Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

magictime

Member
  • Content Count

    1803
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

magictime last won the day on April 10 2019

magictime had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

440 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    United Kingdom

Previous Fields

  • Boat Name
    Forever Changes
  • Boat Location
    Yorkshire (mostly)

Recent Profile Visitors

3832 profile views
  1. Okay, I'll give them a ring before making any assumptions!
  2. Thanks. Another boater here in Long Eaton assured me Dobson's didn't have one!
  3. No CRT services at Shardlow as far as I can see, but is there a practical private option? E.g. are the facilities at Shardlow Marina accessible on foot with a cassette on a trolley, and available to the public (for a charge)?
  4. As I understand it, all visitor moorings that are normally restricted (to 48 hours or whatever) default to 14 days during stoppage season unless there's a sign specifically saying '48 hours all year round' or similar. So I think the answer is 'all areas'.
  5. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  6. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  7. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  8. Congratulations! We've been living aboard just over a year and no regrets.
  9. I could have lived with that side of it actually - maybe because we got used to finding a petrol station on foot and filling two 5 litre cans every day when cruising on our old petrol outboard boat! 5 litres once a week would have been okay (enough to run a small generator for say 12 hours). Still, combined with refuelling, storing/operating/servicing gennie etc it's a hassle I can certainly do without.
  10. How long are you talking about being away from shore power, and how often? If you're talking about a few weeks a year, just run the engine. If months on end, and without solar power, the case for a generator makes more sense. I was weighing this up myself recently (year-round liveaboard CCer) and had pretty much talked myself into getting a generator, as I didn't want to be running my engine 20 hours a week or more through the winter (= say 6 days at 2 hours and one at 8 hours) even if staying put in a given week. But the practicalities and safety concerns regarding use and storage did worry me. In the end I've gone for a somewhat lateral solution; since my batteries need replacing anyway, I've bought a set of Pure Lead Carbon batteries that are claimed to charge faster and to be less reliant on frequent full charges to stay in good condition. Hence, in theory, I should be able to get by with maybe half the engine running time while stationary (say 60-90 minutes 7 days a week, which I'd need for hot water anyway), with full charges from a cruising day at least once a fortnight. They're expensive, but no more expensive than a regular set of batteries plus a generator plus fuel to run it. Made sense to me anyway; I'll see how they work out in practice.
  11. We never knew our boat was a (sort of) ex hire till we found an old blog by the first owner. They had it built for themselves, but put it into a hire fleet for a couple of seasons while making preparations to move on board. So we bought a (sort of) ex hire boat without knowing it! Personally I'm inclined to think the regular maintenance, repaints etc. weigh more in ex hire boats' favour, than the risk of their possibly 'hard life' bumping in to things weighs against them. Many hire boaters are regulars and good at boat handling, many private boat owners will have had bumps over the years from awkward manoeuvres, accidents, high winds or whatnot. Most such bumps do no harm anyway. And in many ways I'd rather know that if any damage has occurred in the past, it's been assessed and dealt with by a hire firm rather than a private owner with who knows what level of expertise or DIY skills. Having said all that, we didn't (intentionally!) bother viewing any ex-hire boats when shopping around for our liveaboard because the layouts always seem to be based around cramming in extra berths and often extra toilets and showers. At the end of the day they're designed to be used generally by 4-8 people for short periods from spring to autumn, with most of every day spent on deck or in the pub - not by 1-2 people living on board all year.
  12. The basic problem I've got with his reasoning comes out here: However, reducing this battery bank by 50% (to a single 100Ahr battery) would perhaps only reduce the life of the bank as a whole by say 30% because the single battery would still be being relatively well treated. So in this case a saving could have been made by buying half as many batteries (so half the initial outlay) and getting a battery life of 70%. A saving of 30% in monetary terms. Yes, you'll save money in the long term if you buy a new 100Ah bank every time your old one hits 80% capacity/end of life, rather than buying a new 200Ah battery bank every time your old one hits 80% capacity/end of life. That's what the illustration establishes. But if your cut-off point for your batteries needing replacement is that their capacity has dropped to 80Ah, why the hell would you buy a new 200Ah bank every time your old one hits 160Ah? It just makes no sense.
  13. Well I don't know how else to interpret the statements: the most economical use of deep cycle batteries comes about when they are, on average, discharged to 50% capacity then recharged. Discharging deep cycle batteries to 50% results in the most economical use of the batteries in terms of battery life and monetary outlay. Yes, I didn't know what to make of this. (For a start, that's a saving of 33%, not 50% - one larger battery bank costing say £400 lasting as long as three smaller battery banks costing £200 each.) I wasn't sure what depths of discharge we were supposed to be talking about in this illustration: is the double-sized, 400Ah bank supposed to end up at a 50% DoD after drawing 100A for an hour? If not, how does it illustrate the 50% rule? Why should we think it's not more economical to add 50% to the capacity, or 150%, rather than 100%? This is partly why I've stuck to the clearer (to me) illustration of a 200Ah bank vs a 100Ah bank with the same 40Ah taken out of each.
  14. Yes, but a rough rule of thumb should be at least roughly correct! As I've said, it feels to me as if we're talking about two quite different rules here: one, try not to discharge your batteries below 50% if you want to get reasonable value/a reasonable lifespan out of them (which seems fair enough); and two, the most economical way to buy and use batteries is to aim for a 50% depth of discharge in each cycle (which for the reasons I've set out, seems to me to be possibly based on a misapplication of the technical definition of 'end of life'). Phew!
  15. I'm inclined to agree, obviously. But in that case the illustration doesn't support his '50% rule'. It shows that if you compare a 100Ah battery bank to a double-the-cost, double-the-size 200Ah battery bank, the latter will not take double the time to hit 80% of capacity, if both are used to supply 40Ah of charge before recharging. OK, fine. But that simply does not mean that the smaller bank is the more economical choice for someone requiring that 40Ah of useable capacity. It completely overlooks the fact that the bigger bank will still have 160Ah capacity remaining at 'end of life', and as such is surely likely to last at least as long again, and probably longer, before finally hitting the same 80Ah cut-off point for replacement as the smaller bank.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.