# Maybe Steel rules... after all!



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

This is one for Val and Wombat!

Some of you may have seen this already, found it on SA.

Allegedly the story is this boat got rolled by a freighter (I'm thinking a small one if actually true) Anyway, he's gotta be glad it was a steel boat. Apparently the mast, though upright, is a bit shorter than original too.

At anchor in Las Palmas after the incident.


----------



## jrd22 (Nov 14, 2000)

OUCH! I'm trying to imagine what my fiberglas boat would look like after an impact like that. Pretty sure you would need an underwater camera to get a picture of it:-((. Must be a well built boat to still be floating. Is the guy onboard talking on a cellphone? Insurance agent maybe?

John


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I'm thinking that it made a really loud gong-like noise...


----------



## TSteele65 (Oct 19, 2006)

A little hammering, a little Bondo, and she's back in business.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I'll bet that's his insurance agent he's talking to.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Nah, he's calling Maaco...to find out if they do boats. 


teshannon said:


> I'll bet that's his insurance agent he's talking to.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Laugh if you dare, bath toy sailors! _****** _doesn't look as if she took on a drop.

Seriously, though, I don't know if that's fixable in the same sense that if a car's frame is bent, it's not necessarily worth repairing; you'd have to remove the entire saloon (and maybe more) to check the state of the welds and to cut out all the affected frames and stringers.

Frankly, it would be easier to cut off the entire front of the boat and reweld a new bow on. Whether you could find an insurer willing to pop for the tens of thousands necessary in order to do this is another thing entirely.

I do find it reassuring that the fellow in question got back (presumably under his own power), with no loss of his rig and still able to anchor. Any glass or wood boat hit by what I assume was a bow bulb "T-bone" would've just been some stays and turnbuckles wrapped around the bow in the next port.

Viva steel!


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Of course, Valiente is neglecting the fact that a lighter boat may have been damaged far less in the same situation, since the bow wave of the boat might have pushed a lighter boat clear. This actually was the case of a fiberglass boat that got hit by a container ship a while back, every one on it survived, even though, IIRC, the captain thought she was doomed and dived overboard just prior to impact. Lost part of the rigging and had a crack in the hull... both were made good.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I think the guy's calling to have some new underwear delivered to the boat.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Valiente said:


> I do find it reassuring that the fellow in question got back (presumably under his own power), *with no loss of his rig* and still able to anchor. Any glass or wood boat hit by what I assume was a bow bulb "T-bone" would've just been some stays and turnbuckles wrapped around the bow in the next port.
> 
> Viva steel!


Val - if you look closely I don't think there are any upper shrouds still in place... I suspect he's lost the stick above the spreaders. The boom is off too, probably because of no way to hold it up anymore.

In any event, you're right, I can't imagine too many plastic fantastics surviving a collision like that, SDs "pressure wave push" aside (and I don't think I'd want to bet the bank on that  )


----------



## tomaz_423 (Feb 5, 2006)

A sailor from Slovenia on his circumnavigation had a collision with a freighter. 
This happened in the Red sea when he almost finished the trip (just Suez and back to Adriatic).
It was a sad story as he had cancer and wanted to finish his voyage before his fast progressing disease would stop him. 
He was very ill at that time and I suspect his night watch was not so good any more.

The fact: 
He had an old fiberglass boat (about 30 feet IIRC). 
There were two people aboard, he was on watch, the other was sleeping.
In the collision he got dis masted, a lot of things broke, the ruder was bend so he could no longer steer and he had some structural damage and was taking some water. But the boat stayed afloat. The ship did not stop, he was rescued next day by a passing ship. The ship (on his way to Kenia)lifted the sailboat aboard, but I think it was destructed beyond repair.
The sailor died for cancer just weeks after the accident and I do not know what happened to the boat. I think she was left it in Mombasa.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I guess I must say this at this point, I would not assume that a glass or cold molded wooden boat with an equal weight hull would not have survived this impact intact. Pound for pound both glass and cold molded construction are significantly stronger than steel. The reason that we assume that glass boats are weaker is that we typically compare glass boats with one-third to half the weight hulls of a similar shaped steel boat. 

In these kind of discussion it is easy to forget about steel's high density relative to these other materials. To illustrate this difference in density, if we compare equal weight panels, a steel skin an 1/8" thick would weigh the same as a 1.27" fiberglass hull, and a 5.5" thick cold molded (fir/cedar w/ kevlar epoxy sheathing) wood hull. Since puncture resistance, and bending strength increase as the square of the thickness and stiffness increases as the cube of the thickness, when you look at the greater relative thicknesses of these materials, you can quickly see why I say that pound for pound steel is one of the weakest materials that is used in boat building. 

When you consider that 1/8" steel plating, used in the example above, is pretty much of the minimal plating for the topsides of framed steel boats under 32 feet, and that most fiberglasss boats in that size range have topsides of 1/4 to 3/8 thickness, you can understand why there is a popular perception that steel boats are stronger than glass, but if your primary concern is being hit by frieghters, getting iced in in the artic, or running into a container mid-Atlantic, then I suggest that a purpose built cold molded boat, or composite boat with a similar weight hull to a steel boat might be a better choice. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## billyruffn (Sep 21, 2004)

I think I agree with Valiente -- this boat's headed for a scrap yard. If it get's fixed I wouldn't want to buy it -- I can't imagine how many of the welds must be cracked just enough to start rusting badly. The rule of thumb for steel boats is that they rust from the inside out and the internal rust usually starts with the welds. Crack the paint on a weld and you'll have rust in no time. Then again, maybe this is an AL boat? I don't see any rust anywhere and the metal w/ no paint looks gray (just like bare AL).


----------



## Sasha_V (Feb 28, 2004)

If it is aluminium then it too is scrapyard bound....

the areas surrounding the impact and 9strangely) on the other side of the main bulkehead that seems to be at the centre of that impact are all going to be at about T6 hardness by now, and that is not the right thing for being worked by the waves.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Jeff_H said:


> When you consider that 1/8" steel plating, used in the example above, is pretty much of the minimal plating for the topsides of framed steel boats under 32 feet, and that most fiberglasss boats in that size range have topsides of 1/4 to 3/8 thickness, you can understand why there is a popular perception that steel boats are stronger than glass, but if your primary concern is being hit by frieghters, getting iced in in the artic, or running into a container mid-Atlantic, then I suggest that a purpose built cold molded boat, or composite boat with a similar weight hull to a steel boat might be a better choice.


My own partisanship aside (I own an FG "good old boat" as well), we chose steel for its ease of repair, ductility and resistance to abrasion. When our steel boat (in its cradle) came off its trailer, thanks to yard incompetence,










the entire weight of the boat landed on one cradle pad.










The plate barely deformed, and basically "popped out" when relieved of the strain. I had it professionally surveyed later, and the surveyor found no deformation in the frames or plates...but the paint layer on the interior had popped like a blister!










I am not sure fibreglass would have stood up to this point loading quite so well. So why I can accept your points from an engineering perspective, there are good reasons for the preponderance of metal boats in high-latitude sailing, and in areas like the North Sea where small metal boat construction is well-understood. Workboats, trawlers, rescue boats are most commonly aluminum and/or steel, despite the issues of electrolysis and corrosion. I don't think it's just due the to price of resins or the skills needed to create a fibreglass boat. I think it's due to the fact that different applications call for different materials.

Today, the emphasis is on fast, light fibreglass boats that look like condos on the inside. Fair enough. But such boats are poor choices, in my view, for long-distance cruising, more from a design viewpoint than a materials one, although that comes into it. On the other hand, my neighbour in the yard is a Tayana Vancouver 42:










Now, this stout vessel is ostensibly the same LOA as mine (include the bowsprit and we are 41' 10"). But its weight is about four tons greater, and it looks it. But seeing the cambered decks, the generous scuppers, the solid bollards, the properly sized gunwhales (not a toe rail an inch and a half tall), I would happily take such a boat offshore, because it has those attributes.

Most people would deem it an antiquated tub, I suppose.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Sasha_V said:


> If it is aluminium then it too is scrapyard bound....
> 
> the areas surrounding the impact and 9strangely) on the other side of the main bulkehead that seems to be at the centre of that impact are all going to be at about T6 hardness by now, and that is not the right thing for being worked by the waves.


I might very well agree if I had that kind of metallurgical knowledge.

But coming to port aboard ****** trumps a liferaft any day. Even if the boat is scrapped, you can get all belongings off, salvage half a mile of tinned copper, the engine, the steering gear, the batteries (the cables alone are $10/foot!).

Seriously, the insurance might well cover the building of a new bare hull, and you could "recycle" a large proportion of the innards of the old boat.


----------



## Sasha_V (Feb 28, 2004)

No doubt, arriving in port on what you set out in is the name of the game (unless you buy or pirate something better while your out there)...Just saying that for all its resistence and such, she's probably an ex boat.

Sasha


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Valiente-

The paint popping off looks like bad prep IMHO. Properly adhered paint should stick to the steel better than that... There also appears to be slight rust spotting the are where the paint popped off.


----------



## Sasha_V (Feb 28, 2004)

SD, It's true that the piant would have held better if it had gone over an etch primer, but if you look at the spotty rust on the plate, you will see that was the steel sheet when stored flat. It also has that colour of rust that has been nutralised with a chemical application of some sort.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Val,
I would never consider a Tayana 42 to be an antiquated tub! Of course I'm a bit biased.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> Valiente-
> 
> The paint popping off looks like bad prep IMHO. Properly adhered paint should stick to the steel better than that... There also appears to be slight rust spotting the are where the paint popped off.


It's quite possible and was commented upon by the "damage" surveyor as having lifted off too readily. It's been primed and painted with Pettit two-part. The "rust" is indeed neutralized...there's a jug of Ospho primer in the forepeak that's seen plenty of use. Ospho is the steel cruiser's friend, along with naval jelly, brass wool and a good set of forearms.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Generally, paint shouldn't pop off of any properly prepared surface in what is essentially a large sheet. From what I can see of that photo, that entire section lifted free after the impact.

I can't tell from the photo how large that area is, but at most it should have cracked and lifted along the impact line, but it definitely should not be lifting off the entire area like that.

Also, a painted steel surface shouldn't have any rust spots under the paint, if the surface was prepared properly and the paint allowed to cure properly. The paint should have eliminated the ability of oxygen to get to the steel and cause the corrosion. Generally, when preparing metal for painting, isn't removing the surface corrosion is part of the preparation process.

If this were my boat, I'd be worried about oxygen's and possibly water's ability to get through the interior paint. Corrosion never sleeps, and is very good at finding the slightest weakness in a protective coating.



Sasha_V said:


> SD, It's true that the piant would have held better if it had gone over an etch primer, but if you look at the spotty rust on the plate, you will see that was the steel sheet when stored flat. It also has that colour of rust that has been nutralised with a chemical application of some sort.


----------



## Sasha_V (Feb 28, 2004)

SD, once rust spots are nuetralised, they tedn not to bother with them below a certain size, as the etch-primers dig into them just fine. Sand blasting and rod scouring leave their own problems to cause concern...So realistically that degree of rust freckles should not be cause for concern. If any of them were active and had not been zapped before the primer went on, then that would be a different story.

I love steel. I work with it every day...I would not own a mild steel hulled boat.
Aluminium, of sufficiently high standard of construction, yes.

There is a boat made entirely out of 316L Satinless running around out near alaska at the moment (About a 48 foot sloop, can't remember what its called)....I might be at home to being offered that as a christams present, thank you. (The insanity of spending that much money on a hull is just a bit staggering though...)


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

The best metal for boats is a copper-nickel alloy. It is much more expensive than steel, but it also doesn't require anti-fouling treatment. Some of the fishing boats I've seen are made of it. Doesn't corrode like stainless steel will.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

There really is no way to 'stop rust' - rust starts on the inside of steel, merely just looking at what oxidizes on the surface is not one of those things that can just say hey, "etch and prime, and seal, and paint over"...and think the job is done... In fact is entirely probable that moisture gets encapsulated into the steel plating during the manufacturing process...

I am no expert on this stuff (used to manage body shops - so I know a small amount)... but personally, I think it all goes towards the actual construction as none of the processes to build boats is fail safe.

1. Steel rusts inside out and it is possible that you can have fractures and holes without knowing it due to it be covered 

2. Already known, and by myself first hand - balsa / plywood with fiberglass - rots inside out and often without tangible evidence until it well after it is too late...

3. Composite boats with carbon fibre...Carbon once it fractures is a severe wicking agent...Delamination from inside out...

4. Soft metals such as Aluminim and Copper - have tendancies of where the weld is stronger than the metal and over time the welds do not give way the metal plates give due to cyclidic pressures..(Hence why Airstreams are pop-riveted and not welded - it is to allow flex and expansion and contractions)

With composite boats one of the reasons gel coating is popular as it means that less layers have to be applied versus 7 or more coats of epoxy to get a water resistant covering. It can not be called water proof technically - because if not maintained it will wick water in (talking micro) and eventually with weather stress etc - it all goes...

However, all things given to be equal - it is about the construction process. Composite boats with flotation foam included in the design versus 'empty and sealed air spaces' will fair better than one where a designer just thinks the composites provides more than enough mathematical strength....

At any rate - neither here or there - no matter what design or material our boats are made of - there are strengths and weaknesses, but none of the materials used are without risk on their own, just people seem to think that because that because a boat is made of this, physiologically - they feel empowered and safer. IE: Carbon or Kevlar re-enforced hulls - they actually provide literally none if any additional structural resistance in an impact...yet because it is used - marketers will make sure to state it because it is synonymous with - high tech and best you can buy...

None the less ....

It is the reason a boat owner should know the issues and strengths of the particular material their boat is made of - but just because certain strengths exist doesn't make a boat 'invincible' (cite the titanic). Additionally, I have seen tons of accidents where customers with lightweight cars that totaled steel constructed trucks with minimal damage and vice versa.

An accident is an accident. And it is only with luck of the draw of someone being in a more fortunate place and time and sustaining minimal or non catastrophic damage / injuries (if such accident occurs)... that separates those that experience a total disaster...What you are in is actually probably a smaller portion of the puzzle, as it takes awareness of what is about to happen and hap stance to someone maneuver or position oneself to be in a better position of handling an accident...

Probably making no sense but thats the vino now...


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Steel does not rust from the inside out... a solid block of steel, when it starts to rust, will do so from the surface in... the interior of the block of steel is surrounded by steel...which means that there is NO OXYGEN present. By definition, rusting requires OXYGEN, since it is the process of turning the iron in the steel to iron oxide. *It is chemically and physically impossible for a solid sheet or block of steel to rust from the inside out.*


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

We can agree to disagree  Having dealt with firsthand... but you certainly are welcome to your belief...


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

My bedtime reading, gentlemen.










I am the first to admit I'm still learning, but I've had pretty good teachers so far. Going with steel is a risk in the sense of commitment: we have to maintain the boat to a different standard of care than with fibreglass, but in return we hope that she'll take care of us and that the occasional encounters with logs, coral heads and thin water will require no more than a rubber mallet and yet more painting, and not a liferaft, a SAR helicopter and airline tickets home.

Strangely enough, I was grinding some steel today in the pilothouse, and I thought "man, this went faster when it was balsa-core!"

Still, can't grumble.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Rumour has it that it was actually head butted by an irate marsupial.  

Val's said it all. Yes I have faith in steel but it's not the be all and end all. I too would happily head out in the Vancouver. 

I'm talking off the top of my head here but you'd have to doubt that fibreglass or timber would have taken such a hit and not been holed or split. Quite frankly I'm, somewhat surprised that even steel deformed as much as that is, didn't split as well. 

All I can really add is that had it been the Womboat the skipper would have been in need of some serious laundering of the of the knickers.

ps - the thing about steel rusting from the inside out is not that the sheets rust from the middle rather that a steel boat rusts from the inside out. This is I suspect because it's harder to inspect the sheets inside than out.


----------



## Sasha_V (Feb 28, 2004)

Wombat, if you look at where it hit, there is the major bulkhead right there, it crumpled instead of splitting. If the impact had been two feet fore or aft, the plates would have just torn to bits. Getting an internal pic of that boat's cabin would be great! I wantto see if the bulkhead just folded one way or concertina'ed as it gave way. I also want to see how many welds shattered or tore, how many steel plates were torn just either side of the weld and so forth....But I still think it is possible the boat is actually aluminium...Not sure exactly why, but it is a strong feeling.

SD, it is possible to get inclusions in rolled sheet metal that do indeed allow rusting from the inside. usually only found in 4mm thickness and up, and usually only form micro-mills that mostly handle recycled re-melt for their steel making...and have somewhat less then stellar quality control practices...But the stuff does get out there and into the world. anyone that has welded across the top of such a buried porocity and had it explode and pop at them knows....


Sasha


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Sasha-

True, but you're talking about a specific exceptional case. I'd hope that a steel boat was made with higher quality steel than that. If the steel is a decent quality, it will not rust from the inside out. I've spent a enough time working in a machine shop where aluminum, steel, bronze, and stainless steel are worked to know that good steel just doesn't rust from the inside out.



Sasha_V said:


> SD, it is possible to get inclusions in rolled sheet metal that do indeed allow rusting from the inside. usually only found in 4mm thickness and up, and usually only form micro-mills that mostly handle recycled re-melt for their steel making...and have somewhat less then stellar quality control practices...But the stuff does get out there and into the world. anyone that has welded across the top of such a buried porocity and had it explode and pop at them knows....
> 
> Sasha


----------



## Sasha_V (Feb 28, 2004)

I have one word (actually three) to say to you....BRUCE ROBERTS PLANS

That "Cheap" steel is exactly what is going to get bought by the backyard boatbuilder looking to make that 38foot yacht for less then $25K...

I would suggest that there are more steel yachts with inclusions like that running around then you believed until I opened this horrid door into your imagination....

Now ponder.


Sasha


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Is anyone seriously suggesting that a fibreglass boat, say 3/8 inch FG, 1 inch composite core (airex or other) and another 3/8 inch inner skin would have taken this blow and survived it?, This impact was for the majority above the waterline, but for the serious pro FG folks - let's even say it was 2 inches of solid FG and even maybe a Kevlar outer.

No Frigging way. It would have deformed, lost its bond due to sheering stress as it stretched to match the shape of the freighter bow, delaminated and shattered in a spray of glass and airex dust mixed with seawater, red lead paint from the freighter and whatever soaked through the crew's shorts.

Cored FG as a stiff components, sure, - that's two sided. It also means it will not deform for a blow like this. As for impact resistance, only if it's sheathed in steel, milder steel prefered.


----------



## cockeyedbob (Dec 6, 2006)

Regardless of material chosen, design, preparation, and execution are the key factors in boat construction, factory or backyard.


----------



## erps (Aug 2, 2006)

> Steel does not rust from the inside out... a solid block of steel, when it starts to rust, will do so from the surface in... the interior of the block of steel is surrounded by steel...which means that there is NO OXYGEN present. By definition, rusting requires OXYGEN, since it is the process of turning the iron in the steel to iron oxide. It is chemically and physically impossible for a solid sheet or block of steel to rust from the inside out.


I always thought that when it was said that a steel boat will rust from the inside out that they meant from the interior of the hull, not from the interior of the steel metal. Oil pans can rust through from "the inside" too.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Of course, anytime someone goes with the cheap materials for building a boat, the boat's durability and build quality is going to suffer. This is true whether they go with cheap steel or non-marine grade plywood. A 38' steel boat is probably not using 1/4" steel for the hull, more like 1/8" or 3/16", depending on where in the hull the material is. The chance of inclusions, even with cheap steel, drops with the thickness of the material. That said, I wouldn't buy a steel boat that was made with cheap steel. I don't believe that Valiente's boat is made from cheap steel, since IIRC, his was professionally built.



Sasha_V said:


> I have one word (actually three) to say to you....BRUCE ROBERTS PLANS
> 
> That "Cheap" steel is exactly what is going to get bought by the backyard boatbuilder looking to make that 38foot yacht for less then $25K...
> 
> ...


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Erps-

Artbyjody is claiming that steel, like the steel plates used in a steel boat's hull, start rusting from inside the plate and the corrosion works its way to the surface of the plate, rather than starting on the surface and getting progressively deeper.

However, if you've ever wirebrushed a rusty piece of i-beam or big angle iron, you'd know that the rust starts on the outside and works inwards. This is obvious, since the interior of a solid piece of steel, barring any strange inclusions from a shoddy manufacturing process, has no oxygen or source of oxidization and therefore no way to "rust". *Rust is by definition the formation of iron oxide from the iron in the steel-without oxygen, iron oxide can not form. *

As for steel boats, yes, most of them die from corrosion damage that occurs on the interior weakening the hull plates. A wet bilge on a steel boat is probably one of the worst things you can have.



erps said:


> I always thought that when it was said that a steel boat will rust from the inside out that they meant from the interior of the hull, not from the interior of the steel metal. Oil pans can rust through from "the inside" too.


----------



## cockeyedbob (Dec 6, 2006)

Professionally built is no guarantee. Once the paint goes on, who's gonna know? 

I believe Val's coating failure resulted from poor preparation or improper coating application. Unfortunately, some reason that because the inside doesn't sit in the water, less preparation and protection is required. Now Val must ask, If here, where else?

I purchased my steel from the mill accompanied by a certificate of analysis and tests for that particular heat. The numbers on the plate matched the numbers on the certificate, however, that was NO guarantee of the consistant quality of ALL the plate. 

Ya does the best ya can but ya still takes yer chances.

****** was lucky.

Oh, one more thing. Got tired of the snow so I went to San Diego for the boat show. Didn't spend anything other than the price of admission but did learn a valuable lesson. If one is interested in purchasing a new mass produced boat, go look at it in the pouring rain!


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Sasha_V said:


> I would suggest that there are more steel yachts with inclusions like that running around then you believed until I opened this horrid door into your imagination....
> 
> Now ponder.


Sasha, having stepped aboard a few for-sale Roberts home-builts, I understand your concern. I feel fairly confident that my one-off was done right, because I have extensively documented provenance for it and know that it was welded up by an obsessive German fellow a little upset that he was too young to have worked in a Messerschmitt factory.

Yes, it is possible to find crap steel boats out there made from indifferently smelted Chinese bicycle frames and rolled by steelworkers with Parkinson's and only one good eye. I've seen them. But at the same time, I saw a lot of new Hunters at the boat show today, and they all pass survey...just not _my_ survey (I liked the Tartan 4300, though...the Beneteaux, less so...)

You rely on common sense, Eyeball Mark One, a reputable surveyor, and then you pays your money and takes your chances....which is why I also stopped at the Furuno booth to ask about stand-alone RADAR packages that could hook into PC-based chartplotters along with AIS data.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

Faster said:


> This is one for Val and Wombat!
> 
> Some of you may have seen this already, found it on SA.
> 
> ...


EXACTLY!!
Moitesier posted a similar photo of a sistership to his, in Yachting Magazine, which had the same impact from a 35,000 ton freighter, with no leaks whatever. She sailed onto Tahiti where repairs were too expensive, so sailed on to New Zealand, before doing any repairs. Had the Sleavins been in a steel boat, they would have probably all survived. Other advantages . Zero decks leaks , fittings which never work loose or leak, which means far less maintenance if the boat is being used full time, heavy use which would mean a lot of repairs in boats made of other materials, far cheaper and quicker to build from scratch than a new boat of any other material, far more comfortable to live aboard for the long term, especially in cold, wet climates, than most boats of other materials, fire proof , far more burglar and pirate proof.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

Valiente said:


> Sasha, having stepped aboard a few for-sale Roberts home-builts, I understand your concern. I feel fairly confident that my one-off was done right, because I have extensively documented provenance for it and know that it was welded up by an obsessive German fellow a little upset that he was too young to have worked in a Messerschmitt factory.
> 
> Yes, it is possible to find crap steel boats out there made from indifferently smelted Chinese bicycle frames and rolled by steelworkers with Parkinson's and only one good eye. I've seen them. But at the same time, I saw a lot of new Hunters at the boat show today, and they all pass survey...just not _my_ survey (I liked the Tartan 4300, though...the Beneteaux, less so...)
> 
> You rely on common sense, Eyeball Mark One, a reputable surveyor, and then you pays your money and takes your chances....which is why I also stopped at the Furuno booth to ask about stand-alone RADAR packages that could hook into PC-based chartplotters along with AIS data.


You know how good steel is the first time you try cut it with the torch. Any lamination and it spits molten metal right back at you. No one would accept that in any case without sending it right back to the supplier. I haven't sent that in over 40 years of metal boat building. Bad mild steel is as rare as hens teeth.
The worst built steel boat would sail right thru a Hunter, Beneteau or Tartan without suffering anything more than paint damage. The ****** picture makes that quite clear.
You could kick any of the far too many fragile plastic thru hulls off a Beneteau without much effort. You'd break your foot without damaging the stainless thru hulls welded into a steel hull. Ditto most other gear welded on a steel hull.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

sailingdog said:


> Sasha-
> 
> True, but you're talking about a specific exceptional case. I'd hope that a steel boat was made with higher quality steel than that. If the steel is a decent quality, it will not rust from the inside out. I've spent a enough time working in a machine shop where aluminum, steel, bronze, and stainless steel are worked to know that good steel just doesn't rust from the inside out.


Steel only rusts form the inside out when the builder doesn't bother to paint the inside ( Like Foulkes Fehr, Amazon, etc) Commercial builders are mostly only interested in getting it out the door and the buyer has no idea of any paint under the spray foam. Spray foam is not protection for the inside of a steel hull. Only at least three coats of epoxy tar will do that. Did that with my boat 29 years ago, and the steel under the foam, anywhere I have looked, is as good as the day I painted it.
I have seen Foulkes boats with zero paint in the bilge, just mill scale, then heavily flaking rust. NO excuse for that!
Here in BC , most amateur built steel sailboats are far better built than most commercially built steel sail boats. In fact, most commercially built steel sailboats here are disasters.
Even the worst mild steel welds are far tougher than fibreglass, and certainly a lot tougher than the copper fastenings in wood every few inches, used to hold wooden boats together, for thousands of years .


----------



## poopdeckpappy (Jul 25, 2006)

That damage doesn't look right for some reason, you would think the crushing would have been across the deck and from the toe rail down instead of the waterline up with no deck damage, you would think that the sailboat would have rolled down by starboard and under the bow of the freighter simply do to the angle of the freighters bow.



What??, this thread is 5 yrs old......... sorry


----------



## copacabana (Oct 1, 2007)

Brent, is ****** one of yours? If the boat had had conventional framing do you think it would have deformed and absorbed the impact or would the skin have sheared at the frames?

At any rate, the photo certainly makes a compelling argument for the strength of steel!


----------



## Rezz (Oct 12, 2012)

So Brent, you triple-posted in a five year old thread? Newbie mistake, man.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Does anybody see that this damage is kind of odd? If it was hit by a ship, it would have to be a pretty big ship, because the bow of the ship never hit what we can see of the hull. If this is damage from a ship, it has to be from the bulb on the bow at the waterline, and the sailboat was pushed out of the way before the bow could hit it.
Also, there is absolutely NO RUST anywhere on this boat and the exposed metal seems grey, not rust colored; I believe this is an aluminum boat, not a steel one.
New thoughts, anyone?


----------



## krisscross (Feb 22, 2013)

capta said:


> Also, there is absolutely NO RUST anywhere on this boat and the exposed metal seems grey, not rust colored; I believe this is an aluminum boat, not a steel one.
> New thoughts, anyone?


Bare steel would start showing rust after just a day of exposure to air and seawater. This looks like an aluminum boat. Aluminum will flow (deform) under pressure much more than steel will.


----------



## poopdeckpappy (Jul 25, 2006)

capta said:


> Does anybody see that this damage is kind of odd? New thoughts, anyone?


I thought it was a little strange at first but then you brought up the unladen freighter and a bulb running at or near the surface, now it seems less odd, so maybe it did push and rolled it to port as opposed to rolling it down to starboard sucking it under the bow


----------



## TQA (Apr 4, 2009)

Does any know what happened to ******?

The reason that I ask is that I saw a boat with the name ****** on the side in similar fashion in the Eastern Caribbean 2 - 3 years ago. My memory is not that great but it was a broadly similar boat. 

Did he get it fixed?


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

TQA said:


> Does any know what happened to ******?
> 
> The reason that I ask is that I saw a boat with the name ****** on the side in similar fashion in the Eastern Caribbean 2 - 3 years ago. My memory is not that great but it was a broadly similar boat.
> 
> Did he get it fixed?


I did a web search but could find nothing about the incident pictured or in fact that vessel named ******. (plenty of other Gringos).
Does anybody know THAT boat?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Ah - so this is the ****** that you keep referring to Brent. I'd tried to find something on it, but like the others above, couldn't.

In the *BS Marketing Program*, you keep bringing up this boat in relation to the Sleavin family disaster...saying that had they been in one of your boats (Is ****** yours?) "they'd still be a alive today". You also use the baseball bat and tin can analogy in that argument.

So, looking at that picture above - then comparing it to the tanker that actually hit the Sleavins at cruising speed - and the markings on the bow...



















Do you really think the impacts were equivalent?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Resolute_ZS said:


> So Brent, you triple-posted in a five year old thread? Newbie mistake, man.


I just like the fact that the triple-facepalm poster has a misspelling.


----------



## Rezz (Oct 12, 2012)

Haha, smack - I saw the typo after it was posted, and then I couldn't unsee it. I just liked the image too much to change it


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> Ah - so this is the ****** that you keep referring to Brent. I'd tried to find something on it, but like the others above, couldn't.
> 
> In the *BS Marketing Program*, you keep bringing up this boat in relation to the Sleavin family disaster...saying that had they been in one of your boats (Is ****** yours?) "they'd still be a alive today". You also use the baseball bat and tin can analogy in that argument.
> 
> ...


No ****** was not one of mine , but steel of a given thickness doesn't behave differently, depending on the brand name of what it is used for. The freighter in the photo appears to have a considerably blunter bow than the one which hit the ******. It would have done about the same damage however. The real question is your implication that a plastic boat would have fared better than the ******.

As you have said, you have no credibility .(ie. no experience in the subject at hand)
Could someone please move this photo to "the pros and cons of steel boats" thread?


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> I just like the fact that the triple-facepalm poster has a misspelling.


What does this photo have do with steel boats?


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

poopdeckpappy said:


> That damage doesn't look right for some reason, you would think the crushing would have been across the deck and from the toe rail down instead of the waterline up with no deck damage, you would think that the sailboat would have rolled down by starboard and under the bow of the freighter simply do to the angle of the freighters bow.
> 
> What??, this thread is 5 yrs old......... sorry


The bulbous bow stopped it from doing that. Stops the boat from going under the ship.

What does 5 years have to do with the subject? I just joined this site much later than that. Is the subject any less relevant today? Does Smack imply that steel behaves differently today than it did 5 years ago?
Smack has a habit of putting his own marks on photos, then saying "Hey looky there!"


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Brent Swain said:


> No ****** was not one of mine , but steel of a given thickness doesn't behave differently, depending on the brand name of what it is used for. The freighter in the photo appears to have a considerably blunter bow than the one which hit the ******. It would have done about the same damage however. The real question is your implication that a plastic boat would have fared better than the ******.
> 
> As you have said, you have no credibility .(ie. no experience in the subject at hand)
> Could someone please move this photo to "the pros and cons of steel boats" thread?


Where did you come up with that "implication"? That's not at all what I'm implying.

I'm_ saying_, very clearly, you're full of crap if you really think that freighter that hit the Sleavins at cruising speed would have done the amount of damage to ****** (or any other small steel sailboat) that we see in that photo. And I'm also saying you're full of crap - and extremely disrespectful/jerky - for continually saying the Sleavins would be alive today if they were in one of your steel boats. You have absolutely no basis in reality for such a statement. It's laughable.

It's really very simple. If you truly believe what you're saying - put it to the test...with your own boat...with you inside...with a freighter that large ramming you at cruising speed. If you're unwilling to do that - then maybe you should come up with a different bucket of crap. Because this one's a major FAIL.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

I don't believe my boat would suffer any more damage than the ****** did, a dent I wouldn't want to have to fix, because someone selling plastic boat myths thinks I am having too much fun( which I am).
So until you take your plastic boat in front of a freighter to prove how much 
less damage it would suffer in the same circumstances, you are full of crap.
He has repeatedly implied that the Sleavins would have been no better off in a boat like the ******, than in a plastic boat, a myth which could result in the loss of even more lives, and probably already has. 
He has implied that showing respect means absolutely refusing to try to learn anything from the Sleavins tragedy! Trying to figure out how to avoid such tragedies is "disrespectful?" 
He implies that giving any of the pros of steel boats is "salesmanship." He implies that cruisers should not be allowed to know the pros of steel boats, from someone with decades of designing building and cruising in one. Smack has made a hobby out of attacking anything and everything I say, regardless of what I say. 
He sure sounds like a pedlar of crap to me!
He has stated on another thread that he has no credibility. 
Now that's a load of truth!


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

"Could someone please move this photo to "the pros and cons of steel boats" thread?"

Brent Swain
Would you please tell me what this aluminum boat has to do with "the pros and cons of steel boats" ?
I don't get it.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Brent Swain said:


> I don't believe my boat would suffer any more damage than the ****** did, a dent I wouldn't want to have to fix, because someone selling plastic boat myths thinks I am having too much fun( which I am).
> So until you take your plastic boat in front of a freighter to prove how much
> less damage it would suffer in the same circumstances, you are full of crap.
> He has repeatedly implied that the Sleavins would have been no better off in a boat like the ******, than in a plastic boat, a myth which could result in the loss of even more lives, and probably already has.


Sorry, bro...you lose again. I never implied/stated/etc. that a plastic boat would fare well in a collision with a large freighter like the one above that hit the Sleavins. I don't believe that for a second.

It is YOU who states that "they would still be alive if they were in one of your boats - or a boat like ******". THIS is a myth. Why? Because you have absolutely no real evidence to back this up - apart from a photo of a boat with a dent it that appears to have come from something MUCH smaller and moving FAR slower than the freighter in the photo above.

So, you don't believe your boat would fare any worse than ****** in a collision with that freighter at speed in the Sleavin case? Let's see some real data - either numbers you can produce, or a test you're willing to provide with one of your actual boats. Otherwise - _you're_ creating myths....not me. And it is your myth that will get people killed.



Brent Swain said:


> He implies that giving any of the pros of steel boats is "salesmanship." He implies that cruisers should not be allowed to know the pros of steel boats, from someone with decades of designing building and cruising in one. Smack has made a hobby out of attacking anything and everything I say, regardless of what I say.
> He sure sounds like a pedlar of crap to me!
> He has stated on another thread that he has no credibility.
> Now that's a load of truth!


Remember, I don't attack or argue with "anything and everything" you say. Not by any means. I ONLY point out the stuff that is not honest, misleading, hypocritical, and ridiculous. It only _appears_ to you that that's "anything and everything" due to the volume of these things in your posts.

See, I don't need to "attack" what you say, I just need to _present it_, in your own words, to prove my point - as I've done here:

*BS Yachts Marketing Program*

So keep trying dude. Because you haven't dug out of that hole yet.


----------



## DJR351 (Mar 3, 2010)

We had a nav safety flash go around the fleet not long after this happened....

What I can remember from it:

1. ****** is aluminium.
2. The vessel that hit ****** was an "in ballast condition" feeder container ship.
3. Three on board, two below and one on deck. The one on deck went over the side when ****** was pushed aside and on to her beam ends, he was tethered and managed to get himself back on board when the vessel righted herself, the two down below had a few cuts and bruises.
4. The mast broke where it hit the bow, the masthead light and a few other bits and pieces where found on the fo'c's'l deck of the container ship.
5. ****** was towed in, I think if I remember correctly the force of the impact broke an engine mount or two.....

The reason we got a safety flash was it was one of our vessels that got to ****** first, she was following the container ship.....


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Thanks for the additional info DJ. Where did the collision happen exactly? And what were the conditions? Do you know? I'm curious about the speed of the ship in the ****** case.

The feeder container ship makes much more sense in terms of the apparent damage to ****** than the full-size 27,000 ton freighter like the one in the Sleavin's case (the Pan Grace). Definitely different animals.

(PS - Brent's going to be very dismayed that ****** isn't steel. He'll have to come up with a new example to try to prove his point.)


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> I just like the fact that the triple-facepalm poster has a misspelling.


This is the crew of the ******, thinking about Smacks suggestion. to "Forget about metal and go plastic." and his giving of that advice to people taking their families to sea.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

DJR351 said:


> We had a nav safety flash go around the fleet not long after this happened....
> 
> What I can remember from it:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info.
What was the tonnage of the container ship, and its speed?
Steel is even tougher than aluminium, with far more reliable welds, which are far less prone to cracking. The sister ship to Joshua, which was hit by a 35,000 ton freighter (Posted in a 1984 issue of Yachting magazine) had a similar dent, with no leaks. How would the plastic boat which Smack advocates, have fared in such a collision?

We are still waiting for the video of Smack, waist deep in water , punching a hole in a tin can with an aluminium baseball bat, to prove that a very blunt object can punch a hole in a light, buoyant, steel container


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

capta said:


> "Could someone please move this photo to "the pros and cons of steel boats" thread?"
> 
> Brent Swain
> Would you please tell me what this aluminum boat has to do with "the pros and cons of steel boats" ?
> I don't get it.


The behavior of aluminium in an impact is very close to that of steel ,and far different from that of fibreglass in such an impact. The damage to a steel hull would have been pretty much the same, maybe slightly less. What would it have done to a fibreglass boat, such as Smack suggests, is better for cruising.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

In reading Smack's posts, one should bear in mind that he automatically attacks any, and every suggestion of anything positive about steel boats, without having any experience whatsoever in cruising in , maintaining long term , nor building or designing a steel boat.
In other words, on the subject of steel boats, he simply doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and never will, meaning his posts are completely worthless.


----------



## rbrasi (Mar 21, 2011)

Wow- I have zero interest in this subject, started reading and got sucked all the way in! The back story is brilliant, especially the part that includes Mr. Perry. Brent, I don't know who you are or what you are selling, but for the love of all that is good, just.. stop. Stop before someone edits your dialog into that scene in Downfall.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Boy, Brent is on an angry rant tonight.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Brent Swain said:


> In reading Smack's posts, one should bear in mind that he automatically attacks any, and every suggestion of anything positive about steel boats, without having any experience whatsoever in cruising in , maintaining long term , nor building or designing a steel boat.
> In other words, on the subject of steel boats, he simply doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and never will, meaning his posts are completely worthless.


I'm a bit confused by your claim that a frame-less steel boat is particularly strong. Having operated many steel vessels, both power and sail, I have personally scalloped (between frames) a few, in conditions which were admittedly difficult, but by no means extreme. I cannot even imagine how a frame-less steel boat would have withstood those conditions, without sustaining severe damage.
In a collision situation I do not see that a frame-less steel boat would be any different than crushing a tin can, unless constructed of obscenely heavy steel. Though as you claim, welds do increase the work in construction, proper welds are stronger than the steel itself and longitudinally welding several smaller plates (rather than a single plate) as Joshua was constructed or hard chine construction, should be a significantly stronger build. Whatever you choose to call your technique, "monocoque" means monohull in French, nothing more or less, and is certainly not a construction method, by the way.
I am in no way contradicting the statement that a steel boat could survive an impact situation better than a plastic one, but even implying that this situation is survivable in one of your boats is pushing things a bit. It is pure conjecture at this point and I would be inclined to think that it would be less survivable in an "Origamiboat" than a more traditionally built steel boat.


----------



## Rezz (Oct 12, 2012)

Brent, a sample of one does not a proven point make.

I think you need to take a few of your boats and put them in front of freighters to prove your point.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

rbrasi said:


> Wow- I have zero interest in this subject, started reading and got sucked all the way in! The back story is brilliant, especially the part that includes Mr. Perry. Brent, I don't know who you are or what you are selling, but for the love of all that is good, just.. stop. Stop before someone edits your dialog into that scene in Downfall.


Oh that's a great idea.


----------



## DJR351 (Mar 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> Thanks for the additional info DJ. Where did the collision happen exactly? And what were the conditions? Do you know? I'm curious about the speed of the ship in the ****** case.
> 
> The feeder container ship makes much more sense in terms of the apparent damage to ****** than the full-size 27,000 ton freighter like the one in the Sleavin's case (the Pan Grace). Definitely different animals.
> 
> (PS - Brent's going to be very dismayed that ****** isn't steel. He'll have to come up with a new example to try to prove his point.)


I memory serves i think it was of Portugal, can't add much more as the safety flash was generated by our company as only a reminder to watch keepers about the importance of maintaining a proper lookout, it was in no way an investigative report.

The damage though is not so much to do with the size of the vessel doing the hitting; it's that she was in ballast with her bulbous bow above the water line. I have no doubt that if the feeder was loaded to her designed capacity the damage would have been catastrophic and ****** would have been on the bottom, the bulbous bow served to punch ****** aside instead of been hit by the knife like edge of the plating above.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

DJR351 said:


> I memory serves i think it was of Portugal, can't add much more as the safety flash was generated by our company as only a reminder to watch keepers about the importance of maintaining a proper lookout, it was in no way an investigative report.
> 
> The damage though is not so much to do with the size of the vessel doing the hitting; it's that she was in ballast with her bulbous bow above the water line. I have no doubt that if the feeder was loaded to her designed capacity the damage would have been catastrophic and ****** would have been on the bottom, the bulbous bow served to punch ****** aside instead of been hit by the knife like edge of the plating above.


Gotcha. That makes perfect sense. Thanks DJ.


----------



## AlaskaMC (Aug 19, 2010)

Brent Swain said:


> In reading Smack's posts, one should bear in mind that he automatically attacks any, and every suggestion of anything positive about steel boats, without having any experience whatsoever in cruising in , maintaining long term , nor building or designing a steel boat.
> In other words, on the subject of steel boats, he simply doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and never will, meaning his posts are completely worthless.


Brent,

Just a piece of advise. You are a writer, builder and designer according to your signature. You are trying to sell, convince, prove (choose your word) your product over others. Smack is a member of a sailing forum that has found your approach very offensive. But he is NOT trying to sell me something. This makes your attacks on him appear very inappropriate while his not so much. I am in a business myself where I am often attacked as part of the sales cycle. If I behaved as you do in response I would have no customers in short order. I can even remember early in these threads where Smack was supporting you somewhat. It wasn't STEEL that turned opinions, it was STYLE.

As someone reading this for information from the outside in, it seems that the members of sailnet seem to like STEELE and SWAIN better than you do. Bob's right, you seem very angry. There are a lot of people very interested in your ideas here. No need to attack everyone so much. Let your product speak for itself, leave the FUD (Fear, uncertainty, and doubt) factor selling at the door. It rarely (if ever) works and always makes one look bad.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

You know, I had completely forgotten about this little gem. This is an 870', 120,000-ton tanker t-boning a plastic 33' racing boat...ON VIDEO:















The boat was dismasted when the spi caught the anchor, but it didn't sink, and was towed into port show showing no catastrophic hull damage.










Maybe I was wrong to assume a plastic boat wouldn't fare better than a metal one. Just look at the evidence!

How is this possible, Brent? Maybe Plastic Rules After All.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Divine intervention?
Has to be.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

What's particularly funny is that all the guys on the boat are Royal Navy. Nice career move.


----------



## jak3b (Apr 24, 2011)

The boat would have been fine if they hadnt caught there spinnaker on the anchor.maybe steel spinnakers?.


----------



## jak3b (Apr 24, 2011)

But if I am going out on one of these new fangled grp boats I am going to at least be dressed properly.And the doggie to.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Jak: I agree, you have to dress right.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Valiente said:


>


Is it just me or does it look like there was rust already starting under that paint?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Steel rusts.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Steel Rusts?
I have that. It's a Neil Young album.
Quite good.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

bobperry said:


> Steel Rusts?
> I have that. It's a Neil Young album.
> Quite good.


And it never sleeps.


----------



## jak3b (Apr 24, 2011)

Hey Hey My My RocknRoll will never die


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Old?
Yep. But never too old.


----------

