Page 16 of 18 FirstFirst ... 612131415161718 LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 176

Thread: Late Pacs

  1. #151
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pogen View Post
    Point of reference, on our Pac Cup trip of 15 - 16 days two people used well under 20 gal of water for all uses, though for the first 4 or 5 days we should have been forcing ourselves to drink more. And I don't think adding a drouge to go even slower in a slow boat is really a good idea -- except in some sort of storm/survival scenario.
    If I can solve the balance problems, I can eliminate the stern trying to get in front of the bow (too far forward CLR), and I won't need a drogue except for running in a storm. I agree that 22.5 gallons is a lot. I drink 0.5 gallon a day in warm weather. But if I have any gastrointestinal issues (or the first boat ever of seasickness), that number will go way up. I had a virus once (norovirus) while crewing on a commercial vessel that caused me to lose 2 gallons (16 pounds) per hour for four hours. Fortunately, we had a medic who could feed me saline via IV. Having enough water to meet an emergency like that is part of self-sufficiency. I agree that the 21-gallon-rule is just about right for a fast boat. I do feel safer in my slow boat with a little extra.

    By the way, for dehydration, I have a small supply of Pedialyte powder in my first aid kit. Just mix in bottled water. Sport drinks like gatorade are a bad idea - they are actually hypertonic and taken undiluted will exacerbate dehydration. Too much salt.
    Last edited by pbryant; 05-26-2016 at 02:55 PM.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dazzler View Post
    Hello Peter,
    I have been following your TransPac prep with interest. My parents were the original owners of Ariel #256 FLYING CLOUD. Their boat has had a few subsequent name changes and is, I believe, now in Morro Bay. I well remember racing against your boat when it was JUBILEE. Dean Morrison was tough to beat.

    I'm prompted to write with some comments on our weight issues. The Ariels were originally built some with an Atomic 4 and most without. For the boats without an engine, there was added ballast in the form of a good sized wedge shaped chunk of lead under the cabin sole. Additionally, the dealer for San Francisco Bay added more lead well forward under the head area. I wonder if your boat has any of the "added" ballast, and if so, if removing it would help, considering all the other weight you have onboard.

    I was surprised by your problem of how to stow the outboard. We hardly ever used our long shaft Evenrude. The well plug was left in and the motor lived on its side in the engine compartment. The fuel tank was below.

    Tom P.
    Thank you Tom! Try as I might, I have never been able to wedge my 6 HP, 4 stroke, long shaft Nissan outboard into the compartment on its side. I have two fuel tanks in there that would have to be repositioned, and the thought of storing gasoline below makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

    I have looked for the extra ballast "pig" under the main cabin sole. All I can find are two eyeloops of multiple strands of very rusted wire poking up out of the resin. I assume that was for loading in the main ballast. I don't want to disturb those loops because I once drilled a very shallow hole in the resin and got a minigeyser of water. There's water just under the resin. I didn't know about the added ballast under the head area. I'd have to saw through the sole there to look for it. The head without a holding tank, which is illegal, was removed by me and the through-hulls glassed in right after I bought the boat. Since I have a captain's license, the CG would throw the book at me if I'd left it there. So that's a few pounds taken away from the forward cabin. If I drill an inspection hole through the sole to look for the forward ballast, what would it look like?

    I suspect Mr. Morrison, being aware of the speed penalty produced by the extra ballast, may have removed it.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Santa Rosa
    Posts
    644

    Default

    I've been following this thread, but since I'm not Transpacking just for fun. I sailed on an Ariel with Ken Jesmore in the 1970s out of Sausalito. An oft discussed topic was the removal of the two iron "pigs" that lived in the bilge sump in outboard models that compensated for the Atomic 4 that weighed down inboard models. If your sump is shallow, there's a possibility the "pigs" were glassed over at some point. They were sort of wedged in with some wood boards, if I remember correctly - sort of loose. They're rectangular blocks with a "loop" handle on one end. I think they weighed something like 200# each. You might inspect the top of the sump to see if it looks "pro" or "amateur" in its finish.

    But what caught my eye was the "mini geyser" of water" when you "drilled a very shallow hole in the resin." Have you had a good survey recently? It sounds like the hull might be waterlogged. A good "tap" job during a haul out would quickly determine whether the hammer "tapped" or "mushed." Since the main ballast is encapsulated a surveyor might be able to tell you whether there's a problem with the structural integrity of the hull. The boat's been sitting in water for decades, and fiberglass is permeable, so absorbs water. Ariels were built in an era where everything was hand done, and in that era it wasn't unusual for workers to leave voids. I know the common theme is "They're solid fiberglass," but they're not. They're multiple layers of fiberglass and roving that someone mopped/rolled resin into/onto. There were good days and bad days at the factory.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    380

    Default

    Peter,
    Pat B. provides some really good advice. Water in the keel/ballast area was/is a known problem with Ariels. My parent's boat had the same problem.

    As for the added lead pig, I really don't remember how it was fastened. We made no attempt to remove it. I have no idea what the floor around your head looks like. On your boat the area may or may not be original. My best recollection (50 something years later) is that the additional lead added in SF Bay boats was in the form of lead ingots that had been cut and placed well forward in the area somewhere near under the head. It was an area that did not require demolition for access.

    You really should reconsider having a fuel tank for your outboard "inside" your boat. It is commonly done with no downside consequences when done with reasonable care. The benefits include moving weight inboard and freeing up space in the outboard locker.

    Tom P.
    Last edited by Dazzler; 05-26-2016 at 10:21 PM.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Smokester View Post
    This is a report for s/v Owl after 5 days, 400 nm under sail at sea. The experience was overwhelmingly positive. And yes, we were tempted to write Owl’s name in the GPS.
    John: Congratulations from your one time dock neighbor CLOUD. Well done!

    And, thank you for the insightful write-up. The SSS is about learning and sharing. Others will hopefully learn from, and be inspired by your experience.

    Tom P.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Albany, CA
    Posts
    169

    Default

    John, Thanks for sharing. Your story also confirms the need for the 400nm qualifier. You will find stuff that otherwise would go un-noticed.

    Congratulations on finalizing the qualifier.

    Dirk "TIJD" First 30JK

    Quote Originally Posted by The Smokester View Post
    This is a report for s/v Owl after 5 days, 400 nm under sail at sea. The experience was overwhelmingly positive. And yes, we were tempted to write Owl’s name in the GPS track.

    The biggest high was sitting on the bow offshore in a cobalt blue ocean, big sky and 10 knots wind. And then there was the serendipitous talk by VHF with s/v Libra, when we crossed 10 nm apart after 3 days at sea…We on the outbound and she in. Communications (with many of you) via sat pager were very big events. Thank you.

    By far, the lows involved drifting aimlessly near Noonday Rock and the North Farallon, and later off Pt Reyes, just barely outside the shipping lanes. I thought life was over…But then more highs: My good friends reasoned me through it or gave me some tuff luv (usefully in the form of inferential logic).

    Mostly, winds were about 8-10 knots NW with periods of undetectability, sometimes mixed with mist and drizzle. But mostly glorious. For the last 24 hours I saw 10-30 kt NW (probably gusting higher on the way down the SF channel) as the weather turned, except once again near Pt Reyes where we were totally becalmed (as in take the sails down and burn them, you are driving me crazy) for an hour or two around noon near Pt Reyes.

    Lessons learned: When the wind dies, eat hearty, get clean, rest, fix stuff. If you get crazy, heave to or double reef, eat, rest. All better. When the wind blows put the sails back up and go.

    Systems on Owl worked well with the following exceptions: 1) The Iridium Go, which had been apparently thoroughly debugged over the last month, quit due to the SIM being deregistered. This has been an ongoing problem, but uninstalling and wiping the contacts had previously cleared the problem. Not this time. So, no sat coms. Delorme Inreach, weather radio and SWL were backups. Work with supplier to resolve problem. Also, soon-to-be-installed SSB will provide redundancy. 2) The propane solenoid acted up for the first time ever and required persuasion. In addition, at 15 watts, it is the largest electrical power consumer on the boat. Find alternative. 3) The staysail sheets (new configuration as of February) found yet another place to snag. Hunt the snags down like the dogs they are and keep sailing. 4) The turning blocks for the Monitor wind vane have too much friction. Most distressingly, they squeal like pigs in heat. Who needs that? Definitely replace. 5) Clipping in multiple times in the cockpit is a real pain. Install min-jacklines. 6) Engine starting depends on the house battery banks (which in turn can depend on the engine for charging if solar is low) creating a downward spiral of uncertainty and despair leading to psychotic breakdown while drifting helpless in the night towards Noonday Rock. Install separate starting battery. 7) The deadbolt on the inside of the companionway hatch, not normally used at sea, engaged and locked me out topside. Fortunately, I had a spare key in the heel of one of my sea boots. Replace lock and get bigger seaboots.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by P. Broderick - Elaine View Post
    I've been following this thread, but since I'm not Transpacking just for fun. I sailed on an Ariel with Ken Jesmore in the 1970s out of Sausalito. An oft discussed topic was the removal of the two iron "pigs" that lived in the bilge sump in outboard models that compensated for the Atomic 4 that weighed down inboard models. If your sump is shallow, there's a possibility the "pigs" were glassed over at some point. They were sort of wedged in with some wood boards, if I remember correctly - sort of loose. They're rectangular blocks with a "loop" handle on one end. I think they weighed something like 200# each. You might inspect the top of the sump to see if it looks "pro" or "amateur" in its finish.

    But what caught my eye was the "mini geyser" of water" when you "drilled a very shallow hole in the resin." Have you had a good survey recently? It sounds like the hull might be waterlogged. A good "tap" job during a haul out would quickly determine whether the hammer "tapped" or "mushed." Since the main ballast is encapsulated a surveyor might be able to tell you whether there's a problem with the structural integrity of the hull. The boat's been sitting in water for decades, and fiberglass is permeable, so absorbs water. Ariels were built in an era where everything was hand done, and in that era it wasn't unusual for workers to leave voids. I know the common theme is "They're solid fiberglass," but they're not. They're multiple layers of fiberglass and roving that someone mopped/rolled resin into/onto. There were good days and bad days at the factory.
    There are two loops poking out of a thick layer of resin under the main cabin sole. That must be the pigs. Getting them out is not an option - especially since there's water around them. Exposing them would give me two very large leaks in my bilge.

    I've had a recent survey, during haul out - just two months ago. Whether it was a "good" survey is another question. My experience with surveyors is that they can be "highly variable." Ask 5 surveyors, get 10 different answers... I'm not a person to succumb to delusional optimism, and the prospect of a soft waterlogged hull doesn't give me the warm fuzzies. If there is a problem, there is too little time to correct it. Once I throw that factor into the risk matrix, things don't look good for a 2,000 mile exposure to the high seas.

    Thanks very much for the info.
    Last edited by pbryant; 05-27-2016 at 10:31 AM.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Capitola,CA
    Posts
    3,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pbryant View Post
    I'm posting my results here in case someone can find a fault in my logic. Conclusion: Assuming moderate wind, seastates and significant time spent sailing on a reach point of sail with ahead to abeam seas, the race could not be completed within the required 21 days. ... sufficient power for the boat would not be available from the water generator at speeds below 4.8 knots,
    Much of the on-the-water testing of the Hamilton Ferris water generator was conducted aboard my 27 foot sloop WILDFLOWER, with Mr. Ferris, while sailing out of Santa Cruz in the late '70's. I can vouch for the fact that best electrical generation occurs at speeds between 5-7 knots. Above or below those speeds, there is little effective power generated.

    My 2 cents is that using a HF water generator on a small boat racing to Hawaii is a bit like a dog chasing its tail. Direct observation aboard WILDFLOWER, using a variety of different propellers, found the HF water generator drag slowed the boat speed 10-15%, or the equivalent of 2-3 days on a SHTP race, depending on conditions, Certainly the water generator is a good deal when in cruising mode. But where boat speed matters, especially trying to get to Hanalei in under 21 days, I'm not sure a water generator is a viable solution to provide means of charging and get to the finish in the desired time.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sleddog View Post
    Much of the on-the-water testing of the Hamilton Ferris water generator was conducted aboard my 27 foot sloop WILDFLOWER, with Mr. Ferris, while sailing out of Santa Cruz in the late '70's. I can vouch for the fact that best electrical generation occurs at speeds between 5-7 knots. Above or below those speeds, there is little effective power generated.

    My 2 cents is that using a HF water generator on a small boat racing to Hawaii is a bit like a dog chasing its tail. Direct observation aboard WILDFLOWER, using a variety of different propellers, found the HF water generator drag slowed the boat speed 10-15%, or the equivalent of 2-3 days on a SHTP race, depending on conditions, Certainly the water generator is a good deal when in cruising mode. But where boat speed matters, especially trying to get to Hanalei in under 21 days, I'm not sure a water generator is a viable solution to provide means of charging and get to the finish in the desired time.
    Sleddog, I agree with your conclusions. I've covered every usable inch of my boat with solar panels, including hanging panels between the shrouds - but I just don't have that much deck area on my Ariel. I've found wind generators to be very disappointing, especially sailing downwind. My logic was that, once I'm up to hull speed my velocity is constrained by the hull speed limitation, and the extra drag from the water generator wouldn't matter. But so heavily loaded, I never got to hull speed while I watched my batteries dwindle. Mine is a problem of proportions. If I only had a diesel to drive an alternator... or a bigger boat.
    Last edited by pbryant; 05-27-2016 at 05:38 PM.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Albany, CA
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pbryant View Post
    Sleddog, I agree with your conclusions. I've covered every usable inch of my boat with solar panels, including hanging panels between the shrouds - but I just don't have that much deck area on my Ariel. I've found wind generators to be very disappointing, especially sailing downwind. My logic was that, once I'm up to hull speed my velocity is constrained by the hull speed limitation, and the extra drag from the water generator wouldn't matter. But so heavily loaded, I never got to hull speed while I watched my batteries dwindle. Mine is a problem of proportions. If I only had a diesel to drive an alternator... or a bigger boat.
    You could buy TIJD (First 30JK) from me. The boat is ready to go. All the gear you need. You can hop on, do the qualifier and sail to Hawaii...

    Dirk "TIJD" First 30JK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •