Encapsulated = invulnerable ??

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by coopec43

Have you got any links to research done properly which supports your assertion that "metal boats proportionally representing the most lost keels" ?

There is an online spreadsheet that lists the yachts that have lost their keels. If you google "keel failure summary" you will get the link.

Apparently the most up-to-date spreadsheet lists over 100 yachts these days.

This is a perpetuation of a monumental misunderstanding. This fake info has been around for some years. It appears to have started with a British magazine writing about steel KEELS on RACING boats. Then brighter lights just sort if concocted it into steel boats loose keels.

NO, NO, NO. !!!!

Fiberglass BOATS with BOLT ON STEEL KEELS seems to loose them a lot.

That is a whole lot different than steel BOATS loose their keels.

That was when Boaties example was drug up. And the answer to that was this particular steel boat had a bolt on keel.

The lesson here is that bolt on keels fall off no matter the hull construction.

No steel boat has ever lost its keel, provided it was not bolted on.

[Greg K]

As others have commented, most if not all encapsulated keels are built with a void at the aft end which is used as a sump. Our S28 is exactly the same way. The ballast itself is encapsulated all around, including the aft section, but behind it is the sump which goes down quite deep and then tapers aft and up into the hull molding.

That part of the hull is generally less vulnerable to damage than the bow, but it still needs to be built strongly. My guess would be that the sort of extreme abrasion damage seen in the pics is more of an issue with the quality and thickness of layup than anything else.

All boats are vulnerable, but some boats are obviously more vulnerable than others

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Two examples of damage.

Photo 1 & 2, Westsail 42 with encapsulated ballast, hit a rock.

Photo 3, Different scenario, bolt-on keel hit by moving steel structure on the back of the keel.

More: I have no photos of either of two other cases where a fin keel race boat (one mine, the other one which I was commanding) hit rocks near the bottom of their bolt-on keels while travelling at speed (over seven knots). Both boats suffered damage on the keel, easily repaired and on one boat there was no other damage. The second one had cracking (but no water engress) on the hull structure aft of the keel and required fiberglass repair.

So I think it is incorrect to say that hitting rocks with bolt-on keels will always result in sinking or torn off keels, and also that having a chain drag around the back of a bolt on fin keel will result in major damage. The photos here don't demonstrate that.

I join Chotu with a bad record.

It's pretty obvious that photos 1 & 2 are not just "hitting a rock". Those are hitting rocks and laying against them with sea action grinding away for quite some time.

[nortonscove]

Originally Posted by coopec43

So uninsured yachts were not included?

Of course we don't know how many yachts (if any) have lost their keels at sea and disappeared along with the crew.

Missing or Overdue Yachts Worldwide

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1411480548874724/


Missing or Overdue Vessels

https://boatwatch.org/boat-watch-net...erdue-vessels/

https://boatwatch.org/2021/

I'm thinking in the name of good science we make no assumptions about those and into which category they belong. Unknowns cannot be used to further any discussion.

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by hpeer

This is a perpetuation of a monumental misunderstanding. This fake info has been around for some years. It appears to have started with a British magazine writing about steel KEELS on RACING boats. Then brighter lights just sort if concocted it into steel boats loose keels.

NO, NO, NO. !!!!

Fiberglass BOATS with BOLT ON STEEL KEELS seems to loose them a lot.

That is a whole lot different than steel BOATS loose their keels.

That was when Boaties example was drug up. And the answer to that was this particular steel boat had a bolt on keel.

The lesson here is that bolt on keels fall off no matter the hull construction.

No steel boat has ever lost its keel, provided it was not bolted on.

Yep, no stringer practical boat building material than steel.

[coopec43]

After reading this I am even more against fin keels.

FACT 4: (the meteo)
we sunk in a sunny day we were reaching in 18 kn of TW with about 1.3 m of wave, sailing with staysail and 80% main sail.


ANOTHER MAJOR KEEL FAILURE: What Really Happened to Polina Star III?

https://wavetrain.net/2015/12/01/ano...lina-star-iii/

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by coopec43

After reading this I am even more against fin keels.

FACT 4: (the meteo)
we sunk in a sunny day we were reaching in 18 kn of TW with about 1.3 m of wave, sailing with staysail and 80% main sail.


ANOTHER MAJOR KEEL FAILURE: What Really Happened to Polina Star III?

https://wavetrain.net/2015/12/01/ano...lina-star-iii/

That all points to a hull design problem, not a keel problem. In other words, the keel didn't snap or fall off, the hull tore apart around the keel mount. So somebody tried to build something a bit too light, leading to insufficient hull strength to spread the loads from the keel attachment into the hull.

[Paul Howard]

When the subject of encapsulated keels comes up I think back to seeing a boat in Tonga that had run up on a reef and ground and pounded until the cast iron ballast pigs encapsulated in the keel spilled out in a pile and the boat lay there on its side to flood at high tide and exposed at low tide.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by hpeer

...Fiberglass BOATS with BOLT ON STEEL KEELS seems to loose them a lot.

The lesson here is that bolt on keels fall off no matter the hull construction.

No steel boat has ever lost its keel, provided it was not bolted on.

Hog wash. I think you are drawing exaggerated conclusions not supported by facts.

But if one wishes to conduct their life based on their fears then by all means, buy the largest and solidest chunk of steel you can get and seal yourself inside it and feel safe.

On the other hand if you wish to own and operate a sailing boat, and actually do some sailing, then evaluate the risks, inspect the construction methods of any boat you are considering, and select something reasonable for your needs feel safe based on reasonable facts, and enjoy it and don't let fears rule your life.

[SSgtPitt]

Originally Posted by Don C L

BTW I suspect many full keel boats share the same vulnerability. Behind the ballast and water tank in the drawings of many boats there seems to be the same void that, unless it is filled with something and capped, is open at the top.

All you all with encapsulated keels, crawl in there with a flashlight and an endoscope and report back what you find!

Well FK! Something else to worry about now.

My Cape Dory 36. You can see the Garboard plug which is the bottom of the bilge. Forward is the glassed in diesel tank and aft is the poo poo tank then engine sump Under the sole is full glass so my keel, hopefully, is full of something because according to Cape Dory they pour it solid around the ballast.

I would have lost my rudder to the chain saw but wouldn’t have sunk. I’m also paranoid and any new sound freaks me out til I run it down. So there’s not a chance in heck that chain would have done more than rub some paint off before I reset everything.

Good ‘ol full keels. Take a lickin’ and keep on tickin’.

[Tillikum]

And of course the long, sloping full keel presents a totally different "angle of attack" to solid or immovable objects, compared to fin keels of all descriptions. Ride up and slide off with the full keel, or "crunch": a sudden stop and a nice test of the engineering, if any, behind your fin keel.

Why buy expensive lead to fill your steel keel when you could just use thicker steel for your bottom plates and keel and enjoy the security of being able to crash into solid objects to your heart's content? Fab the keel first and use it as a mold for the lead, then fill the shrinkage space with bitumen or whatever sealant is preferred. Were I doing it, I'd have a sole an inch or more thick, with plenty of massive bolts running up through the lead block and leave it exposed at the top so that any leakage or movement could be seen.

Steel yachts have sunk; mostly bad welds or "origami" builds without internal framing I suspect, when not for the reasons common to all yachts.

Drive a Lotus 7 or drive a Volvo; you take your choices and live or die with the consequences. And maybe others do too.

[SSgtPitt]

Originally Posted by Tillikum

And of course the long, sloping full keel presents a totally different "angle of attack" to solid or immovable objects, compared to fin keels of all descriptions. Ride up and slide off with the full keel, or "crunch": a sudden stop and a nice test of the engineering, if any, behind your fin keel.

Why buy expensive lead to fill your steel keel when you could just use thicker steel for your bottom plates and keel and enjoy the security of being able to crash into solid objects to your heart's content?

That sounds like a winner (bigger steel plates).
And we actually bought this full stepped keel boat specifically because we had no experience and needed the assurance that running into things wouldn’t sink us

[Elleroo]

Steel keels, welded onto a steel hull, do fail. There was a steel hulk in Moreton Bay for a while, due to the steel keel tearing the welds and just peeling off. The steel keel should pass through the hull, and be properly welded inside and out, making it indestructible.




Look up Drum, a maxi that had an aluminium keel welded to a plate, which was bolted to the hull. First time out, they put up full sail and brought it up onto the wind, and it gently just heeled over and kept going. The ali weld tore, sheared.


Then there's Cheeki Rafiki and some of it's sister yachts. Look em up.


I worked as an instructor on a First 40.7, and did the maintenance. Tightening the keel bolts was a six monthly occurence. After the second time, I got the owner to spend some money and have a very solid internal network of 20mm ss made to spread the load. It was installed, tightened. Then checked again after sailing and settling in, and it didn't shift in four years.


So, a lot of the failures are either poor engineering, or poor execution of the design. I suppose that's obvious

[Don C L]

I think the point though here is that for those of us with encapsulated ballast, most of us have a deep void in the aft part of the keel that is hard to get to and to see into, and represents a vulnerability we should be aware of, though not lose sleep over it. Sure, our sloping long keels will not suffer too much from a hard grounding, hit straight on, but anything coming at us from astern, anything that snags our rudder and rips it off, or any chain, or rocks, grinding away in that aft section represents a serious hazard. Sometimes in low tide we may find our keel resting and or bumping, on something hard and sharp, and if it is back by the rudder I'd say be ready and able to check that sump in the keel. Might be good to have some epoxy putty ready too, and a mask and snorkel

[Jim Cate]

I think a reasonable conclusion is that a well designed and built boat of any genre will likely survive to a ripe old age. A poorly designed or built boat of any genre has a greater chance of an early demise.

Slavish devotion to one genre or another will not save you from these facts, so IMO one should pick a genre that pleases you and then look for and be willing to pay for quality of build... and be prepared to smile a lot.

Jim