penfold
Well-Known Member
Man's only got one bum.
And I’ve used it! (Unless you’ve put a new one in?)I’ve only got one WC aboard.
And I’ve used it! (Unless you’ve put a new one in?)
My take is a single heads, accessible close to the companionway is best for a "normal sized" yacht. The fewest through hulls the better and the nearer the heads to the CG of the boat the better too.I just watched the latest video, the initial layout looks ok, but having just one head? If Leo is planning to take passengers in the future as he indicated, perhaps another head should be planned in?
He has spent an absolute fortune on this rebuild, it's just a little thing but could make all the difference.
I don’t see any real need for the heads to be near the companionway. I also think that whilst one might not want to drill holes in the hull for fun, it’s easy to be overly paranoid about through hull fittings. Our boat has 19 through hull fittings only a few of which are in the topsides above the waterline. (This count excludes the rudder stock, exhaust and stern tube!)My take is a single heads, accessible close to the companionway is best for a "normal sized" yacht. The fewest through hulls the better and the nearer the heads to the CG of the boat the better too.
Boo2
Not so sure. Isn't failure one of the major claims on insurance? I know first hand of a couple of sinkings on our river through failure.it’s easy to be overly paranoid about through hull fittings.
Please reference these multiple claims on skin fitting failure.Not so sure. Isn't failure one of the major claims on insurance? I know first hand of a couple of sinkings on our river through failure.
My surveyor inspected all the Blakes scrupulously asked for several to be replaced. One that was not being used (used to be for a saltwater galley intake - which I don’t use at present) he recommended was removed and blanked-off. I think that tells you what you need to know.
Also millions of boats with multiple holes in haven't sunk. This argument comes up every time when seacocks are discussed.Not so sure. Isn't failure one of the major claims on insurance? I know first hand of a couple of sinkings on our river through failure.
My surveyor inspected all the Blakes scrupulously asked for several to be replaced. One that was not being used (used to be for a saltwater galley intake - which I don’t use at present) he recommended was removed and blanked-off. I think that tells you what you need to know.
I agree. I’m a little cynical about citing examples of boats on rivers. In my experience some of the worst maintained boats I’ve seen are used on rivers. Perhaps it’s the sense of being so close to dry land that brings in the relaxed attitude to normal best practice. (Brass fittings are fine as they don’t rust do they….!)Also millions of boats with multiple holes in haven't sunk. This argument comes up every time when seacocks are discussed.
I'm pretty sure Leo would fit the best money can buy. Also I can't imagine him neglecting them to the extent they sink the boat, isn't this the problem?
I don’t see any real need for the heads to be near the companionway. I also think that whilst one might not want to drill holes in the hull for fun, it’s easy to be overly paranoid about through hull fittings. Our boat has 19 through hull fittings only a few of which are in the topsides above the waterline. (This count excludes the rudder stock, exhaust and stern tube!)
Ah. But boat will only have one holding tank and one outlet.Man's only got one bum.
In your opinion.Ah. But boat will only have one holding tank and one outlet.
One head good. Two heads better!
Ink
One for the owner, one for guests, one for the crew?In one of my yachting world annuals from the early sixties a retired military man had three toilets in his fifty foot mfv………keeping regular?
One for the owner, one for guests, one for the crew?