Chuck: I've never heard of schedule F breakers. I think you are referring to breakers that are slow to blow, so that they aren't tripped by spikes. I do have commercial breakers.
My problem is that it literally takes 75 to 100 amps to start my chillers, versus only 12 amps when they are running. My 16kw generator only puts out about 65 amps. If the normal house (hotel) load is 20 to 30 amps, then the 12 amps to run a chiller is fine, but the 75 amps to get it running isn't. Most chillers only have high demand for less than a second. The models I have are new to Cruisair, and the start-up seems to take multiple seconds. This is long enough that the generator has time to lug down, and the voltage drops. Sometimes the shore power breakers trip at the pedestal, and sometimes it's the breaker inside my boat. Other times, it's fuses blowing in completely different circuits, because the amperage surges as the voltage falls. I need chillers which don't have the high current surge, or at least have a faster startup. Maybe. I am going to give Nordhavn a chance to fiddle with my electrical system, but expect I'll be ordering new chillers.
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (6/21/2008 10:22:38 PM)
Ken---Do you have schedule "F" breakers with longer trip times for startup of your chillers. Could it be something this simple to solve your problem.
Chuck
Comment by: Visitor (6/19/2008 12:01:26 PM)
ChrisW: Great question. I decided to give it a long answer, which can be viewed here. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (6/19/2008 10:30:04 AM)
Ken, Re: your latest whast new post.
After all of the talk about Nordhavn and their fantastic boats, support etc, I am surprised to hear "you" trying to solve your AC/chiller problem. Since this has been a problem for you from day one, shouldn't Nordhavn step up and solve the issue? I am a huge Nordhavn fan and hope to own one someday. However, if I interpret correctly, this situation surprises me. Just looking for some insight into this ownership issue.
Thanks
ChrisW
Jim: Roberta and I would do the delivery ourselves if there were any chance of it being a fun trip. A couple days ago, we made the decision to run the boat from Costa Rica to Florida ourselves, based on some bad weather info. Once we did a bit more research, it quickly became obvious it would be a rough ride, and we bailed on the trip. Actually, if a trip might involve dangerous sea conditions I don't want myself, or a delivery crew on the boat. The boat is currently in a safe place, so as much as I'd like it back, the right answer is to wait for the end of hurricane season, or wait for a freighter. We're still exploring routing that might make the trip possible, but if I can't convince myself the trip is safe, the boat will stay put. In any event, I'm strictly thinking delivery crew at this point, and have given up all hope that there is a trip I'd want to do. -Ken W
Ken, That will be quite an adventure! That has to be one of the most unique paths to travel and will certainly be a trip of a lifetime. O a diffrent subject, if you elect to bring Sans Souci over instead of waiting for the freighter, will you be be doing it yourself or with the hired crew?
Thanks, Jim E.
Comment by: Visitor (6/13/2008 4:18:43 PM)
yes, flip the picture horizontally. it may have been changed for some reason. also its an island so it could be on your right hand side, so your are heading south. now i'm confused! jon
Comment by: Visitor (6/13/2008 2:04:51 PM)
Ken,
Perhaps the picture has been flipped, and in fact, you're heading south, not north?
- John S.
Aha... mystery solved. The picture appears to have been from the Fubar, and is somewhere around Ensenada. I can't figure why I appear to be north-bound, or so close to shore. Perhaps we were coming into the bay to anchor? Strange... - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (6/13/2008 12:32:33 PM)
sorry, i didn't look down the page, picture is near the bottom. jon
Comment by: Visitor (6/13/2008 12:25:39 PM)
i found the picture by accident looking for something else. the picture came from somewhere on this site.
http://nwtrawlers.blogspot.com/2007/11/gourmet-breakfast-ensenada-cruise-ship.html
jon
I like that picture! ... Whose blog is it? There are things about it that are quite puzzling. I can't recognize the location from the picture. It appears that the land is on my starboard side -- which limits the number of places it could have been to almost nowhere. We've been southbound for the past 4,000 miles. Also strange about the picture is that we are close to land, and I can't imagine me running that close to shore, unless forced to for some reason. Thank you for passing along the link -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (6/13/2008 2:47:53 AM)
ken, you may have seen this picture, sans souci against an impressive background. jon
Chuck: I have shipped twice with Dockwise, and both times went perfectly. I'd strongly recommend them. In this case, I tried to ship with Dockwise, but they made a decision not to run the west coast this year. Yachtpath was my only option. -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (6/9/2008 7:57:08 PM)
Ken: I have used Dock Wise twice to transport my boat with VERY favorable results. This is a smaller boat than yours, but they seemed to have their act together. When I contacted Yachpath for a quote etc. I struggled to even get a call back or any straight answers. Your experience confirms for me that Yachtpath would never be my transporter of choice. I am sorry for your troubles, but I'm sure it will work out eventually. Best Wishes. Chuck
Comment by: Visitor (6/2/2008 7:45:32 AM)
June 1 is the start of hurricane season. Most early hurricanes start in the Caribbean. Near Fall they come off of Africa. This ofcourse would be different for California area. I hope your boat will be safe.
mxCoder
Comment by: Visitor (5/22/2008 11:48:48 PM)
This flopper stopper seems to be lighter than yours, as it uses a lattice instead of plates. The plastic sheet works like a valve.
http://www.setsail.com/dashew/rollcontrol.html
Andy
Comment by: Visitor (5/22/2008 2:00:49 AM)
http://www.thrusters.com/products/stabilizers_tracstar.shtm
this is the page from abt, TRAC-star is the upgrade to give stabilization at rest.
On the flopper stopper topic: My current "plates" weigh 34 pounds, have 1,200 sq inches, and are stainless steel. The new plates weigh 38 pounds, have 2,100 sq inches, and are aluminum. I could push them on doing carbon fiber, but they clearly don't want to do it. At only an extra 4 pounds, I should be fine. I'm making up a cardboard mockup of the new plate to see if it will fit in my storage locker. At nearly double the size, it will make a huge difference.
As to the at-anchor stabilization: I'll contact ABT to ask them about it ... I can't imagine how it could work. When the boat is standing still, there is no water flowing over the fins -- so, how could moving them make a difference? - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (5/21/2008 6:26:32 PM)
just in case i confused things, when i say stabilization at anchor i mean the system you have, i believe you use TRAC from abt has an update that lets you use the same fins to stabilize the boat at rest. in the past we have talked about another system that can be used for stabilization, that uses large heavy gryoscopes to right the boat. i'm not sure but the TRAC is just a software update to what you have. jon
Comment by: Visitor (5/21/2008 7:50:24 AM)
Do they have these stoppers if Carbon Fiber? Light weight and stronger than steal.
The issue with Flopper Stopper and weight is simple. If the weight of the plate is not suffient, it will not sink fast enough (due to fluid dynamic resistance) to become effective for the next trip "up" as the boat rolls. I have seen people hang dive weights from the bottom to make them more effective
I don't know much about "at anchor" stabilization. I researched it a year ago, and remember that it was too large -- we didn't have a place to put it. My recollection is that it is based on a large gyroscope, that tries to keep the boat flat. I'll do some quick research .. but, I'm sure I couldn't fit it in.
The company I'm talking to on the new flopper stoppers is: Prime Fabrication. They believe an aluminum stopper 66% larger would be possible, and weigh less. They're doing a design now. My goal is to have the new ones in place before we get to Alaska.
I couldn't understand why they weren't interested in Kevlar. My guess is that they've never worked with it before, and were afraid of the unknown. I doubted their contention that it would be too light to work, but I really don't know. Some weight is certainly required. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (5/20/2008 6:05:00 PM)
I thought that Flopper Stoppers worked with surface area and the design shape, rather than weight. if that is the case then kevlar would work. I'm trying to get over to Victoria when your boat arrives, hopefully I'll be able to see you go by. ..... James
Comment by: Visitor (5/20/2008 3:24:44 PM)
doesn't the TRAC stabilizer system have an upgrade that lets you use it at anchor? is this more effective than flopper stoppers assuming they do the same thing. jon
"I'm in Manhattan for a few days."...and you thought 'Boating' was expensive. laughing
Comment by: Visitor (5/13/2008 12:48:21 PM)
that would have been another suggestion, increase the flow. not sure if the rest of the system, a/c piping is stressed for it but seems the easiest method. would be interesting to know what you choose to go with. thanks. jon
Jon: Yes -- the best solution is to put some chemical into the strainer that kills all the growth. A friend suggested putting in muratic acid once a week, and letting it sit for an hour. The tricky part is how to get rid of the acid once you are done letting it do its job. If you start the a/c system or generator, all of the crud that is loosened off of the walls of the hoses goes into the system, which may not be good. The best approach, which we did at Los Suenos, is to: 1) Close the valves at the sea chest, and to the thru-hull 2) Add chlorine or acid, 3) Let it simmer for a while, 4) Suck out all the liquid to a bucket, 5) open the thru-hulls. ... We did this about a month ago using a "secret formula" that the marina mechanic had at Los Suenos, but it doesn't seem to have made a difference. Doing it weekly might. To facilitate doing it in the future I'm adding hose attachment points to the top of the strainers and the sea chest.
This is getting a bit long, but here's another idea... I spoke to a 64 owner who upsized the dual hoses into the sea chest, to 3" hose (from 2"). He then closes one or the other intake at all times. This means he has a clean backup at all times, and that the other side has bigger hose with greater flow. This has worked for him. .. and, lastly .. I'm expecting an email back from the people (cathelco.com) who do the anti-fouling electrically. I sent them a bunch of information and they are custom engineering something for my boat. I'll report back on what they say. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (5/13/2008 8:25:12 AM)
seen someone suggest tossing a pool tablet (chlorine?) into the strainer. cured the problem for them. not sure if its legal to put chemicals such as chlorine into the water but then no one would know. jon
Jon: My main engines DO NOT have keel cooling. They run a similar, but completely independent system to the sea chest cooling system. The main engines have a thru-hull, that goes to giant Groco strainers, and then the water is heat exchanged to cool the engine. I asked a mechanic, while the boat was at Los Suenos, to check the hoses used to cool the main engines, and there was no growth, whereas the cooling water hoses for the sea chest were completely clogged. I asked how this could be, and the answer was that the cooling for the main engines is much higher flow, in bigger hoses, and the barnacles don't have time to grow. -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (5/12/2008 11:45:48 PM)
your 68 doesn't have any keel cooling? so this is a problem (pipe fouling) with your engines also? jon
Jon: I don't know what Nordhavn's thinking is on putting keel coolers on some boats, and thru-hulls on others. My theory would be that on a boat like mine, there is just too much happening for a keel cooler to provide adequate cooling. I remember the keel cooler on my N62 being fairly large. Given that I have twin engines, it would need to be at least twice as big. So .. I don't know, but my guess is that it is a matter of having enough square footage available on the bottom of the hull to provide adequate cooling. -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (5/12/2008 6:36:26 PM)
ken, curious question you may or may not know. why use a sea chest, strainers, pipes, sea water so forth for a/c cooling instead of another keel cooler? come to think of it where is the benefit in using sea water to cool anything instead of using a keel cooler. theres also no pipes to break below the water line. jon
Jon: I researched something similar to the Cathelco system, called Z Guard, and was excited about installing it, until I read a message board posting by a Nordhavn mechanic saying that he had worked on a couple boats with Z Guard, and all had electrolysis problems, requiring Z Guard to be disabled. Hundreds of boats are using these systems successfully, so I don't want to rule them out -- but, I want to understand the electrolysis issue better. Also: My readings indicate that these systems are focused on metal piping and fittings, not on rubber hoses - which is where I've had my problems. I'll call the salesman at Cathelco and see what they have to say. I definitely need a solution! I wonder if I would have been fine if the boat had been completely shut down, and no water moving through the sea chest. - Ken W
*** Update - I spoke with Garry.Churm @ cathelco.com and he said that electrolysis is not a problem unless you have aluminum piping. He said that the system emits copper ions. I asked whether or not it would work with rubber hoses, and he insisted it would (which I have doubts about).
Comment by: Visitor (5/11/2008 10:14:11 PM)
http://www.cathelco.com/ may help with the a/c problem. jon
JC: You are correct. I am convinced that I will need to swap my a/c chillers for chillers that are three phase, with VFDs (soft starts). The problem I have with doing this is that we chose the current model (TWC 36C) because they are very compact. The three phase chillers are slightly bigger. Nordhavn believes they have some ideas will allow my chillers to work. It is normal for electric motors to require a rush of current at start-up, and generators are set to be able to handle excess load, as is my Atlas system, for a brief period. I believe my problem is that the TWC chillers are spinning up to speed too slow and the system can't handle the long start time. One of the theories being discussed is to look at the wire sizes. My personal prediction is that we'll experiment with a few options, and ultimately replace the chillers with the three phase/soft start. To solve the problem with size we'll have to drop me from four chillers to three, which will be fine. Short-term, we're headed to Alaska, so this will be a non-issue. Thank you! - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (5/5/2008 8:58:00 PM)
Hey Ken,
I have a comment concerning your HVAC issues. I recognize this may be a retrofit of sorts but CruisAir makes Variable Speed Drives for Water Source Chillers like the one you have. Only problem is you need 3 Phase compressors. You do NOT need 3 phase on the boat. The VSD(or VFD varible frequency drive) takes incoming single phase and convert the signal to a 3 phase DC voltage to variably drive the compressor to the desired load. This set up eliminates inrush associated with starting a permanent split capacitor motor such as your compressor motors. There is some loss of efficiency with this but I am willing to bet your oversized on load anyway. This is the path of the future in modern home HVAC and has been in commercial use in buildings for decades. Here is a link to CruisAir
http://www.cruisair.com/sheets/L-0814.pdf . I believe that the interface would allow you to stagger starting of multiple banks. This idea would save a headache if done properly and likely let you run some portion of HVAC with a smaller generator. I have experience with one version of this in the Brownies tank refill system (like yours, sort of) that uses a VFD to drive the refill compressor based on the load against the compressor. Works super on a 12.5 kW generator in the boat. Uses about 6-8 kW if my math is good. Best of luck and enjoy the blog.
jc
jcjannarone@hotmail.com
Comment by: Visitor (5/5/2008 11:50:46 AM)
ken: a/c problem, were the right sized fused installed, could be as simple as changing a fuse? jon
Comment by: Visitor (5/2/2008 1:07:18 PM)
Rather than Word, you might try the Blurb software by Booksmart. It can "slurp" some blog formats directly but also handles photographs very well. I enjoy your blog. -drew
To the person who asked about running the boat north on its own bottom: There are a few reasons why this doesn't make sense for me: 1) I've already paid Yachtpath the money for shipping the boat north, and couldn't get the money back. 2) The cost to ship isn't really that much more than the cost to run the boat on its own bottom. I paid around $45,000. To run it on its own bottom 4,000 miles would take roughly 6,000 gallons of fuel, or around $20,000. Then, the delivery crew might cost another $25,000. Then you add on all that might break on the boat, and the various wear and tear. 3) As much as I don't like the uncertain shipping date with Yachtpath, it could be more predictable than running it on its own bottom. There can be weather delays, and mechanical delays, and crew problems, and ???. -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (5/2/2008 12:38:08 AM)
John S: Yes -- Dockwise does allow owners to stay on their boats. Roberta and I have thought about this, because it can be difficult to fly places with our dog. For instance, let's say that we decide to ship the boat from Australia to the Med -- it might be better to ride on the freighter than to try to get Shelby (our dog) onto an airplane in Australia (which is impossible).
I remember that it wasn't as fun as it sounds. For instance, you have to eat in the cafeteria on the freighter. You are not allowed to run the stove on your boat. I forget what all the other limitations were, but it is definitely not an easy way to make the trip. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (4/30/2008 10:38:25 PM)
Have you considered having your hired crew run the boat to Seattle on its own bottom. They should make in less time than waiting for the freighter and couldn't be much different in cost.
Good Morning Ken,
I was watching Discovery Channel this morning while eating my breakfast. They had a show on Dockwise's Super Servant 3 & 4. When it came on, I immediately thought of you and SS2 heading north... :) (I know...you're not using Dockwise on this trip)
What I found really interesting was that some owners actually stay on their boats while it is being transported, with Super Servant 3 or 4 providing water and electrical hookups, and while transporting, they either touch up their bottom paint (or completely paint the bottom), or clean the props and the hull below the waterline, as they feel they may as well take advantage of the "dry-dock" time.... Very interesting show indeed!
- John S.
Chuck: I posted an update on the "What's New" page. As to the power on the freighter, my understanding is that'll we'll have to cut all power on the boat. The boat will be completely dead. I told Jeff (the delivery skipper going to Costa Rica) to give away all the food. We have three freezers full of frozen meats. The marina employees will be VERY happy. -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (4/27/2008 9:24:42 PM)
Are you using crew to load the boat on Yachtpath? Are you using "shore power" to run your refrigeration etc while on the ship? What special things did you need to do to your boat to prepare for shipment? When are you leaving P.S. for Alaska?
Chuck
Comment by: Visitor (4/21/2008 12:54:38 AM)
it does seem a grey area between tow and salvage and how one can take advantage. i vaguely remember seeing a picture of the boat that night, i don't think it was from your blog where you mentioned it but someone who had posted the pics on a site. the boat seemed to be over far enough that water was at the same level as the deck. the picture may have looked more precarious than in reality. nail bitter for sure! jon
Jon: At the time of the event I never really read the agreement, and was not given a copy. I didn't perceive it as a salvage situation, and only skimmed the agreement. As a result of your query I did some googling, and found what might be the agreement I was asked to sign:
http://www.boatus.com/towing/guide/salvage/contract.asp
Reading the agreement now, I see the words that had me upset: "... Salvor shall have the requisite possession and control of the subject yacht and be entitled without expense to the reasonable use of the yacht and its gear in the performance of recovery or salvage operations. ..." This does not seem to say what I thought it said at the time.
I made the right decision not to sign the agreement, but for the wrong reasons. Now that I have done some reading, my understanding is that the agreement basically leaves it up to a negotiation between the insurance companies, or a arbitrator, to decide what compensation the "salvor" gets. In other words, the salvage company works for free, in return turn for a share of the value of the boat, if they are able to salvage it successfully.
Reading now, when not under duress, it actually seems a fair agreement (assuming this is the same agreement I was presented at the time). The tricky bit is in deciding what is, and isn't, a salvage situation. I was convinced that there was a good chance that the boat could easily be towed to safety. The upsetting part is that these guys were refusing to grant aid to me unless I agreed that it was a salvage situation. It was not a salvage situation, and never became one -- but, it could have become one had I not been able to find a tow company willing to help.
What they did may be legal, but it sure doesn't seem right to me. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (4/20/2008 3:38:32 PM)
ken, do you know what the possible consequences are to signing a salvage agreement or any other peoples experiences who have? i can see their reason for wanting such an agreement, protecting themselves from liability if the boat sinks or is damaged by what they do. i think you mentioned you sign over ownership of the boat (?), could they then hold the boat if theres a disagreement over terms, almost hold the boat as ransom if they so wish or possibly give your insurance company a reason not to insure you if you had signed. jon
James and Steven - hopefully you received my blog. I addressed your questions there. If you didn't then look at the Q&A on Updae #25 by clicking on BLOG on the menu on the left.
-Ken W
Ken, I had read that at one time you had a 15' Boston Whaler as a tender. I am thinking about getting a 13' Boston Whaler Sport to use as my tender when the time comes to get my N55. Other than the inflatable not needing fenders, do you still see any advantage to the RIB or would you go back to a tender like the Boston Whaler? I would be interested to hear your comments since you have had the opporotunity to use the RIB and all the problems with getting it to shore etc...
Thanks, Jim
Greetings Steven. I'm working on the last blog of this trip now, and will include your question in the Q&A section. I want to think over night on what I'll write.
Our grounding itself is fairly straight forward: I was blinded by the sun and missed a buoy, resulting in having to sit on a rock for nearly 12 hours waiting for a high tide.It made for some dramatic photos, and bruised egos (mine), but no real damage.
The story which I think needs told is the story of the "rescue" and their insistance that I sign a salvage agreement. This would have been a horrible mistake, and others should be warned.
This said, there are two reasons why I am worried about writing anything:
1) I have no interest in litigation. I have some very harsh things to say about the techniques used to "encourage" me to sign a salvage agreement (which I refused to do). I can imagine that those involved might not like what I would write.
2) The actual people I worked with were very nice people, who meant well. My problem is with the industry and how it does business. I wouldn't like to see those who helped me damaged by what I have to say.
I'm going to sleep on it and see what I can think of to write that won't get me, or them, into trouble.
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (4/14/2008 2:52:21 AM)
Hi Ken,
I have enjoyed recieving your updates very much, sounds like you had a great time. I do agree thatgroundings do unfortunately happen, if you travel far enough you will encounter the bottom on occasions. While we all hope when this happens it will be a soft grounding, it seems raeding your comment and mention of rock, u encounted the unwanted form of grounding. Did you dive the hull and inspect for any damage or gouging, hopefully it is not too serious. I guess you will have it hauled when you get back to Seattle to do a proper inspection and carry out any repairs before the trip to Alaska. I would definately like to hear your story on the "Vultures" sometime. Looking forward to more blogs, safe cruising.
Steven
Comment by: Visitor (3/24/2008 7:16:53 PM)
What's your impression of Costa Rico? Is Yachtpath still on schedule for your trip to the N.W.?
Chuck
With the Atlas you might be seeing the difference between the shore voltage and the boat voltage. For instance if the real shore voltage is 100volts and the boat 120volts then the boat current would be (100volts x 100amps)/120volts = 83amps. Taking into account the efficiency of the Atlas, say 90% then 74amps would seem resonable.
Chuck: The Atlas system seems to be working fine. I'm hoping it is now fixed. I posted a message about it earlier today on the Nordhavn forum, seeking others who have an Atlas, so that we can compare notes. I'm seeing more of a loss of power inside the Atlas than I was expecting (100 amps in, 74 amps out), and I don't know if I am misunderstanding the data, if there is still a problem with the Atlas, or if that is how it is intended to be. We're running, so it isn't a huge issue, but it is one I'd like to resolve. - Ken W
To the person who said “Money is no substitute for experience” – I assume you are referring to my grounding. I have more than adequate experience (100 ton license, European Yachtmaster’s license, 10,000+ miles). The error was caused by a poorly marked channel, combined with the sun directly in my eyes. Two other boats had gone aground in the same location the same week. It was definitely an error, but the fact is that the location has trapped more than one experienced captain. – Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (3/21/2008 12:25:13 AM)
Yet another shining example of how money is no substitute for experience.
Comment by: Visitor (3/20/2008 11:45:31 PM)
What is going on with the Atlas System? Will you have that fixed back in the Northwest?
Chuck
Roberta and I debated sending out a blog update regarding our grounding. The honest answer is that it was extremely embarrassing and our first reaction was to hope no one would find out. Which was a very silly idea, because where we grounded was at the exit of a heavily traveled river.
Since this "incident" I've come to discover that I'm not the only person to go aground, and that anyone who cruises long enough and far enough will encounter the ground sooner or later. The pictures are fairly dramatic, but like most groundings, it was just a matter of relaxing for 12 hours, to let the tide come back up, and then drive off the rock under our own power. I had two different tugs standing by to pull me off if needed, but the boat had shifted position during the day and we had no trouble once the tide was up.
The big story that needs to be told is about the vultures who prey on people who have gone aground. My current thinking is to write about this incident, as a caution to others, and give the article to one of the magazines (Passagemaker?) or include it in my blog.
A few highlights:
When I called the coast guard for assistance, they asked my cell phone number so they could call me back. Within seconds my phone rang, and I believed I was speaking with the coast guard, but it was a private company offering to "help." When they showed up they immediately handed me a "salvage agreement" and refused to assist until I signed it.
All turned out well for us, and our boat, but I suspect that many others don't really understand what a salvage agreement is, and sign, only to regret it later.
I will write all of this up, but I can't really focus on it until I get this trip done...
-Ken W (from Los Suenos, in Costa Rica)
Comment by: Visitor (3/17/2008 3:34:34 AM)
Hey Ken, somehow we missed hearing about this:
http://www.baylinerownersclub.org/forum/showthread.php?s=9d39746edf5e2343e33ce2f8a6c4621e&t=8518
Ken:
My deepest sympathies on the loss of your father. I was unaware that this blog started to communicate with him. It will be a great memory and a tribute to him as we all "ride along".
Harry
Fred: Thank you for the comment. I haven't spoken with Twin Disc (the transmission company) -- but, Lugger suggested the same as you - they thought that I would be fine if I run the engine that isn't being run for 5-10 minutes every eight hours. The most important thing seems to be to monitor the transmission temperature and run an engine to cool it whenever the heat seems too high (I think Lugger quantified this as 80 degrees centigrade). Lugger also suggested that I consider just running one or the other engine at idle at all times. This would cut the burn to only 1/2 to 1 gallon per hour while providing cooling for the transmission. -Ken W
Andy: I did go to the Pudgy site, and read through it. It seems cool! I liked how it can double as a life raft... I still haven't figured what we'll do. -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (2/16/2008 11:11:24 AM)
Hi Ken:
We were on the Fubar and tied in front of you in La Paz. The name of the vessel I was on Unreel. I have delivered several vessels from Vancouver to Barra. Most without a hitch others on one engine. Most of the voyages were done at 9 to 10 kts. I checked with various transmission manufacturers when I lost an engine. All said at that speed there is no problem free wheeling the idol prop or run the engine for five minutes after 8 hours. You may want to check this out.
Captain Fred Saleigh
Comment by: Visitor (2/16/2008 12:26:18 AM)
Ken and Preston,
Re: Hard dinghy, the Portland Pudgy comes to mind. Unsinkable, you can row it for daily exercise, sail it or motor it (2hp). Rowing and sailing gear is stowed in watertight compartments. No "Baja" wheels, though. It may look small, but there is a picture with 5 people in it and still enough freeboard. 128 lbs.
http://www.portlandpudgy.com/
Andy B., Switzerland
Comment by: Visitor (2/12/2008 12:27:15 AM)
Hi Ken,
Ouch.....like Steven, I'm sorry to hear of your ongoing issues with the Atlas. Perhaps its time for Atlas to step up to the plate and just replace the entire system, if that is indeed an option. I mean....how much does a customer have to put up with? Especially when you take into account the cost of the equipment!
Hopefully this will get resolved to your satisfaction.....and fast!!!
- John S.
Comment by: Visitor (2/11/2008 6:56:54 PM)
Hi Ken,
Sorry to hear about your ongoing problems with the Atlas System, it is becomming a real PIA for you. It really makes others wonder if this is the norm for these particular sytems and if there is a better option. I hope you get it sorted and you get the long term reliability that shoud be expected.
Steven
Comment by: Visitor (2/8/2008 12:11:54 AM)
Ken,
My problem with RIBs centers on the tubes. Modern fabrics used for the tubes are tougher than they used to be but they are by no means tough. In the last year or so, Zodiac altered the Pro series boats so that the decking went up the interior sides of the tubes a few inches. SCUBA divers got tired of damaging tubes with spear guns left on the deck.
RIBs are a PITA to patch. I don't want to say "all" because I haven't seen every patch kit but you usually have to deflate the tube and dry the affected area before you patch. So leaks that can wait until you're on the hard are easy to fix. Leaks that cannot wait generally can't be patched either. There are military clamps that don't rely on glue that could be used (and should be carried IMHO) but even clamps have limitations.
Hard dingies are less likely to suffer a hole in the first place. In the event of a hole there are lots of options for improvisation that are not available with a tube.
Close to civilization I would still want a RIB. They're great in rough seas and their load carrying ability is unmatched. Far from civilization I would not want a RIB.
Walker Bay has some cool hybrid dingies they call RIDs where the tube provides supplemental buoyancy. If you lose the tube on a RID due to puncture you still have a serviceable boat. I have no experience with the boats but it looks like a brilliant idea.
From reading your site, I know you've put a lot of thought into your equipment decisions. My dislike of RIBs comes from 26 years in the military and having things fail in the worst possible way at the worst possible time. If I were far from home I would want gear with as few failure modes as possible. For me, that would be hard dingy with a 2-stroke engine.
I really enjoy your site! Please keep posting.
-->Preston
Comment by: Visitor (2/7/2008 11:07:56 AM)
I found irony in your 2/4/08 post discussing your lust for the 151’ Daedalus. “…unless I buy LOTS of lottery tickets, my chances of ever owning such a boat are zero.”
I too have will have to win the lottery to have my dream boat: A Nordhavn 68! It’s all relative:) Have a safe journey.
Jeff McCallister,
Virginia Beach, VA
Steven: look at today's update on the What's New section of this site. You'll see more info than you ever wanted on running twins. It's a lot of good information, primarily taken from correspondence with Lugger and Nordhavn. -Ken W
Preston: The smallest of the Sealegs boats is 21', and the largest tender I can fit on my deck is 15'. But, as you said -- they do look cool!
What don't you like about RIBs? - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (2/6/2008 6:24:34 AM)
Hi Ken,
Re your Feb.5 update regarding your trip to Hawaii and range with the twin engine set up you have. I have always believed you would have 2 options to obtain the range needed ; (a) run the boat as a single engine and swapping engine useage every several hours, or (b) run around the 1000rpm mark on both engines, but every hour or so spend 5 minutes at near full throttle. It would be interesting to know Lugger's recommendation on this subject as well as your decision on how you will approach this.
Steven.
Comment by: Visitor (2/3/2008 11:57:19 PM)
Ken,
They're big... but they're cool. Have a look at SeaLegs boats. The small one is 21 ft with the wheels.
SeaLegs have two big pluses in my book: the land propulsion system and they make a "D" tube version that is foam-filled. I don't think RIBs belong on expedition boats.
http://www.sealegs.com/tech.asp
-->Preston
Hi Kendra. As you've seen in my updates, we are now at Barra, and loving it here. We felt bad that we couldn't stay longer in Puerto Vallarta, but we used to go there all the time, and we wanted to go to new places to explore.
Good luck with the lots. We have lived in Mexico for 10 years now, and have seen more growth in the last three years than we ever could have imagined. It was amazing to see how much Puerto Vallarta has changed.
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/26/2008 6:34:28 PM)
Hi Ken,
My dad is following your escapades from Stuart, FL, and he forwarded your recent entry. Please continue to play up the Vallarta area because I really want him to bring one of his boats down here. I live in the lighthouse marina- closer to the center of town. You might want to visit for a day or two. If Roberta likes massages, The Day Spa is a fabulous place for aromatherapy, candles, and lots of pampering. Fajita Banana is a terrific little restaurant just outside the spa. There's a leather shop, Tony's, along the promenade, but his wares will turn into chia pets is you stay in the tropics. Once Upon a Bean is your place for chai tea smoothies and English books. Arte Primativo has amazing third world treasures. Pieces from my favorite silver artists are found at Andrea's Silver and Art (next to Amerimed Hospital). Tikul is the high end restaurant that's known for live jazz and fabulous food. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. The whales are in the bay now, so you might see some babies.
I'll look forward to your post about Barra de Navidad. I'm looking to purchase $7,000 lots there. They're about 800 meters from the beach. Mexico still has its charms and good deals.
Fair seas,
Kendra Delano
Comment by: Visitor (1/21/2008 1:07:18 PM)
Right on Andy!
- John S.
Comment by: Visitor (1/20/2008 1:35:16 AM)
John, I know about sublimation but didn't know about frost-free. Had to look that up. I was assuming an equilibrium between ice and relative humidity. In that case wrap the ice cube in plastic foil or put it in a zip-lock baggie or a clear plastic container (no glass) with a tight lid.
My point is, if you leave the boat (or your home) for weeks or months and there was a power outage for several days that later had been restored, then you return to "frozen" food that you assume to be safe, but which might poison you. The ice cube shows if the freezing had been interrupted.
Comment by: Visitor (1/19/2008 4:09:34 PM)
Andy, your ice cube tip isn't entirely true....most freezers these days are "frost-free", and ice cubes eventually go through a process called "Sublimation", whereby the ice cube slowly vaporizes and the resultant vapors are drawn out of the freezer without ever turning back to water. However, if you open up your freezer and see a puddle of water in the tray, your food in the freezer may have thawed as well. But all may not be lost as the extremities will thaw before the food in the center of the freezer thaws, and a simple "squeeze" test should tell you whether or not the food is still frozen or not.
- John S.
Comment by: Visitor (1/19/2008 1:24:03 AM)
Freezers: Put an ice cube on a saucer in every freezer. If you find an empty saucer, the contents may have thawed too and turned bad...
Andy B., Switzerland
Comment by: Visitor (1/18/2008 6:50:56 PM)
The "snail trail" works very well, but be aware, if the GPS signal is compromised following the trail may not be accurate. This is probably highly unlikely, but as they say, don't trust just one source for accurate navigation.
Can't you use your night vision device to see the channel correctly?
Chuck
Comment by: Visitor (1/18/2008 11:03:35 AM)
for anyone interested heres a comparison between vsat and fleet 77
http://www.navcom-solutions.com/seatel/wavecall_4006.htm
jon
Ken,
We have a Furuno integrated system and the "snail trail" is dead on. I have to navigate a very poorly marked channel into Hamersly Inlet in Shelton WA and at night the trails are invaluable.
Cheers
Scott
Adam: I came very close to ordering Vsat. I was concerned about the dome size, but it appears that it is only about 6" wider than the Fleet 77 dome, and actually, the tech who was on the boat today insisted that they now have a dome that is exactly the same size as the Fleet 77. I almost made the switch before coming to Cabo, but Vsat is a new product, and was barely introduced when we were heading south. They weren't sure they could get me going in time. Also -- I didn't want to be the pioneer. The Fleet 77 is darn reliable. It seems good to let some Vsat units get shipped and then install one when we get back to the Pacific NW in May (prior to Alaska). -Ken W
PS - The Bgan unit I have is just a portable unit intended for use on land. I don't know if I'll be able to get it to work at anchor or not. It is along just as an experiment.
Comment by: Visitor (1/18/2008 12:44:28 AM)
Ken:
I'm curious whether you looked at VSAT in addition to BGAN. With BGAN at a very expensive $3-$7/MB, VSAT's $800-$2,000 monthly fee for 512kbps-1Mbps bandwidth and no total volume limit seems like a downright bargain. I do note that VSAT coverage isn't as good as BGAN, and the equipment first cost seems to be higher. Plus there's that big old radome...
Thanks!
/adam
Scott: That's an interesting idea! I wonder how accurate the "snail trails" are? I believe they are plenty accurate enough to navigate by. I may do this. I'll still how adventurous I am feeling when we move the boat to the fuel dock.
I definitely need more training in tight quarters maneuvering. I'm stuggling with controlling the boat in strong currents or wind. If we cross to Puerto Vallarta, and it is windy on arrival, I'll anchor until the wind drops. I received an email from a Nordhavn which is at Barra warning me that the "fairways" are very narrow. That has me worried already. It's just a matter of practice, but the problem is that mistakes are expensive... There really isn't a way to learn without doing. - Ken W
Ken,
When you move the boat to the fuel dock, activate the GPS, navigate to open water, and return to the fuel dock. If you have your plotter set right, it will leave the historical trail for you to follow later that night. I am sure you know this but you know what they say about assumptions! Good luck on your trip; I will be looking forward to the updates. I have to say that given the level of technical help you have had, it would freighten me a bit to be headed into the wild blue yonder with more equipment then they used in the Apollo program.
Scott
Jon: Yup! And, if you did it with a Fleet 77, it would be 10 times more! ... You can bet I'll be looking for a wireless connection wherever I can find it!
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/15/2008 11:12:59 PM)
i just found the rates for bgan. my god. i tried to see if anyone had tried attaching the bgan to a stabilized camera mount for use on a yacht but at that cost it would make no sense. looking at these rates my last linux update would run around $25,000! jon
Jon: I have a portable bgan unit. It's the same thing as the new "fleet broadband". Allegedly, I'm paying at a lower rate than the Fleet Broadband pricing, but I haven't matched the price lists. I ran it for a bit here at the house and it really didn't feel any faster than the Fleet 77. I have a Hughes 9201 portable unit, meant for use on land. Whether or not I'll be able to use it an anchor is unclear. It's my backup to the Fleet 77. I had hoped it would be cheaper (on bandwidth) and faster. My initial experiments weren't promising, but I really didn't get much time with it, so I don't really know. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/15/2008 1:48:32 PM)
i just noticed they have released fleet broadband, around 4x faster than the fleet 77 i believe. somewhat surprised theres only 10,000 fleet 77 installations, a lot less than i would have thought but then again as you say you can find better ways to connect except in the most remote of areas. that and the dome size on most yachts would block out the sunlight for those on deck ;) jon
Jon: As to internet: As I've mentioned, I have many different ways of getting internet. My preference is always for the fastest solution at the lowest cost. There's really only one method that REALLY gives this - a wireless connection. Most marinas have wireless internet these days, and I tend to anchor within wireless distance of a marina when I can. We've even deliberately hovered just in front of a marina for an hour just to get access to the wireless connection for a bit. I've also taken taxis to marinas and internet cafes, from remote anchorages, just so I could sit on a bench to do my email. A cheap fast connection is the best there is.
The next step down is WAY down. I don't want to bore everyone with all the other various options, but they are all slow and expensive. I have another new option I am adding for this trip which is an unknown at this point: I bought a portable bgan sat terminal. It has no positioning unit, so I can't use it except when sitting still. I set it up on my back porch here in Cabo and it worked well. It is somewhat slow, somewhat flawed, and expensive internet, that works most everywhere. The best part is that even though it is expensive, it is a 10th the cost of the Fleet 77. Still outrageous, but less so.
When wireless is not available, my primary internet connection will probably be the Fleet 77. It's $7 a minute, for a connection that is barely faster than a dial-up modem. My plan is to fire it up once a day for about 10-30 mins. On our last trip, I forgot I had it going, and went to dinner with it running. A very expensive mistake! - Ken W
Dale: Thank you! Yes .. I do talk about the problems on Sans Souci, some of which are quite frustrating. Most I'm chalking off to the fact that it is a new boat, with more systems than most boats of its size. Although it is only a 68' boat, almost everyone who comes aboard says that it is the biggest 68' boat in the world. It's always funny to watch the boat cleaners who guesstimate the time to clean our boat based on its size, and then are shocked when they find the effort required more like they would spend on 100+ foot boat. We designed and equipped the boat to be an extremely comfortable second home. Unfortunately, as you add systems, you also add maintenance. There are definitely times I wish we had designed a much simpler boat, but then when I think about what I would toss overboard if I could, nothing comes to mind. My guess is that maintenance is going to get a lot simpler as we go forward. Many of our bigger problems, such as the a/c and the Atlas, are things that have to do with flawed equipment from the manufacturer or installation errors. As we knock down these warranty items, life will improve immensely (I hope!) - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/15/2008 10:13:52 AM)
ken, how are you going about being connected to the internet (assuming you will be). i can remember you saying something about having 5 different means of getting communications. does having fleet 77 make sense, every few days downloading everything quickly, working offline, then uploading everything? very hard to find info on cost vs accessibility vs speed etc. thanks. jon.
Comment by: Visitor (1/15/2008 8:18:35 AM)
Ken,
I just found your site yesterday and read from the time you bought the boat to today. I must say you have the patience of a saint. I am impressed by how you tackle one problem after another. It is refreshing to hear from the owner in real world situations. I love the Nordhavn line and have their videos of the Trans Atlantic trip as well as their "Get to know Nordhavn". It is just good to know that even a good boat built by great people will come with problems. Sounds like life. I am going to sign up for your updates. By the way I read about your boat last week in my copy of "Circumnavigator". What a beautiful ship. Good luck and have fun
Dale
Chuck: Yes - we do have a sea anchor on Sans Souci. I've never deployed one in my life, and worry that I'll be able to do it if the need ever arises. Someday, I hope to get time to experiment with deploying it just for practice. Originally, I bought a drogue, but Jeff, who "property manages" our boat when I'm not on it is a fan of sea anchors, and is down on drogues. Having never used either I tend to believe the person standing in front of me. Jeff is very passionate about sea anchors and claims they've saved his life a time or two. With an endorsement like that, I moved the drogue to storage and loaded on a sea anchor. -Ken W
Jim: I haven't the vaguest idea what Sans Souci's home port is! We have a long-term lease on a slip at Roche Harbor in Washington, and it's a spectacular marina. I can't say enough nice things about it. We also have a three year lease on the slip at Puerto Los Cabos, and I've been trying to convince Roberta to let me extend it to 10 years. That said, I doubt Sans Souci will be here again within the next 10 years, so there is no real reason to have a slip. Plus, I do have a long-term lease on a slip for a 48 foot Ocean Sportfisher that I own with a couple of neighbors.
Sans Souci's future location is completely unknown. We have a vague notion of circumnavigating, and will probably do so -- but, we can't agree on if this is a three year plan, or a ten year plan. My guess is that we'll "cherry pick" the world, and move the boat to places that interest us, rather than doing the "real" circumnavigation thing (the macho thing) of working our way around the world one country at a time. Specifically, I see using a combination of us, delivery crews and Dockwise (or Yachtpath) to move the boat to great cruising grounds, and then exploring regionally. I call this "hubbing" -- in other words, we pick a region, move into a marina, and use it as the hub of our exploring for a season or two, and then move the boat to a new hub location.
All of which is the long was of saying "Sans Souci is probably homeless..." -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/14/2008 10:45:02 PM)
After reading about the problem your former 62 had with a loss of power, it brings to mind that a sea anchor should be on board any boat doing open ocean travel (my opinion) for just such circumstances in order to hold the bow into the waves rather than rolling from side to side. This way repairs could be made much more easily. Also a sea anchor would help on multiple day trips where you just want to stop for awhile and rest. Do you have a sea anchor?
Chuck
Ken,
Just watched the video of the marina where Sans Souci was berthed, certainly looks like it will be a world class facility! Is this the location that Sans Souci will call home when not traveling the world ?
Thanks, Jim
Andy: I'd like to try one of these (a wireless remote) some day! I've watched people use them and they look fun. Personally, I don't know that I'd ever have the confidence to actually own one. I just wouldn't trust the device. If anything goes wrong with the communications between the device and the boat, you are likely to bump into something before you can get to the "normal" controls. I spoke, just a couple of days ago, to a friend in the yacht repair business about the remotes, and he said he knew of a couple instances where these had caused crashes. The biggest problem seems to be the captain dropping the remote. In one instance (as described to me), a boat crushed a smaller boat, with injuries, before the captain could resume control. Perhaps I am being unfair to the remotes, and the newer ones have some safety device I can't imagine -- but, often things are happening fast during docking, and it wouldn't take much of anything going wrong to really cause problems.... - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/13/2008 2:54:26 AM)
The only thing I would add to your boat is a wireless remote control for gear, thrusters and one anchor. The "Yacht Controller" has a range of 450 ft. and each controller has a unique frequency for your boat only. For all electronic controls. Walk to the bow and watch the anchor, stand at a corner for med-style docking...
www.yachtcontroller.com
Andy B.
Jon: We have not done emergency drills yet, but that is definitely part of the plan. Before we leave port we will do a safety briefing, and will discuss what to do in the unlikely event that abandoning ship is necessary.
As I mentioned, our first major passage is with just Roberta, her parents, Shelby (our dog) and myself. Her parents did the last part of the Atlantic crossing with us, plus a three day run with just Roberta and I. They are not rookies. That said, they are elderly, and neither of them could run the boat alone. Our plan is to run alternating four hour shifts, with Roberta and her mom, then Roberta's dad and me. Her parent's job is primarily to keep Roberta and I awake. The major "at risk" time is when Roberta or I are doing engine room checks and they are on the bridge alone. We've discussed this and are planning to use walkie-talkies so that we are always in communication, and plan to keep engine room checks short (5-10 minutes). If there are other boats around, high seas, fog, or any other unusual conditions, we'll either wake the other of us up, or hold off the engine room check until conditions are safe.
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/10/2008 8:02:57 PM)
have you done any emergency drills? i believe you'll have a dog, parents and yourselfs along. sinking usually gives you time to organize but a fire or explosion could be sudden. do you have a plan in place? this would probably be my greatest fear being able to get everyone off quickly and into a raft as well as everything that goes with it, maydays, lifejackets, provisions etc. jon
Dave:
Most popular cruising grounds have great trip-planning information available. Specifically, we need:
- Weather reports
- Information about anchorages and marinas
- Good charts
- Information about availability of fuel and provisions
- Information about repair facilities (and, haul-out if needed)
- Tides and currents
- Frequencies for communicating with marinas, collecting weather information, and seeking emergency assistance
- Times that weather reports are broadcast
- Information about clearing in and out of each country
In the past, most of our cruising has taken place in the Pacific NW, the Bahamas, and the Mediterranean. All of these areas have excellent cruising guides available. Information is plentiful and easily found.
On this next trip, there is plenty of information available, but it isn't as easily found, or as accurate, as what we've been spoiled by in the past. For instance, Puerto Vallarta, our first stop, is amongst the most popular cruising destinations we'll visit. Even with this, most of the books I've read claim that most charts, including most maps in chart plotters, should be expected to be off by as much as a mile and a half. Examples: One book references three underwater "rock spears" which poke up to within three feet of the surface, in the middle of one apparent entrance to the Puerto Vallarta bay. The author says he has found two of the three, but not the third. The other two books do not mention them at all. Another example: we'll pass some islands half way to Puerto Vallarta called "Tres Marias". These islands are a penal colony, and one of the guides says that if you come within 20 miles, they may shoot now, and ask questions later. Without the research, I don't know that I would have noticed this footnote on a chart. No guide, or even website, has pictures of our marina in Puerto Vallarta. Even Google earth shows the marina as not there yet. I'll have to figure out the approach when I get there.
On our route south, we will be passing through Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Costa Rica. Of these, Mexico has the most information available. We need to collect as much information as we can for each country, pulling the data together from multiple sources, and then recognize that much of what we collect will be out of date or inaccurate.
Ultimately, we really can only trust what we see out the window, on our depth gauge and on the radar. I'm hoping the sonar can also be used to keep us out of trouble, but I really need a training course in its use. I've been experimenting with it, and am getting better, but it is going to take a while before I really trust that I am interpreting it correctly.
In addition to the route planning, we also need to get the boat ready to go. I have to work under the assumption that we need to be fairly "self sufficient". Getting parts or repairs for the boat will require flying in a mechanic from the US. Oft-times, getting parts into these countries is difficult. Sometimes parts sail through customs, and sometimes it is impossible to get them through. My strategy has been to load as many spare parts on board as possible. I'm trying to make sure the boat is 100% when we leave the dock headed south, and am doing things like beefing up the cooling in the lazarette, recognizing that it is going to be HOT. We're also making the assumption that food will be hard to find, and loading on a three month supply of most items. One major project has been trying to solve having television along the way. I think I'm going to fail at this, but not because I haven't tried.
Overall: I am almost certainly agonizing over this more than is needed, but that's typical for me. It's exciting to be going someplace new, but without proper advance planning, an adventure can turn into a nightmare VERY quickly.
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/10/2008 9:00:18 AM)
Hi Ken
I can see through the posts some of the planning you ar going to to get berths at marina's and I wondered if you could give us an insight into what processes that you and Roberta have developed over the years to plan, and provision for each leg of the trip. Is it a matter of fuel, food, charts...lets go. Or have you got somthing more rigourous ( which I am sure you do).
Thanks
Dave
Jon: My apologies for the confusion. My boat has been parked (or, is it moored? Or, docked?) over the past six weeks at the Puerto Los Cabos marina in San Jose Del Cabo, 16 miles north of Cabo San Lucas. Puerto Los Cabos is a new marina: It's open, but still under construction. The Cabo marina has been there for as long as I've been coming to Cabo, and is the very active, and crowded, marina, my boat is currently sitting at. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (1/8/2008 1:54:30 PM)
hi Ken, i'm confused. is there one large marina in cabo or 2? the webcam pictures of the marina look like its been there for a long time yet the pictures of the marina where you were getting a slip showed a marina being developed. i suppose i'm imagining cabo to be a desolute place somewhere at the tip of baja yet has these two giant marinas. jon
Ken, I guess the most important thing is that you had a place to to park after FUBAR and currently. I had forgotten that they did not have you in your permanent slip and construction was ongoing. Thanks for the update.
Jim
Jim: The marina is far from complete. Fewer than 10% of the slips are installed. My slip, that I signed a three year lease on, and which was supposed to have been in place a year ago, is still months from completion. The marina has me currently on an end-cap that was intended for a boat with a much shallower draft. Within a few feet of my bow the water drops to 5' of depth. To my port side, within about 20' there is a huge rock which they now have a yellow buoy on. Most of the marina is just wide open space (nearly 3/4s of a mile of it!). The bottom is very inconsistent on depth, and there are places which seem like they should be deep that are not. When I entered the marina, the harbor master was guiding me to the deepest water, and I could tell he was sweating my entry every bit as much as I was. All of this will be (or, should be) fine when they have all the slips in. I would normally be going to a slip meant for my boat, and the deep water channel will be obvious. Ordinarily I drive from outside the boat when docking. From my exterior drive stations I have no depth gauge. This has never been an issue, in that I assume adequate depth inside the marina. It is a new experience for me to deal with unmarked, uncharted, varying depths inside a marina. But, this is Mexico, so anything is possible... I don't mean to be negative. The marina is a huge asset to the community and I am thrilled it is here, but it still a year or two from realizing its full potential. -Ken W
Ken,
Is this the same marina that you call home when in Cabo ? Being a brand new marina, I would have thought there would be sufficiant depth throughout.
Thanks, Jim
Hi Ken, you wrote: "... I'm not finding as much information as I had hoped. ..."
Maybe, this URL will help, maybe: http://cruisenews.net/index.php
Enjoy your journey,
Comment by: Visitor (12/30/2007 6:38:16 PM)
Hey Ken,
Saw your comment on chart updating. I think the big boy yachts use www.transas.com for their charts, updates, etc. Have you ever contacted them? Sure enjoyed your book! Someday mate....someday I'll be out there on the sea too!
David King
Dave:
As to engine room temperatures - I really haven't been in hot weather yet, so I don't know about engine room temperatures. Thus far, it appears I am going to have no problems. My engine room has been running around 105 degrees, which is fine. My lazarette is another story. The lazarette has the 16kw generator, the Atlas, four 3.5kw inverters, the batteries, and a diesel furnace. I currently have two fans in the lazarette, that aren't keeping up. Next week I'll be adding a third, larger, fan. I need to solve this before heading farther south.
As to the BBQ - this doesn't really bother me. The port-side hatch in the lazarette only opens about 2/3rds of the way. This is more than adequate for ingress/egress. Perhaps if I had it to do over again I'd pick a barbecue that didn't poke out quite as far, but the barbecue is one of the most popular items on the boat. It gets used with virtually every dinner.
As to the diesel electric 76 - I did ask about mileage, but have forgotten what he said. My recollection is that they were running fairly slow to save fuel, and getting great results. I think they were getting 8.5 knots at about 9 gallons an hour. I originally ordered my boat as a diesel electric, but then Nordhavn talked me out of it. Diesel Electric was, and still is, somewhat in the experimental stage. It would have been too much of a schedule impact to do diesel electric on my boat. After seeing Cadenza (the diesel electric boat) I am happy I didn't go that route. I do believe it represents the future, but it looked complicated. I'm already somewhat in over my head. I don't have the electrical background to maintain the systems on a diesel electric boat.
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (12/30/2007 9:52:51 AM)
HI Ken, I've been reding through some of the older forum posts and I have some questions, now that you have had your stunning N68 for a couple of months. Please forgive me if they have already been answered.
First, you initially had some concerns about engine room temperatures and thus arranged for some larger fans to be installed. In hindsight are you glad that you did this, and have your engine room running temperatures benefitted from this?
Secondly, I understand that a hatch was being prevented from fully opened by the BBQ. I wondered what had been done to sort this out?
Finally, there was some discussion regarding the fuel economy of the diesel/electric 76 and it was mentioned that you anticipated participating in the FUBAR with the yacht and its owner. I was curious if perhaps there had been any dsucussion regarding fuel burn after the provisional gremlins had been worked out?
Thank you again for sharing your experiences with us.
Thanks
Dave
Comment by: Visitor (12/30/2007 5:03:55 AM)
there is a notice from nobeltec on the TrawlerForum.com website about possible problems with there system might be worth a read
Jim: Minus 45!!! Ouch. I don't think I'd last long in that. Our plans are somewhat loose for the run to Costa Rica. We know we leave Cabo around Jan 22, and know that we need to be in Costa Rica by April 15th, but really don't know much more than that. I think we're planning to move slow when we're having fun, and fast when we're not. My guess: we'll arrive in Costa Rica around March 15th. - Ken W
Ken,
Great pictures of Cabo! I always enjoy shots of warmer climates since last week here in Fairbanks AK we were - 45. I am going to be in Costa Rica around 8 Feb and can't wait to get a bit warmer. By the way, when are you expecting to visit Costa Rica?
Thanks again for the great posts, I really enjoy keeping up with whats going on.
Jim
Comment by: Visitor (12/25/2007 1:01:47 AM)
Ken & Roberta,
Merry Xmas to you and yours. Great picture of Cabo, but ice & bears....even better photo shop. Hope you solve the Atlas issue soon.
Steven
Comment by: Visitor (12/24/2007 11:07:13 PM)
I wonder who named the cub "Cabo"?
Thanks for the explanation on shore/boat electricity Ken.
If, the techs don't solve the 'electricity' problem, you can always let "Cabo" loose on 'em.
Merry Christmas!
Gavin: I've gotten several emails about the Atlas, so I put together THIS FAQ to answer all the questions. If you read it, and still have questions, let me know. Congratulations on your future Nordhavn purchase! - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (12/24/2007 3:06:53 AM)
Ken, Merry Christmas to you. I have much enjoyed reading your comments through the last year. On the Atlas subject I am considering one of these units on an upcoming Nordhavn order but it looks like endless trouble despite masses of attention from you and 4 days work by their technician. Do you know why they can't fix it? Your previous comment of some wires being loose sounded odd for such an expensive bit of kit.
Gavin
I posted a message yesterday about Earthrace which I deleted after I re-read it. It sounded mean-spirited, which isn't normally my style. I read the Earthrace blog, and have just finished reading one book about them, and am starting another. The crew on Earthrace are true believers in their cause and are working with little or no pay, risking their lives, in order to promote awareness of bio-fuels. I'm not as convinced as they are that bio-fuels represent the solution to much of anything, or that they can generate enough awareness to really make a difference --- but, you got to respect them for trying. My negative comments were mostly on the boat itself. It looks impressive on the outside, but is actually fairly "rough". The electronics package is weak. The props are unprotected. I've been told by people that were onboard that visibility in the pilothouse is far from perfect. Sleeping conditions are primitive, the toilet non-existent, and the boat gives a terrible ride in heavy seas. All this said, I wish them well, and hope to see the boat some day! - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (12/21/2007 4:50:02 PM)
jc,
Yes, Earthrace will be making a second attempt in Mar/08, starting in Spain this time around. Lets hope this trip is a little safer than their first go-around attempt!
- John S
Jon: Thank you for asking about the Atlas. As you may have been able to read between the lines, I was quite grumpy when I wrote my update yesterday. I really am not blaming Atlas. 99.9% of the units they ship are trouble-free. Mine is misbehaving, and the people at Atlas are working incredibly hard to get it fixed. They are just as frustrated as I am. I did suggest to them earlier today that perhaps it is time for a new one. My comment today was said lightly, but if I am still having these problems a week or two from now, I will be saying it more loudly, and with greater force. Replacing the Atlas would be a major, and costly, project -- but, the current situation is unacceptable. Currently, I've put the boat back on the generator (my son who is in Cabo helped me with this), and am cutting short my trip home to Seattle. Atlas just sent me some experiments they want me to try. I'm sure we'll figure it out.
A coincidental side note: On the Nordhavn Owners Group discussion board, there is an active discussion that started yesterday. Someone asked what advice should be given to someone considering a Nordhavn. Overwhelmingly the response was "Do it! It's the best boat out there", but the #2 response was "Consider buying a pre-owned Nordhavn". New boats often require some time to get everything dialed-in. Also, the long wait for construction and commisioning can test your patience. There is a lot to be said for having a new boat, equipped just as you want it -- but, there is also a lot to be said for letting someone else deal with the "start-up" problems associated with a new boat. I've been fortunate with my boat. Overall, we've had almost no problems. It's just that this particular one is being really nasty. - Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (12/20/2007 12:52:15 PM)
ken, sorry to hear about the atlas trouble, having to fly back down especially now its christmas. theres a glowing write up on that system for the new n75 on nordhavns site. are you able to tell atlas to take the whole thing out and replace it with a new one? i would hate to think how much has been spent on it vs its actual cost. not sure what can physically be removed from the boat and what can't, such as an engine.
a merry christmas to all.
jon
Comment by: Visitor (12/20/2007 6:23:44 AM)
Is Earthrace trying another go at it or are these news agencies that far behind the story?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317478,00.html
Boat looks the same and the story follows the same as before.
This was also on CBS evening news. They gleem with joy over something that's "Green/Earth friendly" such as this but I wonder if they knew someone lost thier life during this journey. Probably worth it in the minds of these ecofreaks. I didn't know the captain had liposuction to help power the boat. I think I see a new reality show in the making.
jc
Comment by: Visitor (12/19/2007 12:08:37 AM)
new pictures have been posted of nordhavn 68 (ken's boat) on nordhavn's site. some have been posted before. jon
Comment by: Visitor (12/17/2007 10:40:29 PM)
Hi William,
I'm sure they must have been harnessed in, but I'll bet they had to hold their breath for a moment or two! I'm not so sure I would want to take that ride...unless I was below decks! :)
- John S
John s
They all have saftey harness on and are connected to the boat.
It still has to be one heck of a ride.
Bill k
Comment by: Visitor (12/17/2007 3:13:47 PM)
Wow Ken! Those Coast Guard photos are something else! If you look carefully, you can see 2 crew members topsides! How they held on through that ride is beyond me!
- John S
Comment by: Visitor (12/15/2007 12:33:24 AM)
H Ken, I believe each new boat Nordhavn build is a learning curve and subsequent models that follow will always be improved upon. From basically small improvements to major additions is a matter of progress,
I am sure you would have liked the Hardtop of the 2nd N68, then there are the issues you had with not being able to fit the second anchor amd the cockpit hatch/BBQ facia problem. they will not be an issue on future models. The bottom line is that Nordhavn.s are the Real Deal and they are all great boats.
Steven
I had expected to have a lot of problems, because of being hull #1, but thus far there has really only been a couple of issues that are in that category. The Atlas issue appears to be nothing more than just "one of those things" that could have happened with anyone's unit. My problems with the air conditioning really tie to nothing more than that the a/c specialist was sidetracked in Hawaii on someone elses boat when my boat was finishing up. He never really made it to my boat, and I left Dana Point with the system not operational.
This said, I do see touches in the second N68 which I'm jealous of. And, I'm sure the third, and the fourth, and the fifth, and so on, will each be better than the boat that went before. Our N62 was the ninth Nordhavn 62 and I was jealous of every 62 that followed. Nordhavn gets better with every boat they build, and there's no getting around that. At some point you have to just say "it's time to cruise" and recognize that someone else will buy a boat a year later that is a bit cooler than yours, and that nothing really matters except dropping anchor in a quiet bay and enjoying life.
-Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (12/13/2007 11:35:28 PM)
Not to mention that Ken's boat is Hull #1. I'm quite sure that any new model that PAE puts out will have more issues than the hulls that follow, just like any first model year car has more than its share of bugs to work out.
- John S.
Comment by: Visitor (12/13/2007 6:14:02 PM)
Chuck,
While i agree Kens boat is a lot more complex than the majority of Nordhavn's built to date, PAE must learn that complex boats are the way of the future and they do need to get all the systems right, especially with the larger models.
I believe thet there would already be a 72/76 out there that would be just as complex and with the 86 comong online now I think many of these could make Ken's boat look ordinary in comparrison, not to mention the N120 that is now on the drawing board.
Any new boat will have teething problems as each boat in a given range is set up totally different and i believe most owners allow about 1 year to iron out the bugs in large yachts.
Steven
Greetings Chuck: Actually, I've only had a couple problems that have been really frustrating. The air conditioning was a nightmare to get "dialed in" and continues to have issues, although it is presently stable. The only other problem is the Atlas, which has had technicians pulling their hair out for three days. Everyone seems to agree that once they get the Atlas stable, I am very unlikely to have troubles again. I attribute both the Atlas and air conditioning to nothing more than normal "new boat" issues. On a new boat this complex there will always be some things. We built a new home three years ago, and I remember the punch list being much longer than what we've experienced with Sans Souci. If you think about it, we're much more complex than a house! We have to make our own water and electricity. We have to provide storage for our own fuels, oils, grey water and sewage. We have tons of electronics; radar, sonar, sat tv, monitoring systems, etc. Then there are the propulsion systems, davit, winlasses, etc. I hope that my whining about the current problems with the Atlas aren't being taken out of context. Overall, this has been a rock solid boat, that has already run four thousand miles in four months -- including pounding comfortably through seas that would be very dangerous for most other boats. -Ken W
Comment by: Visitor (12/13/2007 10:05:17 AM)
Ken-It seems to me you have so many bells and whistles on your fine vessel that it is problematic that you have and will continue to have multiple performance issues (such as your atlas system). Or do you see these problems encountered as just shaking out the bugs and things will settle down soon? Chuck
Comment by: Visitor (12/12/2007 7:55:44 PM)
for some reason i tried to imagine an answer to this, you take a nordhavn weighing say 60 tons and drop it from a height of 100 feet onto a concrete dock. what would happen? any physicists or structural engineers? i would think the nordhavns structural strength would work against it. i calculate the boat hits the dock at 55 miles/hour. if it fell nose first it would collapse the first 2 or 3 bulkheads in on themselves, rip the engines and generators from their mounts, the upper structure would have enough downward momentum to crack or separate from the hull. dropped horizontally the keel would be forced into the bottom of the boat then the energy would transfer to the bulkheads which would collapse or be forced up through the floors. the rudders would be forced into the lazarette and the interior woodwork would be turned into firewood. or would the boat have enough structural strength to survive such an impact? jon
Comment by: Visitor (12/12/2007 10:01:50 AM)
great series of pictures ken to show a lift. impressive boat. if you look closely theres someone underneath the boat during the lift. at least hes wearing a hard hat ;) whats the color on the bottom of the boat? looks like weathered copper. it stops at the white bootstrap so i assume its different type of paint. jon
Comment by: Visitor (12/12/2007 5:08:23 AM)
The Aurora incident. (Yes, I'm sorry, I know it's been done to death already..)
Having been a professional seafarer, manager and incident investigator....regardless of what equipment you place on the Bridge (including windows) a fundmental cause of collisions is not keeping a proper look out. Radars, Arpa's, AIS's, you name it, all have limitations. You must be aware of the limitations of your navigational aids. But, they are no replacement for a good set of eyes and situational awareness. It was an unfortunate incident, and I understand the person left on the bridge for just a short time was inexperienced. My heart goes out to the owner of Aurora. However, I'm sure the repair was top class and if I had the money, I'd buy it tomomorrow. Mark
Comment by: Visitor (12/11/2007 2:28:27 PM)
i'll go out on a limb and say a nordhavn weighing 10's of tonnes dropped from a height of 100 feet onto solid ground would make a fairly large pile of rubble.
jon
Comment by: Visitor (12/11/2007 11:29:36 AM)
Ok, I got it straight now. I found the photos on YachtForums. It looks like the yacht was being offloaded from the top deck of a car carrier. That and possibly the tide would explain the 100 ft drop. I hope we don't think a Nordhavn (as strong as they are) would just bounce around the dock, undamaged, after a drop like that.
Comment by: Visitor (12/11/2007 11:16:54 AM)
Yep, you are right. I was thinking of the wrong accident and my apologies to Bill for jumping the gun about his post.
JohnA
Comment by: Visitor (12/11/2007 11:10:36 AM)
hmmm i believe the yacht was being lifted from the deck of a ship, over to the dock (not into the water). could be wrong but this would affect how high the boat was when it fell, not by much though, depends on how high/low the tide was. how loaded the ship was affects the distance also.
jon
Comment by: Visitor (12/11/2007 10:51:50 AM)
Excuse my confusion, but what could the tide possibly have to do with how high the yacht was off the water? A more likely reason was the ship was lightly loaded, therefore standing tall against the pier and the water.
JohnA
To answer the question of why the Sunseeker was 100' in the air.
It was being offloaded from a freighter and it must have been at high tide as the picture I saw showed the freighter way higher than the pier.
Bill Kelleher
Comment by: Visitor (12/10/2007 3:29:19 PM)
Hi Ken,
With reference to the Nordhavn that was totalled after dropping from a lift in the Caribbeean - have you seen this Sunseeker after being dropped?
To Sunseekers defence, the yacht (a 108' Predator I believe) is supposed to have been dropped from a 100 feet. But why would you ever lift a yacht that high???
Anyway, the difference between a (relative) light weight planing hull and Norhavns "damn the torpedoes" apprach is obvious...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgRQutLy9X8&NR=1
Comment by: Visitor (12/6/2007 10:02:16 AM)
a quick sidenote to my post: the simrad cs68 ecdis was what i was thinking about. this ties together rada |