Wharram Tiki wrecked in Thailand

[warmat]

Hi RWatson,

I had it built in Thailand primarily because of Creed who built the first Tiki 38. I thought that following behind him I could learn from his mistakes...and besides my background is power catamarans not sail so I am a novice in that department whereas Creed is a highly experienced sailor.

Anyway, I did learn from Creeds mistakes and I added to that by learning from some of my own...primarily due to misplaced trust.

Interestingly as it turned out I could have contracted for the same deal in New Zealand for less money, but I didn't bother checking at the time as I thought it would be fun to build at the same time as Creed and we could do a bit of crusing around South East Asia together. It was quite convenient as I have a subsidiary in Thailand so I commute back and forth quite reguarly.

The 300% premium came about as follows: I was told by the builder that a progress payment was due when I was in NZ and beleiving that to be true I wired him the money. When I arrived to check out the boat it was miles away from being at the point where the progress payment was due. I had at that time sent him US$75,000 but there was less than US$25,000 worth of work completed...thus the 300% calculation.

On hind sight I would have been best to have removed it from the yard and put it up for auction as is and started again in NZ or with Gunther Nutt in Phuket and not incurred the expense of shipping the hulls back to NZ and the additional expense of fixing the structural deficiencies. But...I didn't, so I only have myself to blame.

I don't hold any illwill to ***** as it was my own fault for not being diligent enough at the time... But...he is beginning to annoy me with his childish name calling...

We will see what evolves from this point on. Maybe quite interesting.

Cheers,

Warren

[Angélique]

Originally Posted by Angélique

See RB's new blog for RB's statement about the naval architect of the RB T38 mod's:

"At the beginning, he and I worked with A... N... to redraw the hull lines to better suit strip-planking."

Alik responded "this is not true" and, see quote:

Originally Posted by Alik

Third party blogs and websites do not represent my job or our company job.

We will require corrections from RB (I didn't know they have new blog).

RB changed info:

"At the beginning, he and I worked to redraw the hull lines to better suit strip-planking."

Well that's clear, no involvement of any naval architect mentioned anymore

@ Alik, I apologize for the "one of you is ......" statement I made about this. That was also harmful to the one who was telling the truth, so I should not have said that.

@ Jeff, thanks for the deleting of that inappropriate post.

Regards, Angélique

[robert self]

Originally Posted by warmat

The 300% premium came about as follows: I was told by the builder that a progress payment was due when I was in NZ and beleiving that to be true I wired him the money. When I arrived to check out the boat it was miles away from being at the point where the progress payment was due. I had at that time sent him US$75,000 but there was less than US$25,000 worth of work completed...thus the 300% calculation.
Warren

This also happened to me with the Penny 26. Except I was not conned into paying after Chris Harrell was fired, so save myself thousands of dollars. In my case Chris was very good about keeping me up to date with pics on a weekly basis. Good thing too because plywood bulkhead cutouts were in the wrong place. transom knees too small. Transom knees bolted up incorrectly. Ballast not installed, on, and on...

On the bright side, I probably would have paid for, and sailed off in, a death trap if I had not been diligent about progress pics. Trusting RB went out the window when Chris' replacement, one Allan Ganz, did not reply to my emails for 3 months prior to RB's progress payment invoice.

cheers
robert self

[rwatson]

Originally Posted by ***** bianchett

Its easy to build a "pretty boat" !!!!!!
It took to me 11 years and half to teach a thai crew how to build a proper boat ;

He probably treats those poor Thais with the same attitude we have seen in his posts.

"Trusting RB went out the window when Chris' replacement, one Allan Ganz, did not reply to my emails for 3 months prior to RB's progress payment invoice."

Sounds like he is still in Management Systems 101 after all the hard work training staff, and has yet to enroll in ethical business conduct course.

"Its the age of Enron, baby"

[Angélique]

Originally Posted by ***** bianchett

It took to me 11 years and half to teach a thai crew how to build a proper boat ;

"R... B... founded his boat-building company, RB P... & S..., in T... in 1998."

Hi *****,

11½ years to teach your crew how to build a proper boat is from the start off your company until now. Does that mean that your yard has not delivered a proper boat till to date?

Just curious

Regards, Angélique

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by propshaft

sloopjp, seems like you are next flusher here. Your posts are biased gossips, no facts.

Was the boat on water for 7-8 months? Did the owner provide any maintenance of lashings? If the boat is anchored unattended next to fishing village, could fishermen cut the ropes?

This accident proves only one thing: Tiki idea with ropes does not work today.

I'm not sure Wharram's methods of holding beams onto the hulls worked well at any time. In a six month time frame in the S. Pacific in 1977-78, two Wharrams known to me personally disappeared on passages. I always suspected that they came apart where the beams joined the hulls - they were held by thin steel straps that had layers of cut tire pieces under them. The attachments seemed too flexible and flimsy for big, steep waves to me, and I had spent plenty of time sailing in big waves.

[sabahcat]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I always suspected that they came apart where the beams joined the hulls - they were held by thin steel straps that had layers of cut tire pieces under them.

That sounds like someone went against the designers instructions.

[Angélique]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I always suspected that they came apart where the beams joined the hulls - they were held by thin steel straps that had layers of cut tire pieces under them.

Right !

Wharram classic design hull beam connection from below to above:

- The connection bolts fixed through strengthened gunwhales.
- Steel brackets fixed to the beams.
- The connection bolts through the beam brackets.
- The connection bolts through high compression rubbers.
- Nuts on the connection bolts to press down the high compression rubbers to the brackets with's press down the beams to the hulls.
- Flexibility is adjustable by the nuts on top of the connection bolts.

See also: "Modifications to the standard plans can be dangerous."

Regards, Angélique

[RHP]

This is an interesting read: http://www.wallerdesign.com.au/Docs/...e%20Change.pdf

[sabahcat]

Originally Posted by Angélique

Right !

Wharram classic design hull beam connection from below to above:

- The connection bolts fixed through strengthened gunwhales.
- Steel brackets fixed to the beams.
- The connection bolts through the beam brackets.
- The connection bolts through high compression rubbers.
- Nuts on the connection bolts to press down the high compression rubbers to the brackets with's press down the beams to the hulls.
- Flexibility is adjustable by the nuts on top of the connection bolts.


Regards, Angélique

And here was me thinking they still used ropes, and the ropes now being so much stronger than before adding to their safety, but it seems not

9. Design Specific Questions
CLASSIC DESIGNS
Can I lash the beams on my Classic design, rather than using fixed fastenings?

What you need is Plan Sheet O7, 'Beamlashings for Classic Designs'. This is an optional drawing, not part of the plans, intended for builders who wish to go for lashed beams rather than the standard attachment method. These plans are available from our Online Shop in the Building Plans/Classic Designs Section.
http://www.wharram.com/faq.htm#qC-1

[Angélique]

Originally Posted by sabahcat

And here was me thinking they still used ropes, and the ropes now being so much stronger than before adding to their safety, but it seems not

Wharram rope beam lashings were developed after modern high-tech synthetic ropes became available and are only safe with the use of modern high-tech synthetic ropes. Rope beam lashings are standard on the newer Wharram Designs.

The 'felxibel fixed fastenings' I described is the old fastening system for Wharram Classic Designs and it was developed before modern high-tech synthetic ropes became available. Plan Sheet O7, 'Beamlashings for Classic Designs', is ment to use rope beam lashings on Wharram Classic Designs instead of the old attachment method that is standard on the Classic Designs.

Regards, Angélique

[Angélique]

Originally Posted by RHP

This is an interesting read: http://www.wallerdesign.com.au/Docs/...e%20Change.pdf

Thanks, I will read it tomorrow. It's now night in europe!

Regards, Angélique

[Red Tide]

Originally Posted by Angélique

See also JWD's warning:

http://wharram.eu//live//article.php...90828125835689

Regards, Angélique.

It will be interesting to see if the mentioned builder who seems to threaten to sue everyone will try and sue James Wharram for being called out in his warning. That could be a revealing court case

[Angélique]

Originally Posted by Red Tide

That could be a revealing court case

That would be fun

Regards, Angélique

[RWJ]

Originally Posted by Alik

What You have read? Where? Who said that? If You are talking about private blogs of Creed and *****, then a) both of them were managed by Creed b) it was removed on our request long time ago as it was not true.


Yes, it is a matter for me as we never designed the boat in question.

Are You trying to convince me that I have designed that boat? Then go to the first page of this thread and re-read the title - Wharram Tiki wrecked in Thailand...
I am not going to discuss it with You or Robert anymore, sorry.

******,

You sent me this e-mail telling me that you re-drew the hulls and changed the design of the hull shape.


Dear Rod,
Saturday, February 7, 2009, 12:08:16 AM, you wrote:

Dear Mr. *******,

I am interested in buying a New Tiki 38 in Thailand that I understand you made significant changes to Wharram's design.
Can you tell me anymore about the changes you made to this design?
I notice the deck shear line is different, no chines, and I heard that the boat's keels are now sacrificial. Did you change the freeboard, bow angle, and hull shape?
How did these changes change the overall structure of the boat?
Thank you very much.

Rod Jones

******'s reply:


We have done modifications of hull shape only, on customer's request. The hull is re-drawn for round bilge shape and slightly increased displacment, but profile (and also sheerline) is same with the original boat. We've got sections of orignal Tiki and just rounded them to get new shape.
We did not involve in structural design of this boat, this was done by customer and builder.

Best regards,
****** *******