Wightlink rescues MacGregor...

Are you suggesting the ballast is held above the water line?
Click to expand...
When you force the boat to go faster the hull lifts out the water - it's what they call planning ... not that you'd know about that in a dog slow cat! ;) - add to that the "hole" in the water just behind the transom and you've got quite a bit of height to empty the tank

So - yes, it is gravity that empties the tank ...
 
Why bother with facts or reason

DogWatch said:
Are you suggesting the ballast is held above the water line? Or have the Merkins rewritten Newton's first law?
........
Click to expand...

I am begining to think some people are allergic to facts, logic and informed opinion. Fireball has correctly answered below - the gravity drain works because of the planing.

But hey don't let us stop you with any actual knowledge of how the boat works. Just carry on with random opinions based on... well nothing as far as I can see.

I think I will join you in your world - I am just off to make a call on a telephone made of cheese ;-)
 
Not wanting to decry the engineers and others making more informed postings on this topic, but....

For me it's simple. I don't like the MacGregor anyway, for aesthetic reasons, but even if I felt otherwise, I'd pass up the opportunity to use one because...it falls over. And yachts aren't meant to do that. In strong winds, they're meant to heel over till the wind spills from the sails and go no further. They might get hit by breaking waves, of course, which changes the outlook somewhat, but I doubt this particular guy got knocked down by a wave, sailing where he was. Oh, and once they've gone over, yachts are meant to come back up again, which this one clearly didn't.

Point taken that any small yacht, such as my own, can find itself overwhelmed by conditions. But I'd still expect any decent yacht to adhere to these simple principles.

Water ballast, centre board, etc? If I wanted a dinghy I'd buy one, and sail it where I felt safe to be tipped over once in a while.
 
Last edited:
is it possible that he didn't forget to lower the keel but rather it fell off?

as boating newbies the first time we went out in our J22 we forgot to lower the keel - luckily didn't put the sails up. no capsize but the poor outboard was having a hard time and we were blowing all over the place.
 
The Nub of mys concern....

According to Macgregors own website the 26m has a range of positive stability with the Ballast tanks empty of 60 degrees.

With the Ballast tanks full they claim a self righting ability, and demonstrate this from 90 degrees

Under CE category C they do not have to produce a stability curve for the boat.

Macgregor explain in some detail and repeatedly that the boat should only be used with the Ballast Tank Empty under very restrictive conditions...

Including..

1) No more than 4 persons on board.
2) All persons in the aft cockpit.
3) No Sails
4) No waves higher than 1foot.
5) Conditions were rescue would be rapid.
6) Warm water.

They really stress that the use of the boat without water in the tanks should be under very restricted conditions... and that even under power the tanks should be full...

Given the very narrow window under which they say that the boat can be operated with empty tanks, and given how I can see almost no conditions under which this could be met in the UK... (Warm Water!!) Is it reasonable that in the event of a simple failure.. (The operator forgetting to fill the ballast tank) the boat is clearly intrinsically unsafe??

Frankly, I think that the boat is unsafe, the Water Ballast should fill automatically, and the operator should have to make a positive choice to stop this happening, versus having to make a positive choice to have it happen.

I also have a big problem with the way this boat is marketed... Macgregors web site shows the boat consistently being used in open water on the Sea... in fact they have produced a video showing the boat being used in seas that must have been running to 5 or 6 meters... Yet in Europe the boat is only certified to Cat C, which is for use in sheltered waters.

I am concerned that this machine, which appeals to inexperienced sailors, is being marketed as intrinsically safe, when it is not, and is suitable for open water use, which it is not certified for.

I think that the concept that you can "Motor" away from or ahead of the weather is frankly bonkers... and may be suitable for the typical North American lake, but is not Suitable for Northern European conditions.

I think that far from being suitable for "newbies" this boat is in fact really only suitable for experienced boaters who understand its limitations, can sail the boat appropriatly, and have a clear understanding of the local conditons they may encounter.



I also think they are really ugly. Why buy one of these when you could get a nice Albin for less cash??? Or even a decent Bayliner??

But thats a different issue.
 
aknight said:
Point taken that any small yacht, such as my own, can find itself overwhelmed by conditions. But I'd still expect any decent yacht to adhere to these simple principles.
Click to expand...

The MacGregor isn't a yacht. It's a boat, with various characteristics, designed to be powered by a large outboard engine and by sails when conditions are right.

All boats can be used in inappropriate conditions. I don't know the circumstances of this particular apparent mishap, so I won't comment on the specific case (although ignorance doesn't seem to stop most people airing their opinions and prejudices). But I do know that many news reports are seriously flawed, with an obvious bias to sensationalism.

It would be interesting to hear the real story, i.e. what an informed and unbiased observer might have said.
 
photodog said:
I think that far from being suitable for "newbies" this boat is in fact really only suitable for experienced boaters who understand its limitations, can sail the boat appropriatly, and have a clear understanding of the local conditons they may encounter.



I also think they are really ugly. Why buy one of these when you could get a nice Albin for less cash??? Or even a decent Bayliner??

But thats a different issue.
Click to expand...

This is all your personal opinion, which of course you are entitled to hold - but it is just that!

Boats are bought by adults who make their decisions based on the information they obtain. The average buyer would, I argue, be under no illusion that he is buying an all weather ocean going yacht if he buys a Macgregor.

So why do you keep trying to say he should not be allowed to buy one because you do not approve?
 
Boats are bought by adults who make their decisions based on the information they obtain.
Click to expand...
Yes - but decisions are based on facts and opinions. If someone who is new to boating is told that this boat is perfect for area X and they can outrun the weather using a big outboard they cannot call upon their own knowledge and experience to tell them otherwise.
 
"The MacGregor isn't a yacht. It's a boat, with various characteristics, designed to be powered by a large outboard engine and by sails when conditions are right."

I know that, and you know that. But it is marketed as "the world's best selling cruising sailboat" - see http://www.macgregor26.com/ - and materials such as the YouTube clip referenced in one of the posts above are clearly designed to enhance its credentials as a yacht. You don't have to be a cretin to fall for this stuff, simply new to the sport and visiting a boat show with your chequebook handy.
 
Last edited:
Forgetting the Water Ballast making it "unsafe"........could say the same about smaller boats with Leeboards, Centreboards / lifting keels.
 
aknight said:
I know that, and you know that. But it is marketed as "the world's best selling cruising sailboat"...
Click to expand...


Fair point.

I was interested to see that the UK MacGregor site, http://www.macgregoruk.com/sailing.htm, claims that the MacGregor 26 is "the fastest and best handling of any of the trailerable cruising sailboats". I find that hard to believe after reading in August's PBO about the Dragonfly 28.

Perhaps the ASA should be informed?
 
Tranona said:
So why do you keep trying to say he should not be allowed to buy one because you do not approve?
Click to expand...


For that matter why do you think he should be allowed to buy one because you do approve???

I have made my position pretty clear about the Macgregor, and why I do not think that it is safe... But just in case you missed my previous spelling it out in black and white...

IF THE OPERATOR DOES NOT FILL THE BALLAST TANKS, THE AVS IS 60 DEGREES.

This on a 26 foot boat which is sold as a cruiser and has a covered deck and a enclosed cabin.

This could easily be fixed by the Ballast being automatically loaded upon entering the water.. and the operator having to make a active decision to stop the tank filling.


I know of NO OTHER small yacht... and dont p.i.s.s about this is a small yacht..... looks like a yacht... is advertised as a yacht... and is probably used as most yachts are used... that should the operator make a simple mistake will fail into a unsafe condition... and make no mistake... a small yacht that can accomodate up to 6 people with a 60 degree avs is unsafe.

And, BTW,, I have never said in my previous postings that people should not be allowed to buy one... I have said...

1)" I find it gobsmacking that a craft of this nature can gain certification and be legl for sale in the UK"
2) " A yacht with a enclosed cabin has to have a failsafe amount of stability to prevent a inversion except in extreme coinditions"
3) "I also cant help but think that there comes a point on the stability curve were someone needs to step in and say... hmmm... thats a deathtrap!"
4) "Later, around the dying embers of the once proud fleet... we would all dance in a hypnotic trance formalising our penance to the god of the wind for creaing such a monstrosity."
5) "I do however think that they do a disservice to a proud seafareing nation such as ours to have these things in country"
6)"Frankly, I think that the boat is unsafe, the Water Ballast should fill automatically, and the operator should have to make a positive choice to stop this happening, versus having to make a positive choice to have it happen"
7) "I am concerned that this machine, which appeals to inexperienced sailors, is being marketed as intrinsically safe, when it is not, and is suitable for open water use, which it is not certified for"


I have not called for it to be banned, or said people should not be allowed to buy it.... what I have done is said precisley why I think the boat is dangerous... and what could be done to fix the problem.

I would sure like to here a arguement from yourself that can justify why you feel a cruising sail boat which has a potential AVS of 60 degrees is safe or should be made available in the Uk... apart from the odvious one of thinning out the bottom of the gene pool.

:)
 
photodog said:
For that matter why do you think he should be allowed to buy one because you do approve???

I have made my position pretty clear about the Macgregor, and why I do not think that it is safe... But just in case you missed my previous spelling it out in black and white...

IF THE OPERATOR DOES NOT FILL THE BALLAST TANKS, THE AVS IS 60 DEGREES.

This on a 26 foot boat which is sold as a cruiser and has a covered deck and a enclosed cabin.

This could easily be fixed by the Ballast being automatically loaded upon entering the water.. and the operator having to make a active decision to stop the tank filling.


I know of NO OTHER small yacht... and dont p.i.s.s about this is a small yacht..... looks like a yacht... is advertised as a yacht... and is probably used as most yachts are used... that should the operator make a simple mistake will fail into a unsafe condition... and make no mistake... a small yacht that can accomodate up to 6 people with a 60 degree avs is unsafe.

And, BTW,, I have never said in my previous postings that people should not be allowed to buy one... I have said...

1)" I find it gobsmacking that a craft of this nature can gain certification and be legl for sale in the UK"
2) " A yacht with a enclosed cabin has to have a failsafe amount of stability to prevent a inversion except in extreme coinditions"
3) "I also cant help but think that there comes a point on the stability curve were someone needs to step in and say... hmmm... thats a deathtrap!"
4) "Later, around the dying embers of the once proud fleet... we would all dance in a hypnotic trance formalising our penance to the god of the wind for creaing such a monstrosity."
5) "I do however think that they do a disservice to a proud seafareing nation such as ours to have these things in country"
6)"Frankly, I think that the boat is unsafe, the Water Ballast should fill automatically, and the operator should have to make a positive choice to stop this happening, versus having to make a positive choice to have it happen"
7) "I am concerned that this machine, which appeals to inexperienced sailors, is being marketed as intrinsically safe, when it is not, and is suitable for open water use, which it is not certified for"


I have not called for it to be banned, or said people should not be allowed to buy it.... what I have done is said precisley why I think the boat is dangerous... and what could be done to fix the problem.

I would sure like to here a arguement from yourself that can justify why you feel a cruising sail boat which has a potential AVS of 60 degrees is safe or should be made available in the Uk... apart from the odvious one of thinning out the bottom of the gene pool.

:)
Click to expand...
well said
 
photodog said:
IF THE OPERATOR DOES NOT FILL THE BALLAST TANKS, THE AVS IS 60 DEGREES.

I would sure like to here a arguement from yourself that can justify why you feel a cruising sail boat which has a potential AVS of 60 degrees is safe or should be made available in the Uk... apart from the odvious one of thinning out the bottom of the gene pool.
Click to expand...

It's even worse than that. Do you realise there are boats out there which CAN CARRY TOO MUCH SAIL FOR THE WEATHER CONDITIONS? And anchors which will not set if USED IN A GREATER DEPTH OF WATER THAN LENGTH OF ANCHOR CABLE? I believe there are even - and you may wish to take a sniff of smelling salts before reading this - engines which WILL NOT GO IF YOU RUN OUT OF DIESEL.

And that's not all. I have distinctly seen several sharp, pointy rocks which DO NOT HAVE BIG FLUFFY MATTRESSES TIED ROUND THEM. Isn't that outrageous? Anyone might bump into one at night and without suitable padding who knows what damage could be done.
 
Orbister, if my boat carries too much sail for the conditions, it heels until it spills the wind. I don't expect it, when operated within a pretty wide range of conditions, to fall right over and then stay over. In most recreational sailing scenarios, carrying too much sail will give you a wild ride and make a mess of the cabin as everything loose flies to leeward. You also probably won't be sailing as fast as you could be. But you don't seriously contemplate a capsize and you don't expect to have to be rescued from the hull of your yacht while it lies at a 90 degree angle, partially awash. That's a somewhat different scenario to the user-induced errors that you gave as examples.

I vaguely recall a case in N. Wales (Bardsea?) not very long ago in which an RCD-certified sailing craft capsized and would not right, either by itslef or with the help of its crew. One or more deaths resulted and the MIB report was scathing about aspects of the boat's design.

The MacGregor may be 4 feet longer and hugely more luxurious below decks than my 22-footer, but I will take the latter anytime. With a heavy heart and lots of risk assessment, I might overcome my quaking fear of the sea and all it holds to take the risks that you describe. But I still want to start from the assumption that my boat will tend not to capsize just because it has some sail up and the conditions are breezy.
 
drift...

slight drift, but every time somone posts a reply to this post and it floats to the top, I think it's about a financial bail out.

Pity it isn't entitled "Wightlink rescues Parker Yachts" )c:

R
 
orbister said:
It's even worse than that. Do you realise there are boats out there which CAN CARRY TOO MUCH SAIL FOR THE WEATHER CONDITIONS? And anchors which will not set if USED IN A GREATER DEPTH OF WATER THAN LENGTH OF ANCHOR CABLE? I believe there are even - and you may wish to take a sniff of smelling salts before reading this - engines which WILL NOT GO IF YOU RUN OUT OF DIESEL.

And that's not all. I have distinctly seen several sharp, pointy rocks which DO NOT HAVE BIG FLUFFY MATTRESSES TIED ROUND THEM. Isn't that outrageous? Anyone might bump into one at night and without suitable padding who knows what damage could be done.
Click to expand...
can you tell us what else you understand about boat design
 
I saw one of these at a boat show once. I caught sight of the tiny wheel, laughed and promptly walked off. Its not a real yacht.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top