Orta Vez
 

Hey Robert, after delivering the C&C121 I posted an ad on the board
saying I would deliver boats at a rate of 350 an hour, not really
interested in or expecting much more work.

Low a behold the owner of a brand new first 37.5 asked me to take his
boat down to Galveston in the AM. I told him it would be a 3 hr trip
and he said OK.

The name of the boat is Orta Ves...

Is that a sign?

Joe

Orta Vez
 

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com..
..
Hey Robert, after delivering the C&C121 I posted an ad on
the board
saying I would deliver boats at a rate of 350 an hour, not
really
interested in or expecting much more work.

Low a behold the owner of a brand new first 37.5 asked me
to take his
boat down to Galveston in the AM. I told him it would be a
3 hr trip
and he said OK.


How are you getting back?

SBV

Orta Vez
 

Joe wrote:
Hey Robert, after delivering the C&C121 I posted an ad on the board
saying I would deliver boats at a rate of 350 an hour, not really
interested in or expecting much more work.


Around here there are dozens of semi-retired captains
wanting delivery work. Some of them seem to make pretty
regular trips, I'm on a few of their crew lists... get asked
about once a month on average.


Low a behold the owner of a brand new first 37.5 asked me to take his
boat down to Galveston in the AM.

You mean a First 36.7? Or one of the older First series?


... I told him it would be a 3 hr trip
and he said OK.

The name of the boat is Orta Ves...

Is that a sign?


Seems like a funny name for a boat. Anyway a 3 hour tour
(everybody sing along ... "a 3 hour tour, a 3 hour tour") is
not enough to thoroughly evaluate a boat, but it would be
interesting to see your opinion of these boats after
checking one out.

IMHO most of the First series (not the new 36.7) have too
small a cockpit, but they are pretty good sailers.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Orta Vez
 

IMHO most of the First series (not the new 36.7) have too
small a cockpit, but they are pretty good sailers.


Doug, just curious...which 1st series boats have you sailed???



RB
35s5
NY

Orta Vez
 

"Capt" Rob wrote:
Doug, just curious...which 1st series boats have you sailed???


More than you

DSK

Orta Vez
 

"Capt" Rob wrote:
So which First boats have you sailed?


More than you.

DSK

Orta Vez
 

DSK wrote:
"Capt" Rob wrote:
So which First boats have you sailed?


More than you.


Doug, you're full of it. You've probably NEVER sailed a First Series
Beneteau and who'd believe you now unless you posted a VIDEO of it?
Ah, well. Enjoy the trawler, Doug. I'm sure you'd "claim" that you do
in any case.
You've turned out to be the biggest fraud around, Doug. Care to measure
the 35s5 cockpit and seat layout vs. a Catalina 36??? Try the 345 while
you're at it. Donal's 33.7 seats 5 people just fine. I've been aboard
two.
I've rarely spotted such a wannabe. You talk about boats that you've
read about or seen on jackstands as though you know them from a major
passage. What happened to the 35s5 at your yard you were going to sail?
HMMMMM?
Exactly right. BUSTED again is Doug.

RB
35s5
NY

Orta Vez
 

"Capt" Rob wrote:
Doug, you're full of it.

The jokes on you, because I'm not.

.... You've probably NEVER sailed a First Series
Beneteau

Well, let's just say

1- I've sailed more than you, including six or seven First
series... skippered a couple in races for that matter... you?

2- I don't care if you (or anybody who wasn't with me at the
time) believes me, because I'm not some internet whacko
trying to impress others with big talk.



.... What happened to the 35s5 at your yard you were going to sail?

The owner sold it and got a Jeanneau. I never did sail that
one, never said I did.

Bubbles, you're nuts.

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Well, let's just say

1- I've sailed more than you, including six or seven First
series... skippered a couple in races for that matter... you?


Well let's just say that amazingly you says 6 OR 7 which is the same
number I've sailed. Interesting that you should give that vague number.
Oh, and I OWN a First series Beneteau, Doug. You begged a few rides.


2- I don't care if you (or anybody who wasn't with me at the
time) believes me,


Really...OH REALLY, they why do you feel the need to defend yourself
each and every time? Doug, I know your type very well. I put on a show
here to be sure, but you really are the wannabe sailor fraud as
charged. And now you own a powerboat. The circle now is complete!


The owner sold it and got a Jeanneau.

Man, just in the nick of time, right, Doug!!!??? Even your generalized
statement that First Series boats "sail well" was dumb and useless. How
about those J-Boats? Do they sail well too? Maybe you'll let the cat
out of the bag and tell us they float well too!
Doug, you are the most insecure sailor since Sloco!


RB
35s5
NY

Orta Vez
 

"Capt" Rob wrote:
Well let's just say that amazingly you says 6 OR 7 which is the same
number I've sailed.

In the Matrix, you mean?





Really...OH REALLY, they why do you feel the need to defend yourself
each and every time?

Do I?



..... Even your generalized
statement that First Series boats "sail well" was dumb and useless.

As opposed to most of your statements, which not only are
dumb but also false?

... How
about those J-Boats?

How 'bout them Dawgs?

... Do they sail well too?

Some of them do.

... Maybe you'll let the cat
out of the bag and tell us they float well too!

Sure.
Except for the J-24s that sometimes sink, that is.

Doug, you are the most insecure sailor since Sloco!


Indeed.
Notice that he's not an internet blowhard, either.

Bubbles, you're nuts.

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Well let's just say that amazingly you says 6 OR 7 which is the same
number I've sailed.


In the Matrix, you mean?



Really, Doug. No need to defend my every post. I'm sure plenty of folks
believe your trash. Keep on motoring!
Thanks for proving what you said about 1st series cockpits and that
you've seen them...at boat shows!


RB
35s5
NY

Orta Vez
 

Joe wrote:
Nice day sailors, both to nimble, to small to cruise in comfort.

I didn't think the 121 was too small. The layout was better
for 2 couples weekending than 1 couple for long term
cruising, but it would be hard to find a boat in that size
range with comparable room & speed.

Could you explain how a boat is too nimble?


.... dont like sail drive units

I'm not crazy about them either, but they do have some
advantages.



.... Not as bad on the 36.7. That kinda money I'd pass in a heart beat.

Well, it's not xpensive for what it is.

Wish I delivered that Sabre, that was a quality day sailor.


Sabres are pretty nice boats... classy.

For that kinda money and that use of a boat I'd go with the P40.


Didn't like the Pearson 40 myself, and it's not as roomy as
the C&C 121 and nowhere near as fast. The big flush deck is
nice.

One thing I did not like about the C&C 121 was the propane
storage well, makes no sense to me to put it inboard and
away from any bulkheads. I also didn't like the aft cockpit
lockers with no bulkheading, relatively large flimsy lids...
open to the sea basically.



IMHO most of the First series (not the new 36.7) have too
small a cockpit, but they are pretty good sailers.


Yeah, big day sailors, small cruisers. Hate to get in a real storm at
sea on either one.


Depends on the equipment & crew more than the boat IMHO.

I'd take the 121 over the 36.7. better looking boat, better quality
IMO.


It's a much bigger boat. I'd agree it's better looking
although I don't think the Benny 36.7 is bad looking... it's
a Farr design after all... never heard of any of them coming
apart either. FWIW C&C's do seem better built overall than
most mass-production boats.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Orta Vez
 

DSK wrote:
Joe wrote:
Nice day sailors, both to nimble, to small to cruise in comfort.

I didn't think the 121 was too small. The layout was better
for 2 couples weekending than 1 couple for long term
cruising, but it would be hard to find a boat in that size
range with comparable room & speed.

Could you explain how a boat is too nimble?

Quirkey, jittery, both designed more for light winds than heavy winds.
Keep in mind I'm not use to a boat leaning over more than a 1/4 inch at
most when I step aboard. I like a good solid feel, a boat that minds
more than it need tending to. If you want to round bouys in a lake, or
enjoy light chop on the bay putzing around then they are good boats. I
would not even class them as coastal cruisers, and IMO a solid boat
that digs in deep makes a major difference in fighting and winning in
storms.

.... dont like sail drive units

I'm not crazy about them either, but they do have some
advantages.

What besides no stuffing box?



.... Not as bad on the 36.7. That kinda money I'd pass in a heart beat.

Well, it's not xpensive for what it is.

Wish I delivered that Sabre, that was a quality day sailor.


Sabres are pretty nice boats... classy.

For that kinda money and that use of a boat I'd go with the P40.


Didn't like the Pearson 40 myself, and it's not as roomy as
the C&C 121 and nowhere near as fast. The big flush deck is
nice.

Flush deck and large overhead, leading to more storage, also has a keel
board.

One thing I did not like about the C&C 121 was the propane
storage well, makes no sense to me to put it inboard and
away from any bulkheads. I also didn't like the aft cockpit
lockers with no bulkheading, relatively large flimsy lids...
open to the sea basically.


I did not have the time or want to go over them with a fine tooth
comb. I just delivered them with out scratching them or running
aground. That was enough for me.


IMHO most of the First series (not the new 36.7) have too
small a cockpit, but they are pretty good sailers.


Yeah, big day sailors, small cruisers. Hate to get in a real storm at
sea on either one.


Depends on the equipment & crew more than the boat IMHO.

I'd take the 121 over the 36.7. better looking boat, better quality
IMO.


It's a much bigger boat. I'd agree it's better looking
although I don't think the Benny 36.7 is bad looking... it's
a Farr design after all... never heard of any of them coming
apart either. FWIW C&C's do seem better built overall than
most mass-production boats.

yeah and they fixed the C&C smile problems.

Joe



Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Orta Vez
 

Could you explain how a boat is too nimble?

Joe wrote:
Quirkey, jittery, both designed more for light winds than heavy winds.

That's a silly assumption. I've sailed a lot of lightweight
boats in strong winds, as long as they don't break (a good
way to define 'construction quality') they do great.

I'd rather sail a 470 in 30 knot winds and 10 foot waves
than most mass-produced keel boats, and any crab crusher.

Keep in mind I'm not use to a boat leaning over more than a 1/4 inch at
most when I step aboard. I like a good solid feel, a boat that minds
more than it need tending to.

I that's partly a matter of goals... do you want a fast
responsive boat, or a home at sea complete with fireplace &
barca-lounger?

... If you want to round bouys in a lake, or
enjoy light chop on the bay putzing around then they are good boats. I
would not even class them as coastal cruisers, and IMO a solid boat
that digs in deep makes a major difference in fighting and winning in
storms.


Sorry to disagree, but a boat with effective foils & rig is
going to be better at "fighting & winning" in storm
conditions... given that the boat is equipped & handled
competently, and (of course) nothing breaks.


.... dont like sail drive units

I'm not crazy about them either, but they do have some
advantages.


What besides no stuffing box?


Less drag, more compact, quieter, better weight
distribution, no prop walk (some people consider that an
advantage), better isolation of the engine & prop from the
rest of the cabin.

Personally, given a choice between a boat with a sail-drive
and an identical boat with conventional engine, tranny, &
shaft; I'd pick the conventional one. But I wouldn't diss
the sail drive just because it's new.

Some fo the big cats have them mounted so that the drive leg
is slanted inward between the hulls for better protection.



I did not have the time or want to go over them with a fine tooth
comb. I just delivered them with out scratching them or running
aground. That was enough for me.


Souds like you did a good job. I did go over the 121 with a
fine tooth comb at a boat show, expected my wife to love it
and maybe end up buying one. Hindsight being 20/20 perhaps I
could have spent my time elsewhere ;)

DSK

Orta Vez
 

DSK wrote:
Could you explain how a boat is too nimble?

Joe wrote:
Quirkey, jittery, both designed more for light winds than heavy winds.

That's a silly assumption. I've sailed a lot of lightweight
boats in strong winds, as long as they don't break (a good
way to define 'construction quality') they do great.

Thats the rub of it...looks fragile to me

I'd rather sail a 470 in 30 knot winds and 10 foot waves
than most mass-produced keel boats, and any crab crusher.

unless it breaks:0)

Keep in mind I'm not use to a boat leaning over more than a 1/4 inch at
most when I step aboard. I like a good solid feel, a boat that minds
more than it need tending to.

I that's partly a matter of goals... do you want a fast
responsive boat, or a home at sea complete with fireplace &
barca-lounger?

With RedCloud I have both

... If you want to round bouys in a lake, or
enjoy light chop on the bay putzing around then they are good boats. I
would not even class them as coastal cruisers, and IMO a solid boat
that digs in deep makes a major difference in fighting and winning in
storms.


Sorry to disagree, but a boat with effective foils & rig is
going to be better at "fighting & winning" in storm
conditions... given that the boat is equipped & handled
competently, and (of course) nothing breaks.

Yeah that breaking problem keep appearing in bay boats that venture
offshore.


.... dont like sail drive units

I'm not crazy about them either, but they do have some
advantages.


What besides no stuffing box?


Less drag,

I don't think so if both boats use folding props, a strut is more
streamline than a lower unit.

more compact, quieter, better weight
distribution, no prop walk (some people consider that an
advantage), better isolation of the engine & prop from the
rest of the cabin.

OK, even if you repeated a few points. Still it's a big trade off, and
long term a mistake IMO

Personally, given a choice between a boat with a sail-drive
and an identical boat with conventional engine, tranny, &
shaft; I'd pick the conventional one. But I wouldn't diss
the sail drive just because it's new.

New has nothing to do with it, water intrusin in that big ass hole in
the bottom of the boat, high dollar parts, and I bet high maintance are
what turn me off...and if you smack it good you have way bigger
problems then a bent prop and shaft.

Joe




DSK

Orta Vez
 

Joe wrote
Thats the rub of it...looks fragile to me


Well, that's an issue for another discussion. Steel boats
have their disadvantages from my point of view, too ;)


I'd rather sail a 470 in 30 knot winds and 10 foot waves
than most mass-produced keel boats, and any crab crusher.


unless it breaks:0)


Never broken one of them yet.


... that's partly a matter of goals... do you want a fast
responsive boat, or a home at sea complete with fireplace &
barca-lounger?


With RedCloud I have both


I will reserve comment until after I have sailed Red Cloud.
However I will say (not intending any insult) that a person
who begins sailing by learning to handle fast tippy racing
boats will have a totally different set of perceptions than
someone who learns to sail in big heavy slow boats.

There was a long discussion on this point some years ago,
and surprisingly enough Donal, who learned to sail in
keelboats and insisted that he had missed nothing by it,
changed tack abruptly after his dinghy sailing experiences.




Yeah that breaking problem keep appearing in bay boats that venture
offshore.


Like what?

Haven't seen any boats break up lately, what gear failures &
breakages I see tend to be maintenance problems rather than
construction flaws. Not that I'm saying one should jump in a
Catalina and head for Cape Horn, but the construction issue
is overblown most of the time.




.... dont like sail drive units

Less drag,


I don't think so if both boats use folding props, a strut is more
streamline than a lower unit.

That may be your opinion, but the test tank says otherwise.


more compact, quieter, better weight

distribution, no prop walk (some people consider that an
advantage), better isolation of the engine & prop from the
rest of the cabin.


OK, even if you repeated a few points

What did I repeat?

.... Still it's a big trade off, and
long term a mistake IMO


Hey, I'm not trying to sell you one!

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Souds like you did a good job. I did go over the 121 with a
fine tooth comb at a boat show, expected my wife to love it
and maybe end up buying one.


Your bridges were burned, and now it's your turn
To cry, cry me a river
Cry me a river-er
Cry me a river
Cry me a river-er, yea yea


BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA! Priceless!!! HIS WIFE CRUSHED HIS PLANS AND
DREAMS!! THERE IT IS IN PRINT FOLKS!!!!
DOUG, YOU ARE NO MAN!!!


RB
35s5
NY

Orta Vez
 

"Capt" Rob wrote:
Your bridges were burned, and now it's your turn
To cry, cry me a river
Cry me a river-er
Cry me a river
Cry me a river-er, yea yea


BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA! Priceless!!! HIS WIFE CRUSHED HIS PLANS AND
DREAMS!! THERE IT IS IN PRINT FOLKS!!!!
DOUG, YOU ARE NO MAN!!!


Bubbles, you're nuts.

DSK

Orta Vez
 

DSK wrote:


more compact= better isolation of the engine & prop from the
rest of the cabin.

What did I repeat?

.... Still it's a big trade off, and
long term a mistake IMO


Hey, I'm not trying to sell you one!

Your goal is accomplished ;0)

Joe

DSK

Orta Vez
 

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Joe wrote
Thats the rub of it...looks fragile to me


Well, that's an issue for another discussion. Steel boats
have their disadvantages from my point of view, too ;)

Besides the rust, and being heavy and slow, what are the
disadvantages of a steel boat.

Scotty

Orta Vez
 

Well, that's an issue for another discussion. Steel boats
have their disadvantages from my point of view, too ;)


Scotty wrote:
Besides the rust, and being heavy and slow, what are the
disadvantages of a steel boat.


Well, there's the rust. Then there's the fact that it's not
as easy to repair as fiberglass. And it rusts.

It can never be as strong as a well-engineered and well
built fiberglass hull & deck, much less carbon fiber. The
biggest disadvantage is the rust, howewver, which once it
starts will never stop and eats away at every part of the
boat, especially the inaccessible crevices which are
structurally critical.

Then there's the issue of galvanic corrosion, not as bad as
aluminum but a dropped wire can eat right thru it, as can a
penny in the bilge. The rust is also a constant problem.

Because the galavanic corrosion, if lead ballast is used it
must be very carefully insulated from the structural parts
of the boat (usually done with fiberglass, which was
originally invented as electrical insulation). Alos because
steel is so heavy, it is difficult to design a steel boat
that can carry a high proportion of ballast. Don't forget
about rust.

Almost every steel boat will have slight ripples in the
metal from welding, and it will look crummy or else be
filled with Bondo. This isn't really a bad problem as long
as the putty doesn't fall off from rust under it.

As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man hours
and oceans of red-lead primer are not enough to keep a steel
vessel from rusting away beneath your feet. The first ship I
was on actually had fiberglass patches on the hull where the
rust had eaten thru. What does that tell you? Something like
"Build it out of fiberglass in the first place!"

But if you're going to get shot at, a couple of steel plates
between you & the bullets is very nice. The only thing
better would be some Kevlar or some of that new fiberglass
tank armor.

;)

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Think I'll stick with glass. I've heard that 'rust never
sleeps'.

What is the biggest fiber glass boat built?
Is it conceivable that a large ship could be built of glass?


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_


"DSK" wrote in message
...
Well, that's an issue for another discussion. Steel
boats
have their disadvantages from my point of view, too ;)


Scotty wrote:
Besides the rust, and being heavy and slow, what are the
disadvantages of a steel boat.


Well, there's the rust. Then there's the fact that it's
not
as easy to repair as fiberglass. And it rusts.

It can never be as strong as a well-engineered and well
built fiberglass hull & deck, much less carbon fiber. The
biggest disadvantage is the rust, howewver, which once it
starts will never stop and eats away at every part of the
boat, especially the inaccessible crevices which are
structurally critical.

Then there's the issue of galvanic corrosion, not as bad
as
aluminum but a dropped wire can eat right thru it, as can
a
penny in the bilge. The rust is also a constant problem.

Because the galavanic corrosion, if lead ballast is used
it
must be very carefully insulated from the structural parts
of the boat (usually done with fiberglass, which was
originally invented as electrical insulation). Alos
because
steel is so heavy, it is difficult to design a steel boat
that can carry a high proportion of ballast. Don't forget
about rust.

Almost every steel boat will have slight ripples in the
metal from welding, and it will look crummy or else be
filled with Bondo. This isn't really a bad problem as long
as the putty doesn't fall off from rust under it.

As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man hours
and oceans of red-lead primer are not enough to keep a
steel
vessel from rusting away beneath your feet. The first ship
I
was on actually had fiberglass patches on the hull where
the
rust had eaten thru. What does that tell you? Something
like
"Build it out of fiberglass in the first place!"

But if you're going to get shot at, a couple of steel
plates
between you & the bullets is very nice. The only thing
better would be some Kevlar or some of that new fiberglass
tank armor.

;)

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Scotty wrote:
Think I'll stick with glass. I've heard that 'rust never
sleeps'.


I heard that too. In fact I've heard it several times, real
REAL loud!

What is the biggest fiber glass boat built?
Is it conceivable that a large ship could be built of glass?


Dunno about the biggest, the new super-yachts are being
built of fiberglass (well, "composite" but it's basically
fiberglass) upwards of 200' and 700 tons. The Navy had a
class of minesweeps built of fiberglass, don't think they
were as long but they were likely more tonnage.

There's no reason a big ship couldn't be built out of
fiberglass. Nobody's doing it because the facilities are
already in place to build them of steel. It would be
interesting to see if fiberglass commercial hulls could have
a longer service life.

DSK

Orta Vez
 

On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 09:20:27 -0400, "Scotty"
wrote:

Think I'll stick with glass. I've heard that 'rust never
sleeps'.

What is the biggest fiber glass boat built?
Is it conceivable that a large ship could be built of glass?


Minesweepers for the Navy were/maybe still are built in a yard in
Gulfport, MS. Can't remember what the length is. I worked at that
plant when it was under different ownership and had a different
product line (offshore production platforms).

Orta Vez
 

DSK wrote:
Well, that's an issue for another discussion. Steel boats
have their disadvantages from my point of view, too ;)


Scotty wrote:
Besides the rust, and being heavy and slow, what are the
disadvantages of a steel boat.


Well, there's the rust. Then there's the fact that it's not
as easy to repair as fiberglass. And it rusts.

You are out of your mind, Steel is much easier nd cheaper to repair and
can be repaired in most ports around the world. I could repaire a 3ft
hole in about 3-4 hrs with steel it. take weeks or months on fragile
glass, and you have that itchy dust, expensive resins, soft cores,
matching gel-coats and it goes on and on for the flammable fiberglass.

It can never be as strong as a well-engineered and well
built fiberglass hull & deck, much less carbon fiber.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha......bwahahaha hahahahahahahahaha

The
biggest disadvantage is the rust, howewver, which once it
starts will never stop and eats away at every part of the
boat, especially the inaccessible crevices which are
structurally critical.

Sounds like you know nothing about maintaining a steel boat.

Then there's the issue of galvanic corrosion, not as bad as
aluminum but a dropped wire can eat right thru it, as can a
penny in the bilge. The rust is also a constant problem.

Oh boy, a penny in the bilge fool, I guess you glass guys leave stray
wires adrift in contact with your hulls allot. Guess you yse romax and
do not run your wires in approved casings. Not smart, better check your
zincs.

Because the galavanic corrosion, if lead ballast is used it
must be very carefully insulated from the structural parts
of the boat (usually done with fiberglass, which was
originally invented as electrical insulation).

Steel punch shot is the way to go on a steel boat.

Alos because
steel is so heavy, it is difficult to design a steel boat
that can carry a high proportion of ballast. Don't forget
about rust.

Have you seen Around the Horn by Irving Johnson? Not enough ballest on
a sailing ship my ass...all the flying P's were steel..You pulling
these spec's outta thin air or what?



Almost every steel boat will have slight ripples in the
metal from welding,

Well a crappy mold will make a fiberglass hull look like crap, I've
seen such cheap FG hulls it looks like they used hatchets to make the
molds. You need skilled labor doing both tasks.
I assure you there are more skilled welders on earth that FG experts.

and it will look crummy or else be
filled with Bondo.

My DeVires has zero bondo, and I challenge anyone to find a weld on the
outside of my hull or cabin

This isn't really a bad problem as long
as the putty doesn't fall off from rust under it.

As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man hours
and oceans of red-lead primer are not enough to keep a steel
vessel from rusting away beneath your feet.

How old is Ol Ironsides?

The first ship I
was on actually had fiberglass patches on the hull where the
rust had eaten thru. What does that tell you?

1.)Total idiots were in command or your ship or they were inept.
2.) Total idiots were repairing your ship or they were inept.
3.) It was a throw away vessel on it's last leg, abused and neglected
all its life due to neglect.

I ran several fiberglass boats in the navy, they were the ones not able
to do any rough work. All the LCM's, LCVP's, were made of steel, cept
some of the old Higgins were marine plywood. Fiberglass was for the
delicate gig's, barges, and liberty boats.

Something like
"Build it out of fiberglass in the first place!"

More like.
"Dereliction of duty is a specifical offence in military law. It
includes various elements centred around the avoidance of any duty
which may be properly expected."

"In the US Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) it is contained
within the regulations governing the failure to obey an order or
regulation. It means that one willfully, through negligence or culpable
inefficiency fails to perform one's expected duties. Ineptitude is a
defence against the charge. The maximum penalty in the US is a
bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of pay and six months confinement.
Acts which are derelict may be charged under more specific offences
such as missing movement, noncompliance with procedural rules,
misbehaviour, malingering, self-injury with intent to avoid service, or
straggling."


But if you're going to get shot at, a couple of steel plates
between you & the bullets is very nice. The only thing
better would be some Kevlar or some of that new fiberglass
tank armor.


yeah...right. Fiberglass tank armor.....

Joe

;)

DSK

Orta Vez
 

I wonder what the weight difference would be, say if Red
Cloud were fiber glass instead of steel.

As a steel boat rusts, does it weigh less?

Scotty


"DSK" wrote in message
...
Scotty wrote:
Think I'll stick with glass. I've heard that 'rust never
sleeps'.


I heard that too. In fact I've heard it several times,
real
REAL loud!

What is the biggest fiber glass boat built?
Is it conceivable that a large ship could be built of
glass?


Dunno about the biggest, the new super-yachts are being
built of fiberglass (well, "composite" but it's basically
fiberglass) upwards of 200' and 700 tons. The Navy had a
class of minesweeps built of fiberglass, don't think they
were as long but they were likely more tonnage.

There's no reason a big ship couldn't be built out of
fiberglass. Nobody's doing it because the facilities are
already in place to build them of steel. It would be
interesting to see if fiberglass commercial hulls could
have
a longer service life.

DSK

Orta Vez
 

DSK wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Think I'll stick with glass. I've heard that 'rust never
sleeps'.


I heard that too. In fact I've heard it several times, real
REAL loud!

What is the biggest fiber glass boat built?
Is it conceivable that a large ship could be built of glass?


Dunno about the biggest, the new super-yachts are being
built of fiberglass (well, "composite" but it's basically
fiberglass) upwards of 200' and 700 tons. The Navy had a
class of minesweeps built of fiberglass, don't think they
were as long but they were likely more tonnage.

There's no reason a big ship couldn't be built out of
fiberglass. Nobody's doing it because the facilities are
already in place to build them of steel. It would be
interesting to see if fiberglass commercial hulls could have
a longer service life.


The Navy typical sells it FG hulls at 10-15 yrs, were it's steel
vessels last an average 30-50 yrs. Check out the surplus auctions.

Fiberglass is way to expensive, fragile, and would have to be 1/2 a ft
thick to match the strength of a steel hull ship. Then the upkeep,
polishing, core rott, scratching, cracking, ect ect ect make's it a
maintance nightmare.

Joe


DSK

Orta Vez
 

Well, there's the rust. Then there's the fact that it's not
as easy to repair as fiberglass. And it rusts.


Joe wrote:
You are out of your mind, Steel is much easier nd cheaper to repair and
can be repaired in most ports around the world.

Fiberglass can be repaired with stuff from Lowes. You don't
even need to be in port. You don't need a welding machine.
Patches or rolls of fiberglass cloth & jugs of resin are a
lot easier to stow than spare steel plates, and they are
much easier to form into the desired shape.




... I could repaire a 3ft
hole in about 3-4 hrs with steel it. take weeks or months on fragile
glass

???

you need to find less lazy workmen.

A 3 ft hole in fiberglass should take about an hour to
repair, then a day to cure. And it wouldn't start rusting
before you'd finished the patch.







Steel punch shot is the way to go on a steel boat.


Cheap and no galvanic corrosion, but less effective as
ballast. Oh well, everything is a trade off.





Have you seen Around the Horn by Irving Johnson?

Yes

... Not enough ballest on
a sailing ship my ass...all the flying P's were steel..

They were also cargo ships. And yes, they would have sailed
much better (not to mention being safer) if they had a
higher ballast ratio.


.... You pulling
these spec's outta thin air or what?


Nope, basic physics.




Well a crappy mold will make a fiberglass hull look like crap, I've
seen such cheap FG hulls it looks like they used hatchets to make the
molds. You need skilled labor doing both tasks.

Agreed.

I assure you there are more skilled welders on earth that FG experts.


Maybe that's true in Texas. Fiberglass is hardly some new
cutting edge voodoo technology, it's only been around about
60 years now. Heck there are 20 year old carbon fiber &
Kevlar boats.

If steel were easier to work then more production boats
would be made of it, since labor cost is the highest factor
in commercial boatbuilding.



As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man hours
and oceans of red-lead primer are not enough to keep a steel
vessel from rusting away beneath your feet.


How old is Ol Ironsides?


News flash: the USS Constitution is made of wood. "Old
Ironsides" is just a nickname.


1.)Total idiots were in command or your ship or they were inept.

That may have been true

2.) Total idiots were repairing your ship or they were inept.

Also may have been true

3.) It was a throw away vessel on it's last leg, abused and neglected
all its life due to neglect.


That was certainly not true, it was the best in it's class
as determined by INSURV

However it was about 30 years old at that time and had seen
many many many sea miles & hard service.


I ran several fiberglass boats in the navy, they were the ones not able
to do any rough work.

And how many of them were 30 years old?
Actually some of them may have been approaching that, the
Navy started buying fiberglass boats in the mid 1950s.



But if you're going to get shot at, a couple of steel plates
between you & the bullets is very nice. The only thing
better would be some Kevlar or some of that new fiberglass
tank armor.



yeah...right. Fiberglass tank armor.....


Look it up. It's not even top secret any more. News flash:
look for the word "composite" when checking the specs. After
all, do they make bulletproof vests out of steel?

Joe since you already have a steel boat, I'm not going to
try and tell you it's lousy stuff. Besides, it isn't lousy,
it's just not as good (ie strong or durable). Steel is
stronger than wood, but there are more than two choices
these days.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Orta Vez
 

On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 10:28:39 -0400, DSK wrote:

Well, there's the rust. Then there's the fact that it's not
as easy to repair as fiberglass. And it rusts.


Joe wrote:
You are out of your mind, Steel is much easier nd cheaper to repair and
can be repaired in most ports around the world.

Fiberglass can be repaired with stuff from Lowes. You don't
even need to be in port. You don't need a welding machine.
Patches or rolls of fiberglass cloth & jugs of resin are a
lot easier to stow than spare steel plates, and they are
much easier to form into the desired shape.

Having made my living for a while as a welder (on offshore deck
sections) and having done a lot of glass work and chased a lot of core
rot, I'd say it depends on the type of repair. If I needed to repair
a holed hull, steel gets the vote for easier and more reliable. I
would not trust any yard in my area to do a holed (particularly below
the water line) hull in glass. If you don't feather back the edges
properly and back lap the repair, there will be a weak spot do to the
loss of the monolithic nature of the woven roving, mat and cloth. Not
sure I would ever trust it. Not an issue with steel.

That said, I'd still rather have a glass boat. Did someone mention
rust as an issue?

Frank




... I could repaire a 3ft
hole in about 3-4 hrs with steel it. take weeks or months on fragile
glass

???

you need to find less lazy workmen.

A 3 ft hole in fiberglass should take about an hour to
repair, then a day to cure. And it wouldn't start rusting
before you'd finished the patch.







Steel punch shot is the way to go on a steel boat.


Cheap and no galvanic corrosion, but less effective as
ballast. Oh well, everything is a trade off.





Have you seen Around the Horn by Irving Johnson?

Yes

... Not enough ballest on
a sailing ship my ass...all the flying P's were steel..

They were also cargo ships. And yes, they would have sailed
much better (not to mention being safer) if they had a
higher ballast ratio.


.... You pulling
these spec's outta thin air or what?


Nope, basic physics.




Well a crappy mold will make a fiberglass hull look like crap, I've
seen such cheap FG hulls it looks like they used hatchets to make the
molds. You need skilled labor doing both tasks.

Agreed.

I assure you there are more skilled welders on earth that FG experts.


Maybe that's true in Texas. Fiberglass is hardly some new
cutting edge voodoo technology, it's only been around about
60 years now. Heck there are 20 year old carbon fiber &
Kevlar boats.

If steel were easier to work then more production boats
would be made of it, since labor cost is the highest factor
in commercial boatbuilding.



As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man hours
and oceans of red-lead primer are not enough to keep a steel
vessel from rusting away beneath your feet.


How old is Ol Ironsides?


News flash: the USS Constitution is made of wood. "Old
Ironsides" is just a nickname.


1.)Total idiots were in command or your ship or they were inept.

That may have been true

2.) Total idiots were repairing your ship or they were inept.

Also may have been true

3.) It was a throw away vessel on it's last leg, abused and neglected
all its life due to neglect.


That was certainly not true, it was the best in it's class
as determined by INSURV

However it was about 30 years old at that time and had seen
many many many sea miles & hard service.


I ran several fiberglass boats in the navy, they were the ones not able
to do any rough work.

And how many of them were 30 years old?
Actually some of them may have been approaching that, the
Navy started buying fiberglass boats in the mid 1950s.



But if you're going to get shot at, a couple of steel plates
between you & the bullets is very nice. The only thing
better would be some Kevlar or some of that new fiberglass
tank armor.



yeah...right. Fiberglass tank armor.....


Look it up. It's not even top secret any more. News flash:
look for the word "composite" when checking the specs. After
all, do they make bulletproof vests out of steel?

Joe since you already have a steel boat, I'm not going to
try and tell you it's lousy stuff. Besides, it isn't lousy,
it's just not as good (ie strong or durable). Steel is
stronger than wood, but there are more than two choices
these days.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Orta Vez
 

If it doesn't move paint it. If it moves, salute it. If you're not sure,
salute it and cut down on the drinking.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Well, that's an issue for another discussion. Steel boats
have their disadvantages from my point of view, too ;)


Scotty wrote:
Besides the rust, and being heavy and slow, what are the
disadvantages of a steel boat.


Well, there's the rust. Then there's the fact that it's not as easy to
repair as fiberglass. And it rusts.

It can never be as strong as a well-engineered and well built fiberglass
hull & deck, much less carbon fiber. The biggest disadvantage is the rust,
howewver, which once it starts will never stop and eats away at every part
of the boat, especially the inaccessible crevices which are structurally
critical.

Then there's the issue of galvanic corrosion, not as bad as aluminum but a
dropped wire can eat right thru it, as can a penny in the bilge. The rust
is also a constant problem.

Because the galavanic corrosion, if lead ballast is used it must be very
carefully insulated from the structural parts of the boat (usually done
with fiberglass, which was originally invented as electrical insulation).
Alos because steel is so heavy, it is difficult to design a steel boat
that can carry a high proportion of ballast. Don't forget about rust.

Almost every steel boat will have slight ripples in the metal from
welding, and it will look crummy or else be filled with Bondo. This isn't
really a bad problem as long as the putty doesn't fall off from rust under
it.

As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man hours and oceans of
red-lead primer are not enough to keep a steel vessel from rusting away
beneath your feet. The first ship I was on actually had fiberglass patches
on the hull where the rust had eaten thru. What does that tell you?
Something like "Build it out of fiberglass in the first place!"

But if you're going to get shot at, a couple of steel plates between you &
the bullets is very nice. The only thing better would be some Kevlar or
some of that new fiberglass tank armor.

;)

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Why? Doug is approximately the same age. :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On 3 Aug 2006 07:10:01 -0700, "Joe" wrote:


DSK wrote:

As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man hours
and oceans of red-lead primer are not enough to keep a steel
vessel from rusting away beneath your feet.


How old is Ol Ironsides?


I nominate this for funniest post for August. I realize it's only the
third of August, but I'm pretty sure nothing will top this!

CWM

Orta Vez
 

Capt. JG wrote:
Why? Doug is approximately the same age. :-)



AM NOT!!

DSK

Orta Vez
 

How old is Ol Ironsides?



I nominate this for funniest post for August. I realize it's only the
third of August, but I'm pretty sure nothing will top this!



Yeah, that was funny. Ol Ironsides was wood. The name came from enemy
fire bouncing off her hull with minimal damage.


RB
35s5
NY

Orta Vez
 

You are out of your mind, Steel is much easier nd cheaper to repair and
can be repaired in most ports around the world.

Fiberglass can be repaired with stuff from Lowes. You don't
even need to be in port. You don't need a welding machine.
Patches or rolls of fiberglass cloth & jugs of resin are a
lot easier to stow than spare steel plates, and they are
much easier to form into the desired shape.


Frank Boettcher wrote:
Having made my living for a while as a welder (on offshore deck
sections) and having done a lot of glass work and chased a lot of core
rot, I'd say it depends on the type of repair. If I needed to repair
a holed hull, steel gets the vote for easier and more reliable.

Since it takes years of specialized study & practice to
become a welder, why would you say it's easier?

Mor reliable... depends on your perspective I guess. I've
done a lot of QA work on pressure vessel welding. Most of
the best welders I've worked with are bikers... don't know
why that is.


... I
would not trust any yard in my area to do a holed (particularly below
the water line) hull in glass.

I wouldn't either. I'd do it myself.


.... If you don't feather back the edges
properly and back lap the repair, there will be a weak spot do to the
loss of the monolithic nature of the woven roving, mat and cloth. Not
sure I would ever trust it. Not an issue with steel.


A weld can never be as strong as the original metal. A
properly done fiberglass repair can be stronger than the
original... in fact, it can be a problem if you make the
patch too stiff because that throws more stress to the other
areas of the hull.

Looks to me like you guys who are already welders have a lot
of faith in metal... that's good. OTOH it would be
interesting to see your opinion after studying a text on
composite engineering. I have done minor fiberglass work for
many years, but recently decided to learn more about it &
the best books seem to be focussed on aviation.


That said, I'd still rather have a glass boat. Did someone mention
rust as an issue?


Why no. Is rust a problem for steel boats?? Who'd a thunk
it? ;)

DSK

Orta Vez
 

DSK wrote:



A weld can never be as strong as the original metal.

Wrong, a weld can.... be and is often... stronger than the original
metal


A
properly done fiberglass repair can be stronger than the
original... in fact, it can be a problem if you make the
patch too stiff because that throws more stress to the other
areas of the hull.

Looks to me like you guys who are already welders have a lot
of faith in metal... that's good. OTOH it would be
interesting to see your opinion after studying a text on
composite engineering. I have done minor fiberglass work for
many years, but recently decided to learn more about it &
the best books seem to be focussed on aviation.


Stainless steel is a result of composite engineering.

Joe

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Oh wait... I was talking about Donal.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Capt. JG wrote:
Why? Doug is approximately the same age. :-)



AM NOT!!

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Also, you're not sheathed in copper. :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Capt. JG wrote:
Why? Doug is approximately the same age. :-)



AM NOT!!

DSK

Orta Vez
 

--
"Swab Rob" wrote



Yeah, that was funny. Ol Ironsides was wood.

And now?

Orta Vez
 

Wow! I haven't seen a bite like that since Jaws!

Scotty


"Joe" took the bait and ran
with......

DSK wrote:
Well, that's an issue for another discussion. Steel
boats
have their disadvantages from my point of view, too
;)


Scotty wrote:
Besides the rust, and being heavy and slow, what are
the
disadvantages of a steel boat.


Well, there's the rust. Then there's the fact that it's
not
as easy to repair as fiberglass. And it rusts.

You are out of your mind, Steel is much easier nd cheaper
to repair and
can be repaired in most ports around the world. I could
repaire a 3ft
hole in about 3-4 hrs with steel it. take weeks or months
on fragile
glass, and you have that itchy dust, expensive resins,
soft cores,
matching gel-coats and it goes on and on for the flammable
fiberglass.

It can never be as strong as a well-engineered and well
built fiberglass hull & deck, much less carbon fiber.


Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha......bwahahaha hahahahaha
hahahaha

The
biggest disadvantage is the rust, howewver, which once
it
starts will never stop and eats away at every part of
the
boat, especially the inaccessible crevices which are
structurally critical.

Sounds like you know nothing about maintaining a steel
boat.

Then there's the issue of galvanic corrosion, not as bad
as
aluminum but a dropped wire can eat right thru it, as
can a
penny in the bilge. The rust is also a constant problem.

Oh boy, a penny in the bilge fool, I guess you glass guys
leave stray
wires adrift in contact with your hulls allot. Guess you
yse romax and
do not run your wires in approved casings. Not smart,
better check your
zincs.

Because the galavanic corrosion, if lead ballast is used
it
must be very carefully insulated from the structural
parts
of the boat (usually done with fiberglass, which was
originally invented as electrical insulation).

Steel punch shot is the way to go on a steel boat.

Alos because
steel is so heavy, it is difficult to design a steel
boat
that can carry a high proportion of ballast. Don't
forget
about rust.

Have you seen Around the Horn by Irving Johnson? Not
enough ballest on
a sailing ship my ass...all the flying P's were steel..You
pulling
these spec's outta thin air or what?



Almost every steel boat will have slight ripples in the
metal from welding,

Well a crappy mold will make a fiberglass hull look like
crap, I've
seen such cheap FG hulls it looks like they used hatchets
to make the
molds. You need skilled labor doing both tasks.
I assure you there are more skilled welders on earth that
FG experts.

and it will look crummy or else be
filled with Bondo.

My DeVires has zero bondo, and I challenge anyone to find
a weld on the
outside of my hull or cabin

This isn't really a bad problem as long
as the putty doesn't fall off from rust under it.

As a Navy veteran, I can tell you that infinite man
hours
and oceans of red-lead primer are not enough to keep a
steel
vessel from rusting away beneath your feet.

How old is Ol Ironsides?

The first ship I
was on actually had fiberglass patches on the hull where
the
rust had eaten thru. What does that tell you?

1.)Total idiots were in command or your ship or they were
inept.
2.) Total idiots were repairing your ship or they were
inept.
3.) It was a throw away vessel on it's last leg, abused
and neglected
all its life due to neglect.

I ran several fiberglass boats in the navy, they were the
ones not able
to do any rough work. All the LCM's, LCVP's, were made of
steel, cept
some of the old Higgins were marine plywood. Fiberglass
was for the
delicate gig's, barges, and liberty boats.

Something like
"Build it out of fiberglass in the first place!"

More like.
"Dereliction of duty is a specifical offence in military
law. It
includes various elements centred around the avoidance of
any duty
which may be properly expected."

"In the US Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) it is
contained
within the regulations governing the failure to obey an
order or
regulation. It means that one willfully, through
negligence or culpable
inefficiency fails to perform one's expected duties.
Ineptitude is a
defence against the charge. The maximum penalty in the US
is a
bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of pay and six months
confinement.
Acts which are derelict may be charged under more specific
offences
such as missing movement, noncompliance with procedural
rules,
misbehaviour, malingering, self-injury with intent to
avoid service, or
straggling."


But if you're going to get shot at, a couple of steel
plates
between you & the bullets is very nice. The only thing
better would be some Kevlar or some of that new
fiberglass
tank armor.


yeah...right. Fiberglass tank armor.....

Joe

;)

DSK

Orta Vez
 

Actually, it's not only made of wood. It's supported by metal... copper.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..


--
"Swab Rob" wrote



Yeah, that was funny. Ol Ironsides was wood.

And now?