On going steel boat maintenace

[kens2114]

I am looking at purchasing a 36-38 yacht & am considering steel.
I have read a lot over the years but keep getting told stay away from steel.
How do you tell the paint system used if the vendor doesn't know, what does it entail to keep a steel hull in good condition, does it need to be blasted & repainted every few years.
I find steel appealing & has the perception of strength, down hear in Aus most seem to take the safe way & select standard production designs in glass, which is OK but I want to canvas steel before I make a final decision.
I would appreciate any comments.

Cheers, Ken

[Ilan Voyager]

Steel can be the worst and the best.

For 36-38 feet boat it's too heavy and not the best material for a yacht of this size, and definitely fiberglass or epoxy wood is better in these sizes. Metal in small boats has also the inconvenience to need an insulation which is expensive and adds further weight.

Steel needs good preparation with sandblasting and primaries to have a lasting paint after building. It needs a constant maintenance tracking all rust spots, repainting immediately any scratch, or the boat will look like rusted junk within months. Yes it has to be blasted and repainted regularly (the frequency depends on a lot of factors) and that costs a thick pack of green Franklin portraits.

If you are not a lover of painting maybe you'll think that a steel boat makes life miserable.

To conclude, against common belief, steel is not a strong nor rigid material for its weight and on small boats has to be worked in thin plates which bumps at the smaller accident.

If you do not believe me make the following trials:

-take 2 inches wide 2 feet long samples: a 1/8 inch thick steel strap, a fiberglass strap 6/10 inch thick, and a 2 inches thick piece of fir. They have about the same weight, and try to bend them with your hands on the angle of a table. The fir will win as you won't bend it by hand, fiberglass second and it'll come back like a spring, while the steel will bend definitely. 1/8" is the common thickness of a steel deck plate, often it's a 1/10" on a small yacht.

-take a good hammer, try to bump the straps by hitting hard. Fiberglass winner, fir second and steel bumped.

-throw the 3 samples in a bucket of sea water and leave them a week. Have a look; the steel is a piece of rust.

[bober]

i like tests :).
let's take the same materials and place them on a good sturdy and solid surface.
now hit them with a shape edged tool such as a double bladed axe.
which materials will be cut in two pieces(sheared)?

[Frosty]

Oooh I know a good test. 4 boats run aground on rocks, the boats are wood, fibreglass , cement and steel. A 1 foot hole is ripped in the side of each one.

Which boat will be repaired and off the rocks the quickest

[Wynand N]

Oooh I know a good test. 4 boats run aground on rocks, the boats are wood, fibreglass , cement and steel. A 1 foot hole is ripped in the side of each one.

Which boat will be repaired and off the rocks the quickest

Come on Iceman, why be so generous - if all four run aground on rocks with some nice waves pounding them, one will be splinter wood, one will be bit and pieces, another cracked and holed and lastly one will have its paint job spoiled, saved for a few bends and scratches.....make your pick.

A nice example of this scenario was when Bernard Moitessior boat Joshua was blown on the beach somewhere on Mexico coast if I remembered correctly in the 80's.
Fibreglass boats looked like driftwood all over the beach and I remembered the photos in Cruising magazine where some GRP boats laid broken over Joshua. The junk was removed from his boat, a front end loader used to dug a trench and pushed Joshua into the water where she floated. Mr Moitessior gave the boat away just there and then. The point is, that was the only boat that survived the storm and she lived to sail another ocean or two.

[Wynand N]

Yes it has to be blasted and repainted regularly (the frequency depends on a lot of factors) and that costs a thick pack of green Franklin portraits.

A well build steel boat shotblasted and epoxy painted with a compatible system - that means, primer, tie coats, top coats with a coaltar epoxy on the inside and outside the waterline below the tie coats will have less maintenance than a GRP boat, period. If done properly, it will last a lifetime and only preventative maintenance needed as is the case with any other material. If chipped for instance, repair soonest, same with tupperware boats.
Modern epoxies are unbeatable and hard to beat and GRP / gelcoat is like comparing cheese and chalck.

Steel got its bad reputation from amateur built boats - guys that used strange brews to remove rust, no surface preparation for the paint to bind to, cheap paints (seen some enamel painted hulls), expired overcoat times and I can go on, on on....then again they try to save some bucks and that is the very reason they built it themselves in the first place.

[Ilan Voyager]

I was sure to get some posts ;)

There also some other test non very representative of yacht strength: the 20mm cannon, a water jet cutter, 1 kg of C4 and detonator, 52 m of free fall like the Norwegian life boats for the oil drilling platforms on North Sea, or a hit by a 320mm marine shell. And all we know that yachts are tested by the US Coast Guards with a good axe lent by the fire station.

For the grounding on a reef with a 1 foot hole, and not staying grounded battered by the sea: my experience of fixing a few dozens of grounded boats says the plywood or cold molded hull will be punctured with a few broken ribs and repaired easily, the fiberglass will need a further surveying of the bulkheads and a good fixing, the steel hull if punctured really with a 1 foot hole will be badly deformed on a extensive zone with major work as steel is ductile so not easily punctured, and ferrocement will need a good survey for the cracks or crevices plus the big fixing.

As weathered naval engineer I maintain than steel is nor strong or rigid for its weight that's the detail like said Cantinflas. Fiberglass and Kevlar are used for armor plates, and wood composites have a ratio weight/modulus just beaten by carbon. And for making light and stiff hulls, nothing is better than a low density thick material with a correct modulus. Pure maths in engineering illustrated by a myriad of sandwich hulls.

While waiting the eventual ultimate storm, you'll have to move all the time the "dead" weight of the steel and its insulation, the bigger ballast, plus the bigger rigging, the bigger tank of fuel for the bigger engine, the bigger winches and hardware for the bigger sails, and from time to time an expensive sandblasting and paint job, and a everyday maintenance. And these expenses are for sure, not an eventuality. It's so true that a lot a pro fishing boats owners do not want steel boats under 45 feet. Maybe a better insurance with the saved money will be more interesting.

The former statement is for small yachts like a 36-38 feet. On bigger yachts is not the same, although aluminium is a strong contender... and for ships is the lone economical material, so no competition.

Whatever the size of a steel boat, constant maintenance is mandatory and tiring for an ordinary yachtman. As we say in the Navy to the young recruits: etiquette is simple, salute all that moves, paint the remaining. I'm sorry to say that white metal blasting, best epoxy tars, the cream of primaries, and the top of paints on the best marine steel -all that of a high price- does not guaranties a long life protection, just some years and the smallest scratch will rust, with reparations which need to make locally all the process again.

About the Moitessier boat, all my friends in post at Papeete who saw the boat told me that it was badly corroded and looking like a piece of junk. It's true that Moitessier was getting old with poor health. When the Joshua was grounded, it was so beaten and deformed that Moitessier renounced to repair it, it was not a money problem (a lot of people in France offered help), and at the end gave the boat to some young people. How nice was the boat after reparations by these young fellows, I don't know.

Steel can be the worst and the best.

[Ilan Voyager]

About the destiny of Joshua, Moitessier's boat

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Moitessier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Moitessier

pics of Joshua now at La Rochelle Museum
http://www.photographies.marais.poitevin.fr/Le-Joshua-marais-poitevin.htm

Very bumpy and dented the boat has been restaured, classified as historic monument and is at La Rochelle.

[MikeJohns]

Ken

Steel is an excellent material and a very sensible material for a cruising yacht.

I have a problem with Ilan's very simple illustration. To properly compare the materials with your simple experiment you would need to make the sections equal moments of inertia. By making the section deeper because it is lighter you make it stiffer not due to its material properties but because you have given it a higher BD^3 so you would need to adjust your observations by this factor. That’s why steel plating has an associated framing structure. Or why the beams in your house are rectangular wood or I beam steel.

To get more specific:

Comparing GRP CSM 30% and common 300Mpa yield boat building steel
Steel is 4.3 times heavier by volume than GRP

GRP is 1/32 the stiffness of mild steel, adjusting for weight that’s still less than one seventh as stiff.

In collision brittle hull materials fail in shear not tension.
The inter-laminar shear strength is the limiting strength with GRP and it fails at around 1/12 that of steel for size and 1/3 by weight. However this is really meaningless as GRP construction often weighs as much as steel (without the ballast) because of the poor stiffness issue. So for 2 inches of solid bottom laminate you could have 12mm steel bottom plate for equal weight. Even in a heavy displacement 60 footer we only use 8mm steel and the vessel can be lighter that its equivalent GRP counterpart.

Douglas fir is around 1/25 as strong as mild steel and is similar in stiffness to GRP and much worse in cross grain shear.

Then consider abrasion resistance, creep, matrix aging, water absorption, hydrolysis, flammability, repair-ability and lay-up and manufacture related hidden faults.

One glance at trends of material properties with age should quickly convince anyone that metal is a superior material if you are concerned with raw material longevity.

Steel is a very good material providing the boat has been designed and built by someone who understands the pitfalls and the requirements for reliability. It is this factor alone that gives steel its undeserved reputation for corrosion as Wynand already pointed out.

Modern coatings have made regular repaints a thing of the past, providing they were done properly initially. I am seeing 25 year old epoxy coatings that are in good repair with minimal touch-ups. Epoxies have come a long way, we now have high build epoxies developed for the oil industry that can be applied up to 3mm thick in one pass and it is very tough.

There any many 36 to 38 foot boats that work well in steel in the medium to heavy displacement range. There are 100 year old steel sailboats in common use and no reason that they shouldn’t see several more life spans since the material is so quickly and easily repaired to full original strength.

Steel is also unique in having a practical long term fatigue immunity there is what is termed a fatigue limit in the SN curves that don't exist for other common boat building materials. GRP has a finite life that makes older used boats a minefield for the buyer and surveyor. Many 'bottom jobs' to cure osmosotic delamination have a life of less than 6 years, long enough to shift the problem onto another poor owner .

We had a chat about GRP here:
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/materials/how-long-lasts-fiberglass-11455.html

feel free to email me

cheers

[Wynand N]

About the Moitessier boat, all my friends in post at Papeete who saw the boat told me that it was badly corroded and looking like a piece of junk. It's true that Moitessier was getting old with poor health. When the Joshua was grounded, it was so beaten and deformed that Moitessier renounced to repair it, it was not a money problem (a lot of people in France offered help), and at the end gave the boat to some young people. How nice was the boat after reparations by these young fellows, I don't know.

The point is that Joshua survived that terrible storm, floated albeit a bit dented and crooked. The pictures I saw she was buried under some big GRP boats that laid broken over her. At the end of the day she was restored to her former glory, but not one of those fibreglass boats from that terrible storm was put together again.
What I try to illustrate; It is night, hell of a gale going and to top it all, it is spring tide. You missed your navigation or perhaps felt asleep and a big wave lift you band onto a razor sharp reef where you are stuck, and waves start pounding that boat with vengeance. In what boat would you rather be?
I can tell this much, within a few hours nothing will be left of the GRP boat, and perhaps you as well......

Ilan, thanks for the links:cool:

[Frosty]

If you are happy with a mallet and chisel then wood is good, If you are handy with an oxy cutter and a welder then steel is better. If you love bieng itchy and like to mix 2 pack chemicals with a shelf life of 6 months fibre glass is your choice and if you like to own a boat worth less that your T shirt get a cement boat.

As you can see I sort of sway towards steel Ive had glass and steel and both have there problems.

Dont forget most glass boats today have balsa core or some other water absorbing middle bit which gets you worried and you cant sleep at nights.

[kens2114]

Thanks for your comments, I suppose its like all things, houses cars & boats if they are well built & prepared maintenance is commensurate with quality of build.
I suppose I'm trying to get a real feel for the the day to day, year to year regime of up keep & that really depends on the quality & paint systems used.
I haven't made a detailed enquiry of the boat of interest as yet as I thought I would like to get an opinion of the material first.
The boat is 37', 12' beam 6' draught, pilot house with a mostly flush deck she is a well equipped,big volume boat. I have a 28' fiberglass yacht for sale & as it turns out in the same bay as this boat.
The design appeals & while not as glossy down below(which the other half likes) has a real character of its own as well as a lot of practical attributes.
Cheers,
Ken

[Ilan Voyager]

You're welcome Dynan, Joshua is a piece of history and I was worried by the idea of this boat rusting abandoned.

Like almost all materials (let us forget the ferrocement), steel can be the worst or the best. While designing a boat, each material has its advantages and drawbacks. As Frosty explained, there also are the personal tastes, a mix of rational and irrational.

None is the ideal, and applies within a range of uses, or sizes or other concerns.

Let's illustrate; For spending good time in French Polynesia, I would use a light schooner catamaran of 45 feet, very minimal, in plywood/strip plank/epoxy able to run effortless 300 miles day, and to beach between 2 cocos. I helped to design a such boat, so I know it well. I wouldn't go to the Cap Horn with this boat.

To see the whales in the Behring I would take a strong monohull in steel, insulated with heater and well ballasted. You accept the maintenance as price to pay for the security. But, a such boat is a pain in light breeze and a nightmare in a lagoon.

In the other side, a common sailor, using as many his boat in weekends and holidays, will be more happy with a polyester boat -apparently maintenance free- that with a steel boat, which requires whatever the quality of the paint more maintenance and soon he will be bothered by the small spot of rust that Wynand would fix while drinking his morning coffee without thinking about.

That explains why polyester is generally better for the "common" sailor, the kind of guy who does not know by what end a screwdriver must be hold and who calls the mechanics, the electricist, bref anybody to fix everything on his boat. I'm not despising the common sailor, he is the guy who make us live, and I understand him. He works hard the week to get fun sailing, not fixing rust spots.
******************
Initial subject of the thread.

Ken asks about purchasing a 36-38 feet boat, used, and he is asking about steel, he has been told to stay away. If he was buying a new boat he would be informed by the shipyard, so not asking here, or the shipyard owner does not do his job. Very probable that a 38 feet steel boat is in sale in the marina, and surely cheap.

Analysis;

1-he doesn't talk for circumnavigation or special tasks. Let's assume the ordinary use weekends holidays. If he asks about steel, it's because he has no special knowledge about boatbuilding, and probably someone is trying to sell him a steel boat, and other telling him to stay away. Good thing he tries to get information at the good place.
2-The boat is 36-38 feet, the very low size for steel which is not competitive in such small boat (see further).
3-The boat is probably used, so nobody knows how it has been painted and it's an essential point in steel.
Conclusion: Stay away. A 36-38 yacht in steel badly painted would be a pain in the ... and an economic disaster. It's already not good being too heavy for a week end sailor who need fun, not struggling with a slow boat. Do not take risks. Buy a good polyester boat made by a shipyard of quality.

**********************

About Mike post;

All the thing in engineering is that the inertia sections ARE NOT EQUAL because of the density of the materials. It has no sense to compare so different materials in the basis of equal inertia. The struggle in naval engineering is to get THE MAXIMAL INERTIA OF THE SKINS AT THE LEAST WEIGHT.

The main criterion is the stiffness, general and local, so the deformations are kept within acceptable limits with maximal stresses no going beyond the maximal safe stress of the material, including a coefficient of security, which reflects the fact we do not know all the possible stresses. Included also the fatigue coefficient as any material submitted to alternate stresses or cycles will lose strength. For example aluminium is very sensible to fatigue and calculations are made with big coefficients of this factor, while wood has little fatigue but shows warping if kept permanently under a stress close to 60 % of its maximal capacity.

We can consider a hull as a hollow beam with very thin skins. The analysis becomes easier; general flexing/compression/twisting and as the skins are thin, local flexing/compression/twisting plus internal shear, local impact etc. So you identify the stresses and put just enough material to counteract it. A bulkhead under the mast is an example.

To get stiffness you use inertia. A deep hull with an integrated roof has more inertia than a shallow one flush deck. So it will be more rigid, needing less material (=less weight) at equal stress of the material.

Same thing for the skins of the hull a thick skin will be more rigid at equal stress of the material, or will stress less the material at equal stiffness. There resides the trick.

The densities of the usual materials are in kg per cubic meter:
7800 for steel, 1540 for fiberglass, 2700 for aluminium, 650 for a composite wood/epoxy.

A 3 mm steel weights 23.4kg/m2.
At this same weight; thickness of fiberglass 23.4/1.54= 15.2 mm, aluminium 23.4/2.7= 8.6 mm, wood composite 23.4/0.65=36 mm. As inertia varies at the cube of the thickness the inertia in mm3 (which will become mm4 with the width) are the following:
steel: 3^3=27mm3, aluminium 8.9^3= 705 mm3, fiberglass=15.2^3= 3512 mm3, wood/epoxy= 46656 mm3 so at 23.4kg m2 the inertia of a wood/epoxy skin is 46656/27= 1728 times the inertia of the steel skin.

I won't enter in the ultimate fiber (=the surfaces of the skin) stresses considerations varying at the square of the thickness. With more thickness you'll get the same strength with less stress, that means that you can employ a less strong material than steel to obtain the same strength with a superior rigidity= less deflection for less weight.

As the principal criteria is the stiffness, general and local, the low density materials with enough resistance and modulus giving thick skins are clear winners. Illustrated by all the race boats in sandwich.

So I maintain my provocative post you'll bend by hand the 3mm steel while the 36 mm wood/epoxy (or 50mm clear pine) wouldn´t. That's on flexing, on compression the situation for the steel would be worst as the Euler Formula relies heavily on the inertia.

And if local strength is enough to harbor without making a bump or hole in the hull I'm happy.

Practically a typical panel on a 36 sailboat is 18mm (very comfortable) thick plywood or molded wood with 40*20 stringers espaced of 305 mm. Shitty strong. Weight about 13-15 kg square meter, that means roughly in steel a 2.2mm plating and 38*2.5 stringers every 150mm because of the thickness. Sorry it's impossible to use a 2.2mm steel hull on a 36 feet, it's not enough strong, it will be around 3 to 4 mm, so from 28 to 35 kg m2. Very rough calculations, made by head while writing the post.

For information in prepeg carbon fiber/nomex the weight will be around 7 to 9 kg m2, and strip plank/carbon 9 to 11. Very rough estimations made smelling the wind.

That explains how a 60 foot trimaran, with all its hulls surfaces, long beams, in spite of all the stresses induced by speeds attaining 35 knots, weights only with a good margin of safety (it's an ocean going boat) about 6000 kg. Made for only regatting with a 25 knots max wind it could be done at 3500-4000 kg.

Boats are not built to withstand grounding by a hurricane as cars are not made to hit a wall at 100 mph, nor planes crash at 500 mph.

A lot of books about naval architecture and engineering give more detailed explanations. The present post is a overly grossly simplified demonstration, that Ive tried to make without maths. I hope that everybody understood, English is my third language and I'm not so fluent.

[Ilan Voyager]

Thanks for your comments, I suppose its like all things, houses cars & boats if they are well built & prepared maintenance is commensurate with quality of build.
I suppose I'm trying to get a real feel for the the day to day, year to year regime of up keep & that really depends on the quality & paint systems used.
I haven't made a detailed enquiry of the boat of interest as yet as I thought I would like to get an opinion of the material first.
The boat is 37', 12' beam 6' draught, pilot house with a mostly flush deck she is a well equipped,big volume boat. I have a 28' fiberglass yacht for sale & as it turns out in the same bay as this boat.
The design appeals & while not as glossy down below(which the other half likes) has a real character of its own as well as a lot of practical attributes.
Cheers,
Ken
Cheers Ken

[MikeJohns]

..............

About Mike post;

All the thing in engineering is that the inertia sections ARE NOT EQUAL because of the density of the materials. It has no sense to compare so different materials in the basis of equal inertia. The struggle in naval engineering is to get THE MAXIMAL INERTIA OF THE SKINS AT THE LEAST WEIGHT. ,.............

You are testing unequal sections and will consequently get unequal results which when considered sans structural arrangement are misleading .
If you wanted to properly compare the materials you would test equal sections then you can compare and evaluate the results scaled by mass if you want. This is simple materials science and is the response of the material to an equivalent extreme fiber stress.

We design to the intrinsic nature and strength of the chosen material arranged in ways to enhance it’s properties.

..............
The main criterion is the stiffness, general and local, so the deformations are kept within acceptable limits with maximal stresses no going beyond the maximal safe stress of the material,.............

Precisely and we do this with a structural arrangement of the material which works in unison to provide rigidity and strength. It is this arrangement of material that is all important and is not well indicated by your simple strip illustration.
For example a strip of writing paper in your ‘test’ would simply collapse under its own weight and yet a sheet of writing paper standing on its edge can easily support a brick.

The stiffness of GRP is very poor and is one of the biggest problems designing with this material within a weight budget, and yes that is why cores are used but then they have their problems too and we have not talked about fabrication and repair costs here either.


There are many small steel boats that are good strong stiff boats. I think you just are in the wrong geographical area to meet them.

One example which illustrates the size where steel starts to make sense;

A very popular steel 34 footer commonly owner built here called a temptress deigned by Bill Bollard in the 70's. It displaces 4 1/2 tonnes with 1 tonne of ballast has a 4mm hull plate. They are a stiff reasonably fast but seaworthy cruiser and a joy to sail. If built well including good access to the hull interior they can be an excellent buy when 25 years old.
If they have been maintained they will be in much better hull condition than an equivalent GRP vessel, because of issues with GRP due to aging, fatigue and water ingress.

[Tad]

but not one of those fibreglass boats from that terrible storm was put together again.


Not really the case.

The Cabo San Lucas storm of December 1982 is covered fairly completely in the Pardey's book, The Capable Cruiser. They flew in a day or two after the storm to report for various magazines (Cruising World?). An onshore gale with winds reported to be gusting 50-70 knots with huge seas put 27 boats on a sand beach. Five boats were salvaged basically intact, 11 other hulls where recognizable but damaged beyond repair or sunk in the sand. Six large boats were shattered beyond recognition, and 6 disappeared (out to sea?) completely. Joshua was the only steel boat that landed on the beach.

Besides Joshua, the Bristol Channel cutter Vagabundo, the Olson 40 (ULDB) Notorious, an Omega 44 Grace, and Dancing Bear, a Cabot 36 all survived and went sailing. These are all fiberglass production boats.

[Wynand N]

Tad, it is one thing for a boat to be washed out on a nice smooth sandy beach, away from other boats and debris, as the ULDB showed and they are indeed build flimsy, but quite a different scenario when boats are washed up on top of another. Those I guarantee you, had not survived intact, as was the case with Joshua dug out from underneath other boats, bits and pieces...wish I can find the magazine the pics were publish in at the time:(

Perhaps I am biased toward steel boats because I build them, but I am producing GRP boats as well now. That said, how many boats were lost hitting floating or semi submerged objects, containers, collisions with large ships, whales, hitting reefs etc? I had seen photos taken of a GRP boat just after the collision with a whale - happened at night when the whale surfaced under the boat and pushed the keel right through the hull destroying the hull, and sunk within a minute. And the oceans getting "dirtier" every day by littering.
There are many legends of steel example on case; boats stuck on reefs for a couple of weeks and slammed by waves, towed off by a passing ship and sailed home, albeit a bit dented and scratched or small repairs.
Usually, in the unlikely event of steel being punctured (rather bend) after a collision, the actual tear or hole will be small and easily fixed temporally by hitting a piece of wood into it for instance.
The same would not be true for a GRP boat.

As a parting shot, look at this steel boat that came into the path of a large ship when the two suckers sailing her were asleep. It sailed to port jury rigged - imagine yourself if this boat was built of any other material other than steel - maybe aluminum had a slight change but alu welding is suspect when severe damage is done.

[Brent Swain]

I have more tests . Drive a steel nail into a piece of wood. Now drive a wooden nail into a piece of steel.Chop a piece of wood or fibreglas with a steel pickaxe. Now chop a piece of steel or fibreglass with a wooden pickaxe. Tie a knot in a piece of steel wire. Now tie a knot in a wooden toothpick.
Ask your advisors how many steel boatrs they have maintained and, or cruised in for over a ten year period. Base your assesment of the value of their advice on their experience.
Read Jimmy Cornel's book "Modern Ocean Cruising" , and read the part about how many experienced circumnavigators would choose metal for their next boat.
My current steel boat is 24 years old , has crossed the Pacific many times and has never been sandblasted. The original paint job is as good as the day I put it on.
If you can see the weld pattern thru the paint , the paint is not thick enough , a common mistake on steel boats. I put 30 gallons of epoxy on my 31 footer. My maintenance amounts to about an hour or two a year.
Bare steel has nothing to do with the rate of corrosion on a well epoxied piece of steel. Bare wood doesn't do so well either, in teredo country.
Steel boat owners don't worry about collisions with whales or cargo containers
One of my 36 footers pounded across 300 yards of Fijian coral reef in a huge swell with minimal damage., One also collided with a freighter in Gibralter in peasoup fog with minimal dammage . One pounded on a Baja beach in 8 ft swells for 16 days, and was dragged off in 8 ft swells, being lifted 8 ft and dropped on the hard sand every wave for 1/4 mile ,with minimal damage . Moitessier had a photo of a sistership to his Joshua that had been T-boned by a 35,000 ton freighter without leaking a drop. You could see the imprint of the freighters bow amidships. How would a wood or fibreglass boat fare in such a collision.For a boat in full time use, a steel boat would have far less maintenance than a fibreglas or wood boat. Things that are welded down, don't work loose or leak.Steel is the ultimate choice for offshore cruising. Nothing else comes remotely close, for peace of mind on a dark night sailing at hull speed with family aboard.
A rifle (303 British) that will shoot thru 23 inches of douglass fir will barely squeak thru 3/8th inch mild steel.Impact is impact, like sharp rocks. 3/8th steel is 15 lbs a sq ft. 23 inch douglass fir is 69 lbs a square ft.
But for abysmaly dense comments by people who know nothing about the strengths of metal yachts , there would be far more of them out cruising. As more people gain offshore cruising experience , far more offshore boats are being made of steel. Roughly 200 of my designs , almost all 36 footers have been built.Their ability to outsail many stock fibreglas boats which are considered fast , in the same size range, dispels the misconception that they are slow , or too heavy. Many steel boats in the 36 foot range commonly outsail fibreglas boats in the same size range.
Brent Swain

[Frosty]

Im confused, are you are saying that steel is Ok or not?

[Ilan Voyager]

I have a small knowledge about steel as I've worked in the designs teams of the French Navy -warships are generally in steel...-and also in the French Navy shipyards, building, transforming, repairing steel boats.

Also worked polyester as some mine hunters were made in sandwich, a wood composite mine hunter able to withstand a mine explosion, aluminium on fast patrol boats, and even ferrocement.

I've designed and made professional fishing boats in plywood and classic wood and participated as structural consultant in the design of sailing racing boats mainly 60 feet trimarans, and some cruising multihull.

I recognize that my experience in design of cruising sail monohulls is nihil. But I have some idea about the pros and cons of a good range of materials from raw wood to carbon cooked in nitrogen. Each material has its range of boat size, all (except ferrocement) are rather good when well used, all have a correct durability when well made and mantained, none of then is eternal, all have inconveniences.

I'm not an addict of a material, if one day it's proved that rice paper cigarette glued with bat semen is a good boatbuilding material I'll use it, but I have after 38 years some opinions, that happily I share with myself, about what material is most convenient in some situations.

And one of these opinions is because of weight, added furthermore by the weight and cost of insulation, and maintenance issues, steel is not the optimal material for small boat.

As more I'm not a lover of heavy displacement sailing monohull (but I do not despise those who love them) and even sailing monohulls because the idea of needing a ballast to stay upright bothers me. Personal idiosyncrasy of someone who spent years in the search oh the best efficiency.

About speed, the lone judge is a race with able people on the boats, or constant reliable logs. I have a light doubt that a 36 feet heavy displacement monohull in steel would beat in a Pacific crossing a 36 feet cruising sail boat in polyester made by Jeanneau or Beneteau, the equips having same competence and wish to sail at the optimal speed.

An example of proof of speed is a circumnavigation by the three caps single handed; done in 57 days 13 hours 34 minutes et 6 seconds (mean speed of 19.09 knots) proves beyond discussion that the skipper is good, that the design/building team knew their jobs as the boat is seaworthy, fast and rather easy to sail, and that the construction is light using at the best the concept of maximal inertia at least weight with good reliability ( 26,373 nautical miles full speed in any sea condition; how many boats are able to do that with nothing broken?) .

[Tad]

Wynand....

I don't have a dog in this fight....just trying to keep facts straight.

I think the results of that particular storm say more about the role of luck in mass beachings, (exactly were you are and who lands on top of you) than superior construction. Best to stay off the beach. The folks who cut and ran out to sea as soon as the wind came up where fine though tired after a rough night.

I own two wooden boats, I'm happy with them, and comfortable with what could happen in a bad situation. I like wood, I like working with it, I like looking at it. I have built boats of metal and fiberglass, no fun for me. I have designed boats in all materials except cement and I would do one of those under the right circumstances. Horses for courses.

[Wynand N]

Im in total agreement with you Tad - best to stay out of harms ways if one can....

The best material for a boat in my view is cold molded strip plywood; it is light, stiff and "feels" right. But then again, I'm am only a humble boilermaker by trade and hence my religion in steel.
For coastal cruising I think I would love to have a cold molded strip plywood boat for myself, but for serious offshore sailing, steel be my choice period. In fact, busy building a 6m GRP daysailer for myself:cool:

[Brent Swain]

How does one insulate a wooden boat to the degree of an inch of sprayfoam, without creating a rot factory? I remember living on my first boat under a wooden deck ,seeing the ice forming on it overnight then changing to condensation and raining down, so I know that wood is a piss poor insulator compared to foam over steel. I cruise full time year round in British Columbia, so I have decades of experience in living aboard in cold weather.I wouldn't want to do it in an uninsulated wooden boat. That would be torture. Deck leaks are inevitable, eventually, on a wooden boat. Even the best of boatbuilding perfectionists I've known have not been able to keep decks from leaking eventually.
I find that steel is the ultimate material for offshore or full time cruising and I wouldn't go to sea in anyhting else. That, based on 35 years and 9 Pacific crossings as well as cruising 11 months a year since my mid 20's.Wynand's picture says it all when it comes to worry free offshore cruising.
Brent

[Ilan Voyager]

The good boat is the boat that fits to your requisites and makes you happy.

As I've written none material is intrinsically superior to another, all depends on their use.

Simply some claims make me angry as they are not obviously true, two examples:

- Heavy displacement sail boats are fast: a common claim found in the propaganda of many yacht designers. No, they are slow, it's a measurable fact. So I would be happy to read "my boats are not fast as they are not made for speed, but they are comfortable, spacious, easy going and rather strong." So the customer makes his choice on true facts and his personal tastes.

- You can make your heavy displacement boat with little money and short time. A claim found with too many guys trying to sell plans to home builders.
I hate that, these "designers" are responsible of the ruin of the life of many people.

All boats are expensive, all boats need a lot of work, but heavy boats a more expensive as you pay, in common boatbuilding materials, a price per pound. Worst, most of these plans sold by these snake oil sellers are obsolete if not frankly "pieces of shit".

We can find other improbable claims like this: the catamaran I have designed: 40 feet, 8 metric tons is able of 35 knots without effort. And so on.

I'll conclude writing again: The good boat is the boat that fits to your requisites and makes you happy.

[Ilan Voyager]

Brett, in very cold climates all boats will need insulation. Your experience with wooden boats seem limited to very old worn out ones...:) The humidity trapped behind an insulation can also "rot" a steel deck, in Canada as I've seen pro fishermen favor aluminium as this material is produced in this country at competitive prices.

That I call wood is in fact a composite wood/epoxy/fibers. And I've never seen a double ply scarffed with 2 layers of fiberglass deck leak a drop of water. It's a monocoque structure.

It's perfectly possible to insulate a wood epoxy boat but in this case it's better engineering to include the insulation in the structure in the form of a 2 inch honeycomb filled of foam faced by plywood and covered by fiberglass outside. It is very efficient in several ways; stiffness, practically all further structure is not needed except at the openings or hardware attachments, thermal and phonic insulation with no thermal or phonic bridges, work needed and price.

A well treated classic wood boat can be also insulated. It needs just precautions.

About shooting and rifles, I think I have some experience on the subject of armor plating, although it wasn't my domain. I do not see the interest of the resistance to big calibre bullets on a yacht, unless you want absolutely sail in Somalia waters, in this case it's better to take a warship. That proofs nothing about the general stiffness of a boat, it's the tank syndrome. But now even tanks are using fiberglass/kevlar armors as steel is so easy to perforate with uranium or "plasma" bullets. I have always found funny in a certain way that a 10 millions bucks tank can be destroyed by a barefoot guy with a good 5,000 bucks bazooka, or a destroyer be badly damaged by a missile fired from a training plane...

[Frosty]

All boats are a pain in the arse and maybe I should'nt bother with them at all.

A consideration that crosses my mind at least once a day.

Some one on the Forum used to say "If its got tits, wheels, or a transom its gonna be trouble".

[Ilan Voyager]

Frosty you said words of wisdom.
I try to apply everyday this precept ; I have no boat, but I use those of my acquaintances, leaving to them the worries of maintenance and other wallet eaters, I have no car as we a have here good cheap taxis and buses and in case of absolute necessity I rent, but I'm faulty about the titties, I'm married. I'll try to improve. Nobody's perfect.

[Landlubber]

Sounds like Ilan has hope for recovery, good on ya mate!

[MikeJohns]

.........

Simply some claims make me angry as they are not obviously true.......

- Heavy displacement sail boats are fast: a common claim found in the propaganda of many yacht designers. No, they are slow, it's a measurable fact.

.........most of these plans sold by these snake oil sellers are obsolete if not frankly "pieces of shit".




Er.. um ..but...cough politely :)

Dont you think there is far more to speed under sail than the displacment length ratio?

All the 'fast' sailboats I have sailed on operate in a semi-planing mode which is a different ballgame.

For the rest it's always how much sail the boat can spread and how it stands up to its canvas all else being equal.

[Ilan Voyager]

For sure, there are several factors, from hull shape, hydro of appendices, to efficiency of the sail plan. And the combination of all there factors must be harmonious like in good music, let's say the BVW 1043 of JS Bach played by Menuhin.

But the most obvious is displacement and ratio of ballast.

Heavy displacement boats are expensive: a boat costs roughly by pound in "common" materials even if you try to lower the price with cheap and sometimes substandard materials, the work needed is related to the quantity of materials, not their price. And a heavy boat means bigger and costlier hardware.

Slow because of physics, a short heavy boat is limited in speed as the wave is making is big, and the expense of energy to move it will be out of the possibilities of the sail plan beyond a few knots.

ULDB are not good for comfortable cruising and some amount of inertia is needed to have a smooth motion, but a displacement kept reasonable with a good building method is a good compromise: good ratio of ballast around 40-50 %, good capacities of tanks (water and fuel) and moderate surface sails easier to trim by a small crew, all that helped by a decent design of the hull will be give decent speeds and more important that top speed; good average speeds without struggle. A lot of yachts drawn by able designers meet these requirements.

So, when I read the claims of some "designers" of terrifying things with overbuilt scantlings, ratios of ballast of 25 %, fuel tank of 30 liters (8 gallons!), 100 gallons of water (if you are five on the boat, you'll have to brush your teeth with sea water after a few days), all that packed for example on a on 35000 :eek: pounds 43 feet thing, I become :mad:

To go faster the simplest way is the multihull kept light, but multihulls are a bit expensive because of the hulls surfaces involved. However, if you're on the spartan side, you can get a good catamaran with simple techniques at a reasonable price. It will be comfortable at sea (but not spacious) and under tropics with a good tent very pleasant at the mooring. A such boat of around 40-45 feet is able of 240 miles/day with no effort.

By my personal standards monohulls are too slow, but it's personal taste.

[Brent Swain]

The stainless cleats I weld on take a minute to fabricate and cost under $1,,and will never leak or work loose. The same cleat in bolt on to fibreglas or wood version costs $40, not counting the bolts and bedding compound needed to bolt them down, and take longer to go buy than to build for a metal boat. Detailing a steel boat costs a fraction of what it does for non metal boats , and is far more trouble free, for exactly this reason. Most detail, like lifelines , handrails, cleats , mooring bits , hatch hinges , engine mounts, winch bases,anchor winch, blocks , etc etc are fabricated from scrapyard stainless for about $1.50 a pound, a fraction the cost of buying finished hardware at retail prices.
Rifle impact is similar to sharp rock impact. What it takes to resist a rifle bullet it takes to resist a sharp rock.
The photos that Wynand posted say a lot about safety factors. Denial is lying. You say all small Steel boats are slow?You are a well proven liar.
People who try to sustain the elitist bullshit notion that only the most expensive and time consuming way of building and rigging a boat will work, and the elitist bullshit notion that not having enough money to go the most expensive route means you can't go cruising, costs far more people their cruising dreams, than those who show them more affordable alternatives, like building sheet blocks for a couple of bucks , watermakers for a tenth of the retail price, furlers for under $200, hulls in three days , etc etc.
My methods have saved a lot of people their cruising dreams and have made them a reality for many who could never afford to live them, had they bought the elitist bullshit.
Brent

[NormalBloke]

I have a beautiful steel boat, it's a 38' Alan Payne Koonya that was built in Freemantle in 1973. I keep it moored in the Brisbane River and enjoy sailing her around Moreton Bay and up the Queensland coast. You do have to keep an eya on the paint and repair any scratches or chips before the rust gets going. My boat has a 3/4 keel and displaces 11 tonne but it sails beautifully and can get close to 8 knots. It is built very strongly which is great for me because I am still a learner.

Patrick

Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
27712

[Landlubber]

Hey mate, no "Normal Bloke" would stay on the Brisbane River any longer than necessary!!!!!!!! .......go North young man.

Yeah, it is always best to do your preventative maintenance as it occurrs.

Nice boat too!

[Brent Swain]

One of my twin keelers called "Misty Blue " hangs out in your area.
If you give a steel hull several coats of cold galvanizing primer,imediately after blasting, before your epoxy, you get a bit more time to touch up dings and scrapes before it starts to rust. Cold galv primer doesn't chip. If you trim all outside corners with stainless and put ss handrails on the outside corners of the cabin sides ,instead of slightly inboard, you reduce the amount of dings and chipped paint on the corners drastically, reducing your maintenance by up to 80%. Corners chip often, flat surfaces rarely chip.
My Brisbane uncle says the sugar industry there is a good source of scrap stainless.
Gorgeous looking boat you have.
Brent

[steeldetal12]

Hi,
During the auto detailing process, ensure the vehicle is in a shady space, preferably a cool shop or a roofed space. This is because many of the common and effective car detailing products like paint and wax do not work properly when used on hot surfaces. Therefore, cleaning the auto's exterior under the sun is not prudent as well.