydraulic gear. Not an easy mod, needless to say. If on OP's boat the hydraulic ram is extending to its full length and the platform is still too shallow, he has got a bit of a problem... First thing for OP to check is whether the rams are extending to their max

 

[NGM]

I notice HB Technics make a roller system that allows the tender position to be moved for launching/cruising. We have a fairly heavy tender and the chock position required for the platform to lower with the tender clearing always feels like it is putting too much leverage of mechanism; even when it is locked. Would the slight compromise to aesthetics be worth while to put the mechanism under less pressure and slightly improve boat handling ?

 

[jfm]

I notice HB Technics make a roller system that allows the tender position to be moved for launching/cruising. We have a fairly heavy tender and the chock position required for the platform to lower with the tender clearing always feels like it is putting too much leverage of mechanism; even when it is locked. Would the slight compromise to aesthetics be worth while to put the mechanism under less pressure and slightly improve boat handling ?

I'm wondering about the logic. When in the up position, the mechanism is mechanically locked by hooks/claws that go over bars. It is not held up by the hydraulics. You could put 5x the plated SWL on it. Therefore having the tender slid forward in this mode does no harm but you don't really need to

When in any other position than fully up, the mechanical lock releases. You are hanging on the hydraulics with several leverage/mechanical disadvantages etc working against the hydraulics, and this is when the manufacturer's SWL matters. But in this mode you will have the tender slid aft so that it clears the mother ship for launching. In which case you cannot use the slider mechanism to overcome a problem with a too-heavy tender by sliding it forwards.

So, if you get my drift, adding those sliders seems not to offer any advantage in your case

Please note that everything I've written above is based on the HB Tecnics platform that has mechanical locks. The Opacmare system seems not to have such a lock, otherwise Lozzer wouldn't have arrived at his boat one morning and taken the above picture. With Opacmare it therefore seems you are always hanging on the hydraulics. That's pants but I've said enough on that topic and Princess's annoying penny pinching. If this is the system you have then yes it would help substantially if you fitted the track system and slid the tender forward.

 

[NGM]

Thanks for the reply. I have the HB technics platform so this addresses my concerns.

 

[PRINCESS 56 OWNER]

The Opacmare System on my 56 has the "Hook Lock" arrangement to secure the platform when fully up. The first action of the lift is to deploy the platform away from the stern and then travel down. The whole system works well except for the fact that the platform when fully lowered does not give enough depth of water over it to float the Williams off without hitting the chocks. Certainly a design issue which is being urgently discussed again today hopefully with a reply from the Princess Factory. The boat is out of the water and has had many visitors of varying degrees of interest and technical skills voicing opinions on what can be done to sort the problem as the lift cannot be modified satisfactorily. Other model lifts are being considered. I noticed a reply that suggested considering ballast. It has been calculated that in excess of 3 Tons would be needed in the stern to bring it down to the operating level needed. Given the cost of fuel penalty for carrying this around each year and the fact that Princess have gone to great lengths to reduce weight, increase strength and performance by way of moving to Resin Infusion this would be seen as too big a price to pay. I am therefore still waiting for a reply from Princess which hopefully will come today.

 

[AlbertSeely]

+1
i would like to get the suggestions as well ..

 

[Lozzer]

Hi JFM

My system does have the locks which is confusing me even more. If I am correct these raise as you lower allowing platform to drop. I don't believe that the platform hangs on them though when in up position, purely a safety feature. (I will double check manual).

I don't fancy going for a swim in the port so will have to get boat lifted. I know that I have a proximity sensor on one of the rams, can't remember if it was on both. It could be that one is fouled. Weed build up here is awful.

I have never been satisfied with the platform but I have to put met ski somewhere...

 

[jfm]

Looks like there is a problem with your mechanical engagement with the hooks that lock it in the up position Lozzer. They are meant to hold it in the up position mechanically so that you could even remove all the hydraulic oil ( say) and it still wouldn't creep down. No doubt your lift out will reveal all. Btw, I bet the cost of your haul out on that sized boat in the Med is roughly the same £££ as princess saved by buying opacmare not HB Technics

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

The boat is out of the water

I'd be interested to see some pics of the prob, if available.

 

[Lozzer]

I'd be interested to see some pics of the prob, if available.

When I come out I will take some pics and post. I think it is likely to be next week now as Nick, the local Princess guy wants to be in town to see.

Not so bad for the lift out €800 for a 2 hour lift and hold. Nice thing is it will let me check my cutless bearing at the same time.

I have to say that I find Opacmare stuff to be a little poor and the after sales service is non existence pretty much. I'm hoping that a good blast with a pressure washer will sort my problem but I'm not holding my breath. MIT seems starnge that this fault has occurred after the visit from Opacmare....

Stay tuned...

 

[PRINCESS 56 OWNER]

PRINCESS have suggested putting 750KG of ballast in the Lazarette and they calculate this would bring the stern down by 43mm. They have also admitted that the boat rises by 86mm from full to empty. Considering my boat is not giving sufficient depth over the swim platform when 3/4 full of fuel I am at a loss to understand how they calculate 43mm extra depth from 750KG of ballast will offset 48mm further rise from reducing fuel from 75% to 20%. ANY IDEAS ANYBODY???

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

PRINCESS have suggested putting 750KG of ballast in the Lazarette and they calculate this would bring the stern down by 43mm. They have also admitted that the boat rises by 86mm from full to empty. Considering my boat is not giving sufficient depth over the swim platform when 3/4 full of fuel I am at a loss to understand how they calculate 43mm extra depth from 750KG of ballast will offset 48mm further rise from reducing fuel from 75% to 20%. ANY IDEAS ANYBODY???

What is the actual depth of water coverage over the platform when fully submerged at eg 3/4 fuel?

 

[Nick_H]

PRINCESS have suggested putting 750KG of ballast in the Lazarette and they calculate this would bring the stern down by 43mm. They have also admitted that the boat rises by 86mm from full to empty. Considering my boat is not giving sufficient depth over the swim platform when 3/4 full of fuel I am at a loss to understand how they calculate 43mm extra depth from 750KG of ballast will offset 48mm further rise from reducing fuel from 75% to 20%. ANY IDEAS ANYBODY???

I'm surprised that Princess have suggested that. 750 kgs is quite a lot of extra weight on a P56, could lose you half a knot. It seems a bit odd to resin infuse a boat to save weight, then add a load of ballast.

 

[volvopaul]

I'm surprised that Princess have suggested that. 750 kgs is quite a lot of extra weight on a P56, could lose you half a knot. It seems a bit odd to resin infuse a boat to save weight, then add a load of ballast.

I am gobsmacked that a leading boatbuilder would advise sitting that amount if any to a boat just so that the product they have fitted will work. I'd say its back to the drawing board for this exercise for the 56 owner or owners, simply a bad design or installation , after all most boat owner know that weight in the stern of a boat is totally the wrong place. Yes I know that one of the uk deceased builder were renown for ballasting there boats to make them sit level in the water after mislead building and installations of certain interior fit out, but to sit 750kg in the stern is plain nuts in my view.
With fuel burn as it is why would you want to lugg another 750kg about with you.
While we are on the subject the category coding for persons on board and weight allowed to comply for sea worthiness will all be thrown out the window. I do really wonder who suggested this. Bonkers, I'd have pi55ed myself if this has come for a naval architect or designer.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

PRINCESS have suggested putting 750KG of ballast in the Lazarette and they calculate this would bring the stern down by 43mm. They have also admitted that the boat rises by 86mm from full to empty. Considering my boat is not giving sufficient depth over the swim platform when 3/4 full of fuel I am at a loss to understand how they calculate 43mm extra depth from 750KG of ballast will offset 48mm further rise from reducing fuel from 75% to 20%. ANY IDEAS ANYBODY???

I would reject that out of hand. Adding 750kg will almost certainly reduce the speed and increase the fuel consumption and possibly alter the fore/aft trim at speed. Also as you say, it doesn't look as though it will solve the problem either. Time to get legal probably

 

[volvopaul]

When I come out I will take some pics and post. I think it is likely to be next week now as Nick, the local Princess guy wants to be in town to see.

Not so bad for the lift out €800 for a 2 hour lift and hold. Nice thing is it will let me check my cutless bearing at the same time.

I have to say that I find Opacmare stuff to be a little poor and the after sales service is non existence pretty much. I'm hoping that a good blast with a pressure washer will sort my problem but I'm not holding my breath. MIT seems starnge that this fault has occurred after the visit from Opacmare....

Stay tuned...

A friend of mine and forum member skippered a new 60 something from the Plymouth yard to Portugal, he said the faults were still there on the new boat and the aftersales was non existent until the taps were turned up on the builder, not really what you would expect, sorry for this henryf but its true.

 

[Portofino]

PMYS Fitted the Williams 325 originally to my Princess 54 which we used without issue launching and recovering same with the Passerelle. PMYS fitted the Williams 325 from my 54 onto the new 56 and they have acknowledged the problem concerning the lack of depth of water over the platform when lowered. It is the Factory who have not so far either taken ownership of the problem or produced a workable solution.

Fitted at your request ? -so if you go " all legal"
They will deny that it was intended to do this ( launch / recover W 325 ) -unless you can get some sort of evidence to prove to a court it was sold to you with this clear purpose .

A cheapie blow up kiddie inflatable from a beach shop -that's what they we had in mind " my lord"

 

[volvopaul]

Fitted at your request ? -so if you go " all legal"
They will deny that it was intended to do this ( launch / recover W 325 ) -unless you can get some sort of evidence to prove to a court it was sold to you with this clear purpose .

A cheapie blow up kiddie inflatable from a beach shop -that's what they we had in mind " my lord"

Or one of jfm blow up sofas.

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Fitted at your request ? -so if you go " all legal"
They will deny that it was intended to do this ( launch / recover W 325 ) -unless you can get some sort of evidence to prove to a court it was sold to you with this clear purpose .

A cheapie blow up kiddie inflatable from a beach shop -that's what they we had in mind " my lord"

The spec for the boat says this

Electro-hydraulic raise/lower mechanism for transom platform (suitable for a tender up to 400kgs) is optionally available

Hard to imagine what 400kg tender draws less than a Williams jetrib.