|
Post by Admin on May 18, 2020 13:29:25 GMT
Don't forget the two compulsary Vents. Seagoing and sealing shut. I am fitting three on TREKKA , all can be sealed shut from Inside, one cowl/dorade vent, One mushroom vent and one dome vent. When your buttoned up in a blow in a small space you still need air. You need two commercial deck hatches and all the handrails and safety harness clipping points. You can set up any sailhandling systems you like, but can only have two small snubbing winches.
|
|
jake
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by jake on Jun 1, 2020 20:31:41 GMT
"The only owner modifications allowed are Non-Structural cockpits elements"
I'm writing this post with trans ocean events in mind, thinking of long cold nights (and days) on the tiller...
How much we can change the observation hatch? I can see a benefit of stretching the observation hatch the full width of the deck or at least extending it so it comes within a 6 / 12 inches either side... is this possible?
Sailing upwind this would provide a reasonable wind break as current plans show sailors with their heads in the wind taking the full brunt of it all. Also, Downwind it can add extra windage (assuming speed is an interest). The added benefit of extra headroom below deck is also appealing.
Assuming this is possible would it then be within regulations to extend the top of the observation hatch aft, say 2ft, creating a small shelter underneath which you can sit, and having one or two upward looking ports to keep visibility.
Again I'm thinking of preserving energy and keeping somewhat out of harsh weather on ocean crossings.
I can see the challenge presented in terms of rigidity. Beams and carlins would have to be changed in order to make it work. But with enough reinforcement, I can see it working.... what do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 1, 2020 23:35:30 GMT
|
|
jake
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by jake on Jun 2, 2020 0:21:54 GMT
Hi Don, thanks for the reply. Totally agree about feeling the waves and wind. Here's a (bit) better idea based on what you've said: Non structural elements attached to the deck? This would still allow you to keep the wind on the neck :-) and not affect structure of build? Like the soft drop idea! :-) Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 2, 2020 0:58:44 GMT
Hi..as long as you build the main structure as discussed above...then anything after that is OK....as that is your own spray deflector so it all must be an ADD ON to the standard structure ...so by the look of your drawing..you have taken the option of Raising the OBS. Pod 10cm then built the boat...then added a wave breakwater to the original stucture...so is possible.. just remember in extreme weather a BIG advantage for a soft dodger is to fold it down, so you have no extra windage aft..if your running before it...you do not want to be pushed into a broach..you want the effort up forward.
|
|
jake
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by jake on Jun 2, 2020 6:36:57 GMT
Hi. Thanks for the clarification :-)
|
|
pete
Junior Member
Posts: 56
|
Post by pete on Jun 3, 2020 7:41:53 GMT
Hi Don, been thinking about visibility of the main from the 'pod' as designed in the plans - sightlines don't look great to get an overall view upwards without another port looking straight up. Your comment above "I am also looking at ideas for a soft drop down spray dodger for a little protection?? and think at this time I may just fit a BUBBLE instead of the observation pod?? that is OK cause the POD is optional..." seems to show that the pod can be removed entirely, replaced or modified - i guess adding another port is ok so long as it doesn't compromise the structure? The pod has a positive effect on the AVS curve inverted area, so does whatever replaces it have to have a minimum volume? thanks
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 3, 2020 13:48:41 GMT
It will only have a nominal effect of the AVS if you do not use the OBSERVATION POD, so the way you load the boat with all lockes secure will be much more important and create a greater righting moment. WE do NOT allow other hatches/ports in the deck other than what is drawn, or in the area of the Observation pod footprint...so as long as it is in the way of that pod footpint your ok..you can still look up with the small hatch behind the mast which is part of the reason for having that..For any of the transocean races you can only use as a maximum size the two aft windows on the plans...good luck
|
|
|
Post by captdan on Jun 3, 2020 21:22:05 GMT
Hi Don, You had mentioned above that "...and then I will probably use a deck hatch entry for 100% sealing of the companionway..." Has a decision be made on the brand or model of hatch you are thinking about?
I am thinking that I will go the same way on Hull # 20. It looks like a Lewmar Ocean 70 will fit in that area if I have the raised observation deck as per the plans. It has an outside measurement on 694mm square and it needs a cutout of 627mm square. I am thinking that if I have the hinges in a vertical orientation, the hatch will lay against the sloped bulkhead and clear the cockpit outer coming when opened. I have only saw these fitted with the hinges horizontally at the top of the hatch because they were sort of inside a recess in the companionway and you couldnt open it otherwise. A decision ideally would be made while constructing the framework on the layout table and the plywood could be cut accordingly to suit the hatch that a builder was to use. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
Thanks, CaptDan
Here is the hatch
www.defender.com/product.jsp?id=131540
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 3, 2020 22:24:58 GMT
HI....No set hatch decided and it will be up to the builder to decide..so NOT compulsary ...and I am trying to make my own decision on design right now..in the next week to design my choice. I will use the Plastimo hatches for sure..we are also developing a Plastimo 5.80 BUILDERS PACK order which will have some good discounts from our Partner PLASTIMO...I have drawn many options and yes you could hinge on the side like a door...or on the top...if on the top you can make a easy rain/spray cover??? maybe and keep both side decks clear.. but it is like every boat..many things are a compromise...lol...so I will be interested to see what your thinking too...so make a sketch and lets keep thinking...but yes I like 100% watertight...and that is why the vents are so impotant..it is a small space inside when watertight so needs air when all shut up to keep the water out in a storm..I will let you know my choice when decided here thanks..good luck
|
|
|
Post by captdan on Jun 4, 2020 1:22:37 GMT
Re: Companionway hatch Hi everyone, I agree, everything is a compromise. I would like to be able to stand ( or sometimes sit) in the companionway while the hatch is open. I wont be able to do that if a hatch is hinged at the top and partially open. I would like to have a spray dodger fitted too. I have attached a picture of the door ( has a X on it ) and the door is open to the portside. It fits in there but might not be the best solution .... That is the biggest picture that it would allow me to attach. ( Just press and hold ctrl and press the plus sign multiple times to increase the size of your screen ) ( ctrl 0 to return to normal ) Things to think about: winch placement, lines coming into the cockpit and probably 10 other things .... ! I remember a sketch somewhere of a removable seat that bears on the cockpit floor - might do that after as well.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 4, 2020 2:25:13 GMT
A few things wrong there if you hope to swing it back flat as you have not allowed for the cockpit backrest seats that come quite a way in, so the biggest you will get there is a 50 x 50 and it will just make it...also I will publish my deck gear layout in a couple weeks when finished...quite a bit of co-ordination and human dynamics involved and matching up to the mast halyard layout and other features for solo sailing. I will run a headsail reefing system and a gennaker furing gear, sprit end downhaul, plus a boom braking system, with three main reefs at the cockpit..lots of string!! the seat sketch is on the specification page of the website under the sailplan...it was dawn up before the design was finished ..but the principle will work...I think??....
|
|
|
Post by captdan on Jun 4, 2020 2:50:20 GMT
A few things wrong there if you hope to swing it back flat as you have not allowed for the cockpit backrest seats that come quite a way in, so the biggest you will get there is a 50 x 50 and it will just make it...also I will publish my deck gear layout in a couple weeks when finished...quite a bit of co-ordination and human dynamics involved and matching up to the mast halyard layout and other features for solo sailing. I will run a headsail reefing system and a gennaker furing gear, sprit end downhaul, plus a boom braking system, with three main reefs at the cockpit..lots of string!! the seat sketch is on the specification page of the website under the sailplan...it was dawn up before the design was finished ..but the principle will work...I think??.... Yes, just after I posted that drawing, I realized that it would hit the seat backs. I might have to go with the top hinge or go with a smaller hatch as you mentioned. Your deck gear layout would be a great resource ! CaptDan
|
|
|
Post by craigsailing on Jun 4, 2020 8:20:51 GMT
HI....No set hatch decided and it will be up to the builder to decide..so NOT compulsary ...and I am trying to make my own decision on design right now..in the next week to design my choice. I will use the Plastimo hatches for sure..we are also developing a Plastimo 5.80 BUILDERS PACK order which will have some good discounts from our Partner PLASTIMO...I have drawn many options and yes you could hinge on the side like a door...or on the top...if on the top you can make a easy rain/spray cover??? maybe and keep both side decks clear.. but it is like every boat..many things are a compromise...lol...so I will be interested to see what your thinking too...so make a sketch and lets keep thinking...but yes I like 100% watertight...and that is why the vents are so impotant..it is a small space inside when watertight so needs air when all shut up to keep the water out in a storm..I will let you know my choice when decided here thanks..good luck Don, here are my current ideas on a possible alternative design to the Pod/dome... Where I have tried to keep within the current Pod space envelope? However, I noted on your latest update video you are considering increasing the height of the Pod? Has a figure been decided upon as my alternative Pod/dome design would take advantage of any increase allowed, please advise? Thanks. On another point, I have increased the companionway door step up height +500mm up from the KWL in line with minimum ISO requirements i.e. reduces likelihood of down flooding in the event the cockpit is filled after a knockdown or wave break over in rough seas etc.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 4, 2020 9:52:48 GMT
WOW!! way cool ..I like it a lot BUT??? ...well done!! you would laugh at my scetches..lol...so the max height we want to go is 10cm above the current OBS. POD. ...You may also need to provide some supporting structural data on the size of the deck opening and strenght of the stucture covering that, cause if that is blown acrylic it will be a problem if it breaks..a 50cm diameter hole is as big as it gets for Acrylic Dome and anyone fitting one MUST fit a SS roll bar as a minimum and have a plan to blank the hole off with a locker lid or?? if it ever breaks...say in a dismasting or??..The OBS POD is stucturally sounds and part of the deck structure..so I like what you have drawn, but definitely need a proposal if that is a deck hole as big as it looks ..your probably working on that now anyway? but it looks great!!..folowing with interest!! and yes we have the minimum height for companionway bottom on the plans...I am lifting mine up to the seat height....and also if you have not noticed, for transocean events you need to fit two 10cm inspection ports in the transom no higher than 30cm above the cocpit sole, so in storms you open/unscrew them...that allows two extra huge holes and super fast cockpit draining if flooded............for others reading this who want to modify companionways you must not weaken the stucture.... ..the diference here is this actually is NOT just the companionway..it is changing the obsevation pod..and realistically to maintain structural intergrity...it is the pod or NO pod on the plans...and we allow a bubble instead...so lets see where this goes before we say yes or no..but security is the most important issue
|
|