- This topic has 14 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 10 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Cam I get some feed back from you guys on the single companionway design
with twin heads.We have looked at the single head version that has bulkheads and doorways
seperating the stern cabin from the galley. The alternative design I am
seeing available has half of those bulkheads and is very open…. which is
nice for comfort, but I am concerned about flexibility and offshore
durability.Is this part of the original design or was the starboard side bulkhead
between the nav station and the galley removed?Heading all of the advise from you all, I am investigating better outfitted
boats with higher price tags to make a fair comparison.The two boats that look like this have twin heads and, honestly, we prefer
the stowage space in the v-birth when there is no head up there. Whats your
opinions on two heads vs storage?
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
The real structural bulkhead is the one near the main mast (if a ketch) or
just the mast. The ketch has a mizzen beam that runs across the cockpit
and translates loads to the stringers that end up being the engine ways
(beds). Any bulkhead tabbed properly adds stiffness to the hull, such as
the ones fore and aft of the heads, the galley aft bulkhead and to some
extent the aft cabin aft bulkhead.These boats seem to only have an issue in the bows where oil canning can
cause the tabbed v-berth floor to separate from the hull (and the closet
bulkhead, I hear). Those are easily fixed and you can find out how Tor did
it and also how Rich Carter did it on the web site.The 424s are torsionally stable (they don’t twist) and because of the
keel/stem layup extremely strong fore and aft.As far as the number of heads go, how many people do you expect to be
carrying aboard? If 4 or less, one head should be sufficient. There’s
also half the plumbing to worry about, too.Bob
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Tom Heller via maillist <
> wrote:Cam I get some feed back from you guys on the single companionway design
with twin heads.We have looked at the single head version that has bulkheads and doorways
seperating the stern cabin from the galley. The alternative design I am
seeing available has half of those bulkheads and is very open…. which is
nice for comfort, but I am concerned about flexibility and offshore
durability.Is this part of the original design or was the starboard side bulkhead
between the nav station and the galley removed?Heading all of the advise from you all, I am investigating better outfitted
boats with higher price tags to make a fair comparison.The two boats that look like this have twin heads and, honestly, we prefer
the stowage space in the v-birth when there is no head up there. Whats your
opinions on two heads vs storage?
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
—
Bob Fine
s/v Pelican
Pearson 424 Hull #8
http://thesailinglife.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Interesting,
the only complete bulkhead on my boat #91 is the chain locker. All the
others are partial and do not in my opinion, do a complete stiffening of
the hull. The forward cabin (v-berth) is not complete at the headliner but
does have a full width cleat at the base . The teak trim at the top of the
door does little if anything at all in the stiffening.
Between the galley and aft cabin it’s even less of a stiffener as the
sole hatch to the v-drive cuts the whole bottom off. The teak trim above
the door is the same as forward. Added to these two main cabin stiffeners
of course is the aft face of the shower an “almost half” bulkhead and the
aft ends of the settee’s have their added strength also as partial
bulkheads. The way the aft engine room bulkhead is layed out also has some
issues in my mind, but I’m not questioning what a designer has to do to
build a production boat at a cost to make profit.
Offshore, my boat tends to have many a creak and groan but as yet I see no
major misalignment happening even without “full” bulkheads as I would call
them. She is an old girl and I believe holding up very well with whatever
her actual offshore lineage would be. A full bulkhead to me would be fully
spanning from port to starboard, bilge to overhead and doorways, bilge
access etc cut out of them and then trimmed.
I have no complaints with my boat and I surely, quick a lick took out my
forward head for added storage, but as you mentioned bulkheads, I figured
I’d give my 2 cents worth.Ken
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Tom Heller via maillist <
> wrote:Cam I get some feed back from you guys on the single companionway design
with twin heads.We have looked at the single head version that has bulkheads and doorways
seperating the stern cabin from the galley. The alternative design I am
seeing available has half of those bulkheads and is very open…. which is
nice for comfort, but I am concerned about flexibility and offshore
durability.Is this part of the original design or was the starboard side bulkhead
between the nav station and the galley removed?Heading all of the advise from you all, I am investigating better outfitted
boats with higher price tags to make a fair comparison.The two boats that look like this have twin heads and, honestly, we prefer
the stowage space in the v-birth when there is no head up there. Whats your
opinions on two heads vs storage?
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Have to agree with Ken & Bob, there isn’t much difference in hull and deck
integrity between the classic layout with the galley on the port side and
more open layout with the galley on starboard with a dinette on the port.
For me the big downer for the open layout is the conversion of the aft
berth from a Pullman-style to essentially a quarter berth. I would not
want to be forced to climb into that berth, like the V-berth, rather sit on
the berth and just lay down. I also imagine that enclosed stateroom can
get pretty stuffy in warm climates. I would also miss being able to
monitor what’s going on in the cockpit and check the instrument display at
the nav station from my bunk.
That said the athwart-ship nav station looks a lot more comfortable to work
at than the one on Sarah.Regards,
John Stevenson
http://www.svsarah.com
Sarah’s BlogOn Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Ken Page via maillist <
> wrote:Interesting,
the only complete bulkhead on my boat #91 is the chain locker. All the
others are partial and do not in my opinion, do a complete stiffening of
the hull. The forward cabin (v-berth) is not complete at the headliner but
does have a full width cleat at the base . The teak trim at the top of the
door does little if anything at all in the stiffening.
Between the galley and aft cabin it’s even less of a stiffener as the
sole hatch to the v-drive cuts the whole bottom off. The teak trim above
the door is the same as forward. Added to these two main cabin stiffeners
of course is the aft face of the shower an “almost half” bulkhead and the
aft ends of the settee’s have their added strength also as partial
bulkheads. The way the aft engine room bulkhead is layed out also has some
issues in my mind, but I’m not questioning what a designer has to do to
build a production boat at a cost to make profit.
Offshore, my boat tends to have many a creak and groan but as yet I see no
major misalignment happening even without “full” bulkheads as I would call
them. She is an old girl and I believe holding up very well with whatever
her actual offshore lineage would be. A full bulkhead to me would be fully
spanning from port to starboard, bilge to overhead and doorways, bilge
access etc cut out of them and then trimmed.
I have no complaints with my boat and I surely, quick a lick took out my
forward head for added storage, but as you mentioned bulkheads, I figured
I’d give my 2 cents worth.Ken
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Tom Heller via maillist <
> wrote:Cam I get some feed back from you guys on the single companionway design
with twin heads.We have looked at the single head version that has bulkheads and doorways
seperating the stern cabin from the galley. The alternative design I am
seeing available has half of those bulkheads and is very open…. whichis
nice for comfort, but I am concerned about flexibility and offshore
durability.Is this part of the original design or was the starboard side bulkhead
between the nav station and the galley removed?Heading all of the advise from you all, I am investigating better
outfitted
boats with higher price tags to make a fair comparison.
The two boats that look like this have twin heads and, honestly, we
prefer
the stowage space in the v-birth when there is no head up there. Whats
your
opinions on two heads vs storage?
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
_______________________________________________
maillist mailing listhttps://pearson424.org/mailman/listinfo/maillist_pearson424.org
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
A bit of clarification, if I may.
Both the factory cutter we own and the factory sloops we have looked at have the “mizzen beam that runs across the cockpit and translates loads to the stringers that end up being the engine ways (beds).” In other words, Pearson didn’t change the lay up from the original ketch design when producing the cutters and sloops.
Other than that, ditto what has already been said.Evan Morgan
Revery
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
IMHO, the more common aft cabin layout offers a bit stronger design, but bear in mind that the 424 was not designed as a blue-water passage-maker. She was designed as a comfortable coastal cruiser with the charter fleet in mind. Having said that, many have made safe ocean passages. If you have your heart set on a blue-water boat you’ll have to trade something off, comfort and price come to mind. If you want a 424, pick either layout that suits you.
I originally thought the second companionway to be a waste of space when I first looked at my 424 over 30 years ago. After owning the boat for a bit I began to appreciate the benefits of the midship companionway. The less common open cabin design looks airy, but the aft cabin looks claustrophobic. I see no benefit to having two heads, twice as much stuff to break down. Give me a single large head.
There are things about the 424 that I don’t like but most can be fixed. The note about structural integrity up forward can be fixed for short money.
Here’s a link to my website with lots of info. There is of course the 424 site. One of these days I’ll transfer my notes there.
http://www.richardcarter.net/BlackSheep.html
Rich Carter
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
I agree with everything Rich said – even to under-appreciating
the mid-ship companionway at first. The Pearson 424 is a coastal
cruiser than can (and often does) go farther, a comfortable
live-aboard, a credible (and stiff) sailor, a nearly ideal
“island boat,” and a lot of bang for the buck. I have the
L-shaped galley and personally wouldn’t trade it for another; one
head is enough even when company is aboard. If I were
re-designing her I would only add more ‘glass to her lay-up (and
some stringers forward), aiming for a displacement closer to
30,000 lbs. But that’s just me. As Rich reminds us, these boats
were built for a purpose. If we choose to use them otherwise, we
cannot fault the boat for being what she is. It’s up to us to
modify her to the extent that we can to suit ourselves. I like to
think of it as “messing about with boats.”Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.us
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Rich,
We’re getting close – we’ll have the new forum with email functionality up by the 21st, and content moved over shortly thereafter.
If you’d like, feel free to register an account at dev.pearson424.org
You’ll be able to follow progress as it unfolds right there!
Ewan
Sent from my iPhone
Quote:On Nov 8, 2015, at 18:07, re.carter— via maillist wrote:IMHO, the more common aft cabin layout offers a bit stronger design, but bear in mind that the 424 was not designed as a blue-water passage-maker. She was designed as a comfortable coastal cruiser with the charter fleet in mind. Having said that, many have made safe ocean passages. If you have your heart set on a blue-water boat you’ll have to trade something off, comfort and price come to mind. If you want a 424, pick either layout that suits you.
I originally thought the second companionway to be a waste of space when I first looked at my 424 over 30 years ago. After owning the boat for a bit I began to appreciate the benefits of the midship companionway. The less common open cabin design looks airy, but the aft cabin looks claustrophobic. I see no benefit to having two heads, twice as much stuff to break down. Give me a single large head.
There are things about the 424 that I don’t like but most can be fixed. The note about structural integrity up forward can be fixed for short money.
Here’s a link to my website with lots of info. There is of course the 424 site. One of these days I’ll transfer my notes there.
http://www.richardcarter.net/BlackSheep.html
Rich Carter
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
So,
Let’s expand on this notion of reinforcing for offshore use.
I hear more stringers in the forward parts of the boat. Tin canning solution (fully aware of that one)… What else is there?
Where do these old girls start cracking when put to heavy sea? Deck to hull seem would appear to be solid. Is the primary concern torsion? Or beating down off the top of waves? Do tabs on the bulkheads fail? Could they use more glass?
I’ll have the time for it, so I’ll be happy to do the glass work. In terms of passage making, from what I understand it has the tankage and stowage, combined with a ketch rig for manageability and your pretty well there (cockpit drains aside). Is it just a matter of finding her weak links in the structure?
Sent from my iPhone
Quote:On Nov 8, 2015, at 7:30 PM, Silverheels via maillist wrote:I agree with everything Rich said – even to under-appreciating
the mid-ship companionway at first. The Pearson 424 is a coastal
cruiser than can (and often does) go farther, a comfortable
live-aboard, a credible (and stiff) sailor, a nearly ideal
“island boat,” and a lot of bang for the buck. I have the
L-shaped galley and personally wouldn’t trade it for another; one
head is enough even when company is aboard. If I were
re-designing her I would only add more ‘glass to her lay-up (and
some stringers forward), aiming for a displacement closer to
30,000 lbs. But that’s just me. As Rich reminds us, these boats
were built for a purpose. If we choose to use them otherwise, we
cannot fault the boat for being what she is. It’s up to us to
modify her to the extent that we can to suit ourselves. I like to
think of it as “messing about with boats.”Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.us
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
I am in the process of rebuilding the floor of my head after I removed it to repair the damage from grounding and have a few things to say about stringers and tabbing.
1. The stringers are screwed together with single screws that have corroded and failed in my case. I’m replacing where I can with multiple stainless pocket hole (Jegs) screws. This isnt as easy as it sounds – lots of boat yoga 🙂 but at least I’m getting a sense of where the structural challenges are.
2. The support fiberglassed to the hull failed when she grounded in Sandy. I’ve created a new mahogany support and really beefed up the tabbing. I’m adding a second support to the hull, mounted to the half-round stringer thats moulded to the hull. Photos to follow.
3. The floor is fiberglassed to the hull with a few layers of regular tabbing cloth. I will be using biaxial to strengthen the whole area, and then adding a new marine plywood floor to the area.
4. The full height bulkhead on the forward side of the head were not glassed to the hull on both sides. This has now been resolved. Hopefully this will improve the stability of the deck around the second companion way.
My approach has been to strengthen wherever I am repairing, but I realize that this might cause imbalances in the way forces are transferred throughout the hull. I’m designing a battery storage frame in the area where the fuel tank and engine used to be that will be structural and stiffen the stern.
Ewan
Quote:On Nov 9, 2015, at 7:44 AM, Thomas Heller via maillist wrote:So,
Let’s expand on this notion of reinforcing for offshore use.
I hear more stringers in the forward parts of the boat. Tin canning solution (fully aware of that one)… What else is there?
Where do these old girls start cracking when put to heavy sea? Deck to hull seem would appear to be solid. Is the primary concern torsion? Or beating down off the top of waves? Do tabs on the bulkheads fail? Could they use more glass?
I’ll have the time for it, so I’ll be happy to do the glass work. In terms of passage making, from what I understand it has the tankage and stowage, combined with a ketch rig for manageability and your pretty well there (cockpit drains aside). Is it just a matter of finding her weak links in the structure?
Sent from my iPhone
Quote:On Nov 8, 2015, at 7:30 PM, Silverheels via maillist wrote:I agree with everything Rich said – even to under-appreciating
the mid-ship companionway at first. The Pearson 424 is a coastal
cruiser than can (and often does) go farther, a comfortable
live-aboard, a credible (and stiff) sailor, a nearly ideal
“island boat,” and a lot of bang for the buck. I have the
L-shaped galley and personally wouldn’t trade it for another; one
head is enough even when company is aboard. If I were
re-designing her I would only add more ‘glass to her lay-up (and
some stringers forward), aiming for a displacement closer to
30,000 lbs. But that’s just me. As Rich reminds us, these boats
were built for a purpose. If we choose to use them otherwise, we
cannot fault the boat for being what she is. It’s up to us to
modify her to the extent that we can to suit ourselves. I like to
think of it as “messing about with boats.”Tor
Silverheels, P-424 #17
http://www.silverheels.us
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
I took my 424 to Bermuda many years ago and had a very rough crossing. If you are not familiar with the colony, it’s not just off the coast of Florida. It’s about 600 miles off the coast and on the other side of the Gulf Stream. The flat forward section of the hull gets little support from shape and is dependent on the internal bulkheads for support. Being up forward, it takes a beating when going to weather. Imagine going over the crest of a steep 12′ wave while heeled over, falling off the back side and slamming the flat forward section into the trough on the other side. Now imagine doing it for about a day and a half. The bulkheads in the V-berth on the port side broke free from the hull. This was the shelf over the bunk, the chain locker bulkhead and the bulkhead between the forward sink and V-berth. There was a lot of crazing of the gelcoat below the waterline up forward. The boat was in no danger of sinking, but it was a bit nerve-racking to see the hull oil-can like that.
I had the V-berth repaired while in port. A glass-man repaired the tabbing, adding as much as 3/4″ of glass to the damaged area. A couple of years later I repaired the crazing by putting several coats of epoxy water-barrier on the hull. Its an ice-breaker bow now. You don’t have to go to that extreme however. I observed the failure from when it started. The weak point is the forward attachment of the shelf in the V-berth. The thing is screwed to the forward bulkhead with a couple of bronze wood screws. The screws broke free and the shelf started separating from the hull starting at the forward edge. What I experienced was extreme, but for most conditions I think the hull will do fine if you just beef up the shelf attachment. Other owners have reported many offshore passages with no issues.
If you want a real offshore boat, I know of a serious blue water boat for sale for short money here in the northeast. The owner is terminally ill and is motivated to sell while he can still settle his estate. Its not a comfortable cruising boat however. You can’t have everything unless you have very deep pockets.
Regards
Rich – BlackSheep #47
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Thanks Ewan, I’ve registered but am curious as to not seeing anywhere to
“log in” on the home page or anywhere else. I was a bit challenged by the
registration site to come up with a new password that is required to be
above “very weak” or “weak” but I managed. Hahahaha Looking forward to the
new site. Looks really great as it is now and hope it becomes a “go to”
place where we can all share info, pictures and e-mails easily. Thanks
again for your effort.Ken
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:33 AM, ewanoleary— via maillist <
> wrote:Rich,
We’re getting close – we’ll have the new forum with email functionality up
by the 21st, and content moved over shortly thereafter.If you’d like, feel free to register an account at dev.pearson424.org
You’ll be able to follow progress as it unfolds right there!
Ewan
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 8, 2015, at 18:07, re.carter— via maillist <
> wrote:
IMHO, the more common aft cabin layout offers a bit stronger design, but
bear in mind that the 424 was not designed as a blue-water passage-maker.
She was designed as a comfortable coastal cruiser with the charter fleet in
mind. Having said that, many have made safe ocean passages. If you have
your heart set on a blue-water boat you’ll have to trade something off,
comfort and price come to mind. If you want a 424, pick either layout that
suits you.I originally thought the second companionway to be a waste of space when
I first looked at my 424 over 30 years ago. After owning the boat for a
bit I began to appreciate the benefits of the midship companionway. The
less common open cabin design looks airy, but the aft cabin looks
claustrophobic. I see no benefit to having two heads, twice as much stuff
to break down. Give me a single large head.There are things about the 424 that I don’t like but most can be fixed.
The note about structural integrity up forward can be fixed for short money.
Here’s a link to my website with lots of info. There is of course the
424 site. One of these days I’ll transfer my notes there.
Quote:http://www.richardcarter.net/BlackSheep.htmlRich Carter
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
I would like to propose a project… I am a mechanical engineer with a
background in software and I did web development for a while.What I would like to do is this – Build a system down archive for
referencing upgrades/repairs.
It would be available to the users and it would be hierarchical and build
itself through user input.e.g.
Systems
Structural
– bow
— above water line
— tin canning reinforcement
– bilge
— Stringer
– Stringer support reinforcement
– Bulk Heads
etc….I want to make a place to store all this data that is being generated by
the users in a format where it can be found easily and some method of
including images and diagrams so other owners and future owners can work on
their boats through that knowledge.I can do the programming (talking on a time frame of months to a year),
what I would need from you guys is the guts of it in terms of structure and
flow. How we would all see it easiest to use. I’m thinking it could be a
DIY with a user forum at the bottom of every DIY so it can be discussed.Likely, the easiest thing to do would be to take the current Wiki pages and
upgrade them to a more fluid system thats more structured.On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Roger Bigger via maillist <
> wrote:Rich,
This is some very and specific insight. I’ll use it when I get to the hull
reinforcement part of my project list. (read probably not this winter
season)In the meantime, one of this winter’s projects is to rebed all the
hardware on the deck and atop the cabin. So I’ve removed all the headliners
and started to dig out and seal any sources of leaks. While I’ve got the
hood up, does anyone have suggestions for glass reinforcement that I should
consider? Three winters of removing, relocating and filling in thru hull
holes has left we with a few skills in the glassing department.Roger
On Nov 9, 2015, at 09:09, re.carter— via maillist <
> wrote:
I took my 424 to Bermuda many years ago and had a very rough crossing.
If you are not familiar with the colony, it’s not just off the coast of
Florida. It’s about 600 miles off the coast and on the other side of the
Gulf Stream. The flat forward section of the hull gets little support from
shape and is dependent on the internal bulkheads for support. Being up
forward, it takes a beating when going to weather. Imagine going over the
crest of a steep 12′ wave while heeled over, falling off the back side and
slamming the flat forward section into the trough on the other side. Now
imagine doing it for about a day and a half. The bulkheads in the V-berth
on the port side broke free from the hull. This was the shelf over the
bunk, the chain locker bulkhead and the bulkhead between the forward sink
and V-berth. There was a lot of crazing of the gelcoat below the waterline
up forward. The boat was in no danger of sinking, but it was a bit
nerve-racking to see the hull oil-can like that.I had the V-berth repaired while in port. A glass-man repaired the
tabbing, adding as much as 3/4″ of glass to the damaged area. A couple of
years later I repaired the crazing by putting several coats of epoxy
water-barrier on the hull. Its an ice-breaker bow now. You don’t have to
go to that extreme however. I observed the failure from when it started.
The weak point is the forward attachment of the shelf in the V-berth. The
thing is screwed to the forward bulkhead with a couple of bronze wood
screws. The screws broke free and the shelf started separating from the
hull starting at the forward edge. What I experienced was extreme, but for
most conditions I think the hull will do fine if you just beef up the shelf
attachment. Other owners have reported many offshore passages with no
issues.If you want a real offshore boat, I know of a serious blue water boat
for sale for short money here in the northeast. The owner is terminally
ill and is motivated to sell while he can still settle his estate. Its not
a comfortable cruising boat however. You can’t have everything unless you
have very deep pockets.Quote:Regards
Rich – BlackSheep #47
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Hey Tom!
Great idea – we’re putting the new site together on WordPress and bbPress for forums right now – I’ve a dev team in India who are on Diwali, but will have the basics moved over to WordPress for demo by Friday. Of course, this will make a difference to the look and feel and tagging etc.
We’ve been limited by the almost absence of tools to run listservs like we have.
Word clouds or a tagging structure would get us a lot closer to what might help.
At the moment I’m funding the development effort myself, but I do have a donation button up on dev.pearson424.org if you’re inclined to throw some coin into the effort (more for everyone, than a specific request to you!)
I think there are enough limitations with the existing wiki and forum interface that we need to move away to something more widely supported and easier to work with.
Thoughts?
Ewan
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 10, 2015, at 17:29, Tom Heller via maillist wrote:
I would like to propose a project… I am a mechanical engineer with a
background in software and I did web development for a while.What I would like to do is this – Build a system down archive for
referencing upgrades/repairs.
It would be available to the users and it would be hierarchical and build
itself through user input.e.g.
Systems
Structural
– bow
— above water line
— tin canning reinforcement
– bilge
— Stringer
– Stringer support reinforcement
– Bulk Heads
etc….I want to make a place to store all this data that is being generated by
the users in a format where it can be found easily and some method of
including images and diagrams so other owners and future owners can work on
their boats through that knowledge.I can do the programming (talking on a time frame of months to a year),
what I would need from you guys is the guts of it in terms of structure and
flow. How we would all see it easiest to use. I’m thinking it could be a
DIY with a user forum at the bottom of every DIY so it can be discussed.Likely, the easiest thing to do would be to take the current Wiki pages and
upgrade them to a more fluid system thats more structured.On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Roger Bigger via maillist <
> wrote:Rich,
This is some very and specific insight. I’ll use it when I get to the hull
reinforcement part of my project list. (read probably not this winter
season)In the meantime, one of this winter’s projects is to rebed all the
hardware on the deck and atop the cabin. So I’ve removed all the headliners
and started to dig out and seal any sources of leaks. While I’ve got the
hood up, does anyone have suggestions for glass reinforcement that I should
consider? Three winters of removing, relocating and filling in thru hull
holes has left we with a few skills in the glassing department.Roger
On Nov 9, 2015, at 09:09, re.carter— via maillist <
> wrote:
I took my 424 to Bermuda many years ago and had a very rough crossing.
If you are not familiar with the colony, it’s not just off the coast of
Florida. It’s about 600 miles off the coast and on the other side of the
Gulf Stream. The flat forward section of the hull gets little support from
shape and is dependent on the internal bulkheads for support. Being up
forward, it takes a beating when going to weather. Imagine going over the
crest of a steep 12′ wave while heeled over, falling off the back side and
slamming the flat forward section into the trough on the other side. Now
imagine doing it for about a day and a half. The bulkheads in the V-berth
on the port side broke free from the hull. This was the shelf over the
bunk, the chain locker bulkhead and the bulkhead between the forward sink
and V-berth. There was a lot of crazing of the gelcoat below the waterline
up forward. The boat was in no danger of sinking, but it was a bit
nerve-racking to see the hull oil-can like that.I had the V-berth repaired while in port. A glass-man repaired the
tabbing, adding as much as 3/4″ of glass to the damaged area. A couple of
years later I repaired the crazing by putting several coats of epoxy
water-barrier on the hull. Its an ice-breaker bow now. You don’t have to
go to that extreme however. I observed the failure from when it started.
The weak point is the forward attachment of the shelf in the V-berth. The
thing is screwed to the forward bulkhead with a couple of bronze wood
screws. The screws broke free and the shelf started separating from the
hull starting at the forward edge. What I experienced was extreme, but for
most conditions I think the hull will do fine if you just beef up the shelf
attachment. Other owners have reported many offshore passages with no
issues.If you want a real offshore boat, I know of a serious blue water boat
for sale for short money here in the northeast. The owner is terminally
ill and is motivated to sell while he can still settle his estate. Its not
a comfortable cruising boat however. You can’t have everything unless you
have very deep pockets.Quote:Regards
Rich – BlackSheep #47
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
Sure! WordPress logins are pretty helpful as credentials, as they’re portable. If you have a google credential proposal, let me know.
The existing sites will be retiring shortly, as soon as the end of November. I suggest reviewing what is available in WordPress and developing the structure we need on that. We’ll get a long way before having to write anything other than some css.
Register at dev.pearson424.org – that way you’ll have an account and be able to begin posting right off the bat. Tom and I are talking today and oddly enough, thinking the same way – his first suggestion was actually the team and component we’re using!
Sometime around the 1st of Dec dev.pearson424.org will become https://www.pearson424.org and we’ll be migrated over to the new forums, image gallery and templates for posts. We’ve got an enormous amount of functionality at our disposal for very little cost with WordPress – and mobile compatibility as well. It’s making it rather easy to get the basics functional, but we have a few requirements – emailing to a forum, for one, that have not been possible without development work.
Additionally, I’ve a backlog of user stories and requirements going in trello. Very helpful to capture what we’re trying to accomplish and coordinate efforts. Email me directly for access to this, and you can contribute to our backlog.
Ewan
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 11, 2015, at 05:58, Roger Bigger wrote:
I’ve collect a number of system reference doc and it would be great to have an organized way to share docs like these.
Seems the software engineers are coming out of the woodwork–myself included. In projects where we have diverse requirements we usually loosely couple when possible. Could we federate with Tom’s platform and come up with a credential management scheme to ease movement across the sites?
Roger
On Nov 10, 2015, at 17:40, ewanoleary— via maillist wrote:
Hey Tom!
Great idea – we’re putting the new site together on WordPress and bbPress for forums right now – I’ve a dev team in India who are on Diwali, but will have the basics moved over to WordPress for demo by Friday. Of course, this will make a difference to the look and feel and tagging etc.
We’ve been limited by the almost absence of tools to run listservs like we have.
Word clouds or a tagging structure would get us a lot closer to what might help.
At the moment I’m funding the development effort myself, but I do have a donation button up on dev.pearson424.org if you’re inclined to throw some coin into the effort (more for everyone, than a specific request to you!)
I think there are enough limitations with the existing wiki and forum interface that we need to move away to something more widely supported and easier to work with.
Thoughts?
Ewan
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 10, 2015, at 17:29, Tom Heller via maillist wrote:
I would like to propose a project… I am a mechanical engineer with a
background in software and I did web development for a while.What I would like to do is this – Build a system down archive for
referencing upgrades/repairs.
It would be available to the users and it would be hierarchical and build
itself through user input.e.g.
Systems
Structural
– bow
— above water line
— tin canning reinforcement
– bilge
— Stringer
– Stringer support reinforcement
– Bulk Heads
etc….I want to make a place to store all this data that is being generated by
the users in a format where it can be found easily and some method of
including images and diagrams so other owners and future owners can work on
their boats through that knowledge.I can do the programming (talking on a time frame of months to a year),
what I would need from you guys is the guts of it in terms of structure and
flow. How we would all see it easiest to use. I’m thinking it could be a
DIY with a user forum at the bottom of every DIY so it can be discussed.Likely, the easiest thing to do would be to take the current Wiki pages and
upgrade them to a more fluid system thats more structured.On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Roger Bigger via maillist <
> wrote:Rich,
This is some very and specific insight. I’ll use it when I get to the hull
reinforcement part of my project list. (read probably not this winter
season)In the meantime, one of this winter’s projects is to rebed all the
hardware on the deck and atop the cabin. So I’ve removed all the headliners
and started to dig out and seal any sources of leaks. While I’ve got the
hood up, does anyone have suggestions for glass reinforcement that I should
consider? Three winters of removing, relocating and filling in thru hull
holes has left we with a few skills in the glassing department.Roger
On Nov 9, 2015, at 09:09, re.carter— via maillist <
> wrote:
I took my 424 to Bermuda many years ago and had a very rough crossing.
If you are not familiar with the colony, it’s not just off the coast of
Florida. It’s about 600 miles off the coast and on the other side of the
Gulf Stream. The flat forward section of the hull gets little support from
shape and is dependent on the internal bulkheads for support. Being up
forward, it takes a beating when going to weather. Imagine going over the
crest of a steep 12′ wave while heeled over, falling off the back side and
slamming the flat forward section into the trough on the other side. Now
imagine doing it for about a day and a half. The bulkheads in the V-berth
on the port side broke free from the hull. This was the shelf over the
bunk, the chain locker bulkhead and the bulkhead between the forward sink
and V-berth. There was a lot of crazing of the gelcoat below the waterline
up forward. The boat was in no danger of sinking, but it was a bit
nerve-racking to see the hull oil-can like that.I had the V-berth repaired while in port. A glass-man repaired the
tabbing, adding as much as 3/4″ of glass to the damaged area. A couple of
years later I repaired the crazing by putting several coats of epoxy
water-barrier on the hull. Its an ice-breaker bow now. You don’t have to
go to that extreme however. I observed the failure from when it started.
The weak point is the forward attachment of the shelf in the V-berth. The
thing is screwed to the forward bulkhead with a couple of bronze wood
screws. The screws broke free and the shelf started separating from the
hull starting at the forward edge. What I experienced was extreme, but for
most conditions I think the hull will do fine if you just beef up the shelf
attachment. Other owners have reported many offshore passages with no
issues.If you want a real offshore boat, I know of a serious blue water boat
for sale for short money here in the northeast. The owner is terminally
ill and is motivated to sell while he can still settle his estate. Its not
a comfortable cruising boat however. You can’t have everything unless you
have very deep pockets.Quote:Regards
Rich – BlackSheep #47
Original Message
Post generated from Pearson424 Forum using Mail2Forum
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.