Jump to content

Steel or GRP?


talisman

Featured Posts

19 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The ones where the 'bungs' had leaked and they were 'wallowing' 99% submerged were the dangerous ones.

 

You can see the size of the pipes compared to the size of the (large) sea-going tugs.

 

IMG_2520.JPG

We had to get ahead of one of them in a North Sea race from Banff to Stavanger. We managed to beat high enough just to clear the tug. The boat quarter of a mile behind us lost an hour having to bear away and go behind it. Bloody nuisance these pipelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell me about it. I experienced great difficulty negotiating the  joly old north west passage in my bath with my plastic Triang clockwork minic motor boat. Although my bath ''tap end'' actually faced sou sou west I liked to call the channel between the baths plug chain and bath end wall ''North west passage''  after books I'd read. With all the latest navigational aids at my disposal I found it too impossibly narrow and dangerous and had to momentarily pull the plug out and lift the chain clear to allow passage of my boat. The maelstrom as it passed over the swirling plughole tossed the boat about willy nilly something terrible and if it hadn't been for the plug holes strainer would surely have been sucked away down into oblivion. It eventually escaped the swirling maelstrom at which point I  sang ''Eternal father strong to save'', I then replaced the plug and all was calm once again and my boat returned to port at the other end of the bath where I was waiting anxiousely, dried it off and put it back in its box. I was greatly pleased with this tremendous voyage especially the maelstrom bit. Next time I put my boat to sea I shall again dispatch it towards the dreaded north west passage, but with the added ferocious danger of a tap running full bore to emulate a heavy shower of rain plus the terrible maelstrom. Lets hope it survives. :closedeyes:

Edited by bizzard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MartynG said:

Thank you for that information.

I would have estimated that would still be a good 3 hour trip for us , usually cruising about 23knots. ... if the clock starts from the pontoon in Wells Harbour and ends on the visitor berth at the Yacht Club at Lowestoft.  Grimsby to Wells takes us 3 hours door to door and that's about 55Nm. The slow bits at each end consume a fair bit of time.

 

I would  say Wells to Lowestoft  would allow for a consumption of something like  200  litres of diesel for us  if conditions allow us to go fast .

or

60 litres if we were to  go at 6 knots

It only took us 5 hours from Hull to Lowestoft so I think your predictions are a little on the slow side.

 

Mind you if leaving from Grimsby or Hull you don't head for Wells. You cut a lot out by making a heading in a straight line to Cromer rather then trying to follow the coast.

 

ETA: You are adding a good 45 minutes to the times we have recorded for the same trips. Not sure where we are making time up or you are losing it :blink:

Edited by Naughty Cal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

You are adding a good 45 minutes to the times we have recorded for the same trips. Not sure where we are making time up or you are losing it

Maybe depends on which side of the wind-farm you pass (offshore or inshore) or going 'around' the bombing range instead of straight thru it ?

 

We 'cut the corner' going back into the Humber (maybe 1/2 mile inside the marker buoy and were 'buzzed' by some very noisy aircraft.

After circling just above us they tuned steeply and as they had their backends towards us appeared to ram the throttles forward. You could feel the air vibrating.

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Maybe going 'around' the bombing range instead of straight thru it ?

 

We 'cut the corner' going back into the Humber (maybe 1/2 mile inside the marker buoy and were 'buzzed' by some very noisy aircraft.

After circling just above us they tuned steeply and as they had their backends towards us appeared to ram the throttles forward. You could feel the air vibrating.

No idea but it is a fair chunk of time to lose/gain on such a short cruise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you did shorter times you may have been be going faster than me, which is entirely possible as your S23 is certainly the faster boat.

Grimsby to Wells – my time allowance is based on going out of Grimsby and along the shipping lane route  on the outside of the Donna Nook firing range and then straight line to Wells .

I have done this three times now and my timing is correct in a calm sea. But the trip took us an hour longer in a slight to moderate sea. In calm conditions cruising at 23 knots and occasionally slowing as our cruising chums are a bit slower.

The time is from saying ‘lets go’  to having the ropes secured  at the destination and the kettle on.

The run into and out of Wells is quite long, , as you know. I am including that in the time. I prefer to be on the safe side with times.

 

I am thinking maybe Wells to Lowestoft in the summer, for a short stay at Lowestoft, if the sea is calm. On the basis that the distance is a bit longer than Grimsby to Wells I will be allowing 3 hours if we go fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, MartynG said:

If you did shorter times you may have been be going faster than me, which is entirely possible as your S23 is certainly the faster boat.

Grimsby to Wells – my time allowance is based on going out of Grimsby and along the shipping lane route  on the outside of the Donna Nook firing range and then straight line to Wells .

I have done this three times now and my timing is correct in a calm sea. But the trip took us an hour longer in a slight to moderate sea. In calm conditions cruising at 23 knots and occasionally slowing as our cruising chums are a bit slower.

The time is from saying ‘lets go’  to having the ropes secured  at the destination and the kettle on.

The run into and out of Wells is quite long, , as you know. I am including that in the time. I prefer to be on the safe side with times.

 

I am thinking maybe Wells to Lowestoft in the summer, for a short stay at Lowestoft, if the sea is calm. On the basis that the distance is a bit longer than Grimsby to Wells I will be allowing 3 hours if we go fast.

It you are going to Lowestoft then you may as well go straight from Grimsby rather than stopping at Wells and shave some distance off. You are going out of your way going to Wells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Naughty Cal said:

It you are going to Lowestoft then you may as well go straight from Grimsby rather than stopping at Wells and shave some distance off. You are going out of your way going to Wells.

Yes I know. But we have no desire to do that.

 

We are going to Wells as the main destination  for our holiday , if all goes to plan.

Lowestoft itself has no particular interest other than to be able to say we have done it.     If we goto Lowestoft  it would  would just be a trip out. Stopping at Lowestoft   for a couple of nights. Might even do it slow or part way slow depending on the sea state and tide times.

 

Similarly we stop at Grimsby  from Hull because we choose to do so . Not that Grimsby itself is of any interest but we quite like the HCA club, and the Fish N Chip restaurant  on Cleethorpes pier will be due a return visit.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/02/2019 at 13:33, peterboat said:

I have an old Broads cruiser as well, its all ripped out and I have fitted an electric drive to it, I can like Phil says, swear to how solidly they are built, battleship thicknesses spring to mind

Doesn't that depend on who built the particular boat? Or are they all built by the same firm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, blackrose said:

Doesn't that depend on who built the particular boat? Or are they all built by the same firm?

Not all built by the same firm. Redundant models could and would be built by anybody who could buy or lay hands on the moulds,  I've seen moulds in some very strange out of the way places. 

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/02/2019 at 13:33, peterboat said:

I have an old Broads cruiser as well, its all ripped out and I have fitted an electric drive to it, I can like Phil says, swear to how solidly they are built, battleship thicknesses spring to mind

 

16 hours ago, blackrose said:

Doesn't that depend on who built the particular boat? Or are they all built by the same firm?

No, I dont think it is down to manufacturers. It is more down to the way GRP boats were made at that time.

In the early 70s, the method of manufacture was to use hand lay up using sheets of chopped strand mat (CSM). This technique only allows you to get about 33% glass max in the laminate and was heavily dependent on skilled workers rolling the  laminate well. 3 to 6 layers of glass was the norm. Typically thick sections were used 6-12 mm. By the mid 70's, spray equipment was being used which meant a polyester spray gun fed also with a continuous roving that sprayed the glass cuttings at the same time as the polyester. This gave a glass content of 33% as well. Again results were dependent on the skill of the sprayer and the roller. Thick laminates were the norm. Around 1977, people started to use woven roving more which allowed the glass content to be much higher and typically 40-50% was achieved. The ultimate was the minehunters made at Vosper Thornycroft which where 25mm thick laminates containing 70% ish glass (we sold them the resin). The higher performance of the 40-50% glass laminates got people thinking about differnt ways of impregnating the woven roving and resin injection or vacuum injection was born. Laminate thickness started getting reduced as glass content became higher. People then started questioning the performance actually needed and thickness started reducing as people worked out the old CSM laminates were well over designed. Today then you end up with 3-6mm laminate thickness where 40 years ago it was 6-12mm. Those old laminates will last for a 100 years.:)

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dr Bob said:

 

No, I dont think it is down to manufacturers. It is more down to the way GRP boats were made at that time.

In the early 70s, the method of manufacture was to use hand lay up using sheets of chopped strand mat (CSM). This technique only allows you to get about 33% glass max in the laminate and was heavily dependent on skilled workers rolling the  laminate well. 3 to 6 layers of glass was the norm. Typically thick sections were used 6-12 mm. By the mid 70's, spray equipment was being used which meant a polyester spray gun fed also with a continuous roving that sprayed the glass cuttings at the same time as the polyester. This gave a glass content of 33% as well. Again results were dependent on the skill of the sprayer and the roller. Thick laminates were the norm. Around 1977, people started to use woven roving more which allowed the glass content to be much higher and typically 40-50% was achieved. The ultimate was the minehunters made at Vosper Thornycroft which where 25mm thick laminates containing 70% ish glass (we sold them the resin). The higher performance of the 40-50% glass laminates got people thinking about differnt ways of impregnating the woven roving and resin injection or vacuum injection was born. Laminate thickness started getting reduced as glass content became higher. People then started questioning the performance actually needed and thickness started reducing as people worked out the old CSM laminates were well over designed. Today then you end up with 3-6mm laminate thickness where 40 years ago it was 6-12mm. Those old laminates will last for a 100 years.:)

If mine has some 6mm on it I havent found it yet!! I think the thinnest is 10mm the rest is 15mm plus. The boat was registered in the early 80s so could have built very late 79 to 81 it really is a very solid of plastic

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/02/2019 at 18:43, MartynG said:

Yes I know. But we have no desire to do that.

 

We are going to Wells as the main destination  for our holiday , if all goes to plan.

Lowestoft itself has no particular interest other than to be able to say we have done it.     If we goto Lowestoft  it would  would just be a trip out. Stopping at Lowestoft   for a couple of nights. Might even do it slow or part way slow depending on the sea state and tide times.

 

Similarly we stop at Grimsby  from Hull because we choose to do so . Not that Grimsby itself is of any interest but we quite like the HCA club, and the Fish N Chip restaurant  on Cleethorpes pier will be due a return visit.

 

 

In which case I wouldn't bother as it would just be a waste of time and diesel. 

 

The yacht club is nice but isn't worth the trip down there on it's own and Lowestoft isn't worth the trip on it's own.

 

Save Lowestoft for when you are heading further south or into the Broads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

Save Lowestoft for when you are heading further south or into the Broads.

My last time in Lowestoft was at least  10 years ago. Sounds like it hasn't improved .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MartynG said:

My last time in Lowestoft was at least  10 years ago. Sounds like it hasn't improved .

 

If you happen to go into Gt Yarmouth take some long 'ice' boards with you.

The mooring is on a corrugated wall, with very large corrugations that even 18" fenders 'fall into'

 

Throw jet skis & speed boats into the mix, add a bit of change in tide height …………………….

One of the worst and most unpleasant moorings I've been on for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

If you happen to go into Gt Yarmouth take some long 'ice' boards with you.

The mooring is on a corrugated wall, with very large corrugations that even 18" fenders 'fall into'

 

Throw jet skis & speed boats into the mix, add a bit of change in tide height …………………….

One of the worst and most unpleasant moorings I've been on for a long time.

That's why we avoid it. Its quicker for us to continue past and nip into the yacht club at Lowestoft. 

 

The moorings at Great Yarmouth yacht station are not much better and then you run the risk of errant hire boats hitting you when they fail to take account of the tide!

45 minutes ago, MartynG said:

My last time in Lowestoft was at least  10 years ago. Sounds like it hasn't improved .

 

I doubt it has.

 

That said the yacht club is beautiful. But not really worth the trip down there on it's own.

 

Southwold on the other hand is worth the trip. 

Edited by Naughty Cal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.