Discussion in 'Tenders & Dinghies' started by orion, Apr 27, 2006.
Thanks Kevin. Already done. YachtLuver... be careful.
ok, what is wrong now, i seem not to know what to do when posting something, i am getting the feeling now that i cant post anything now without it being wrong..
Think of it this way: If you were invited to visit Paul Allen aboard Octopus, would you wear Linux t-shirt?
.... I haven't laughed that hard in while. Thanks Kevin!
It's not your fault... it's my fault. There are certain sites we don't allow links to, yet there is no list of these sites posted for reference. So again, it's not your fault and you have done nothing wrong.
I have some very good reasons for this, but this is not the place to discuss them. We ALL appreciate the info you bring to YF and I'm really glad you're a member. PM me for an explanation. There's some history behind all of this.
Which is better?
Which is better for tender storage...depending on what angle you are looking at it from. Whether for esthetics, praticality and maybe classification. Storage in the stern/transom area with a stern door...that seems to be popular with the smaller yachts. Then storage with aft side door launch such as with Utopia, Sarah, Carinthia VII etc..this is popular with mid size yachts...there is also the stylish storage position behind the bridge such as with La Masquerade, the former Alfa IV, all the Blue Moons and so on.... Or the less used bow doors..such as on Callisto and one or two others.
What do you guys think...
The doors in the side of the hull do look VERY cool. And really open up huge areas of the hull for stowing tenders. But I can't help wondering about the practicality of these doors. And what their presence does to the integrity of the hull structure.
old fuddy Kelly
How about these huge dual storage compartments like on "alumercia",
A bow hatch makes a lot of sense to me ....
Wander through this site for lots of pics of Octopus including her garages and tenders.
Hmm, the front of the superstructure reminds me of Lars designs.
I think the designer has said that he got his inspiration from the Baltic Icebreakers and combined it with a more yachtlike styling;
Limitless have a very nice garage to her wooden runabout.
Sorry to be a timid soul, but hull cutouts that huge make me wonder.
Are you concerned with structural integrity of the complete vessel?
When closed and locked, if done properly, there shouldn't be a concern.
When open, the potential twisting loads can be easily transferred to other structures internally.
Or are you wondering about something else?
Mabe a huge side swell with the door open is whats bothering Kelly.
All of it. I'm NOT a structural engineer. But I'm not buying the "loads can be easily transferred to other structures internally" either. If it were my design I'd either put that big runabout in thru a stern door or up on deck.
I have to agree on that
I agree though...even though both installations have their pros and cons. If you store on deck you have to worry about sea spray and exposure generally.....Having side doors are more of a risk than anything cuz if the weather turns bad and some water comes aboard then you could have a problem..That's why i always see Octopus shut back her side doors almost immediately after she launches something. You also have the issue of the weight loads on the structure at that point in time..
There are two concerns then?
1) water ingress through a large door. The garage behind the door is above the water line. The garage itself has it's own internal door which should be closed. Worst case would be a wave flooding that one room, clearing out it's contents, draining out and hopefully leaving a few wet crew behind. If the internal door is left open then I'd agree that there could be a problem.
I don't know this for a fact but I'd bet that those garage doors don't get opened up in any kind of a sea anyway.
2) structural integrity. When the garage door is closed and locked it makes very little difference to the overall strength of the structure. As an example: next time you are out at an airport take a look at the underside of an aircraft wing. There are quite a few access ports used for inspection/lubrication. Those panels are just held in by screws or dzus fasteners which only connect to the skin, not to internal frame structures. If you removed all the panels and put a load on that wing it would still stand up to a goodly percentage of it's specified failure load point. With all the panels in and fastened the wing will meet the load failure point.
I believe this door is several magnitudes larger than those access panels on the underside of an aircraft wing.