Slocum`s Spray

Yeah Troy, when I got re-modeling jobs in California the old studs were literally like oak too. Had to drill for every fastenting, and for a big sheetrock job it's a pain.
And Jak, how great you got to correspond with PC. He was always so.... giving of his skills and experience and we all have grown as boat-people as a result.

 

fastening

 

Troy, love your Einstein tag line!

 

Another good Einstein quote " I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction.The world will have a generation od idiots". Bataan, what kind of cook range is that?.

 

We presently seem to have a loud bunch of anti-science, anti-education zealot/idiots running loose in various places.
I noticed (CENSORED BY WRITER DUE TO OPINIONATED CONTENT) and it really made me (CENSORED DUE TO PROFANITY) and now I feel so much better having gotten that off my mind.
As to the range, it's a TAYLOR's propane, all SS and aluminum and excellent workmanship and design and sadly no longer in production. There's a whopping big oven, two burners on top and the broiler/hot plate next to them, piezo-electric lighters on the burners from a little 9v battery that last months, thermocouples so it's as safe as propane can be.
Right above is an opening port with the propane tank and line outside. In the line is a ball valve that is shut off, outside the cabin, by reaching out the port from the galley. Anywhere in the stern cabin you can glance up and see if the gas if on or off.
It's been safe a long time so I guess it works.
Previous stoves were, let's see...
A Shipmate coal/wood stove that I traded for the present windlass, then an RV propane thing that rusted out in a couple years, then another one of those, then a very old Dickinson Adriatic that I fought to keep working, then a new one of the same that was much more reliable, then a 2 burner kerosene Primus that went on top of the diesel stove for the tropics, then we sold all that and got the present Taylors and the Dickinson diesel heater that lives alongside. It's been since 1978 so I may have forgotten one or two.

 

Our technology has exceeded our human interaction and watching a bunch of teenagers in a mall with their smart phones is an example. My grandsons were with me for part of the summer and could NOT get along without the phone and their friends' interaction.

 

Yup.What bothers me if I leave the house without my cell I cant just leave it there.Taylor,They made some with cast iron tops that were really nice to.The anti science crowd is just trying to help us find our way back to a simpler time,like the dark ages when they burned people alive,drew and quatered them for any wandering from the path of rightioness or the pope didnt like you or whatever.

 

Thank you. I like it too....

I'm appalled that so many American politicos have adopted an at least semi-official stance opposing science and education, and pandering to ignorance and fear.

 

Some people have never learned to be alone with their own thoughts; silence scares them.

Before cell phones, a lot of folks kept music pumping into their ears every waking moment to fill the void. I had a roommate who would actually start twitching when he rode with me, if I made him leave the radio off.

 

Greetings,

Getting back to engines, read a paper concerning Dave Gerr's "Ironheart" which was never built, but seems to be an excellent design. The discussion begins with the two old lean boats from over a hundred years ago that first raced to Bermuda, both about 60' long with about 10' beams. One had 60hp (Thomas Fleming Day boat) the other 25hp. He then mentions how they where able to accomplish the trip back & forth with 270 gallons of fuel. The 60hp won on corrected time.

Next, the article goes on comparing different boats and engines and fuel use. But now, his Ironheart has a recommended engine size of 300HP??? Its a 40,000# boat with easy efficient lines, so why such hugh engines? I hate to bring up these types of issues as it puts me in a bad light at same time attacking a reputable designer, but its dishonest in my mind comparing his boat to something it grossly comes short of achieving.

What's especially dissappointing is this was done over a hundred years ago by TFD, whats happened that efficient designs are so lacking at present time, especially these days where everybody is bragging about being green, ecofriendly, efficient, etc...

You are right on with Bertie's engine size. She isnt much lighter in displacement compared to Ironheart but you have much better fuel efficiency for long distance traveling eventhough its a "tub" compared Gerr's boat, and usable space looks the same. This comparison fails a apples to apples comparison but both are boats which can be used for similar tasks and the drastic difference in costs is what astonishes me.

 

A 300 hp engine in a boat that will drive with 60 means you can exceed hull speed slightly and can punch into wind and sea better when conditions are on the nose.
Also, the engine can be run at an optimal speed below its max output, prolonging life. I've been shipmate with an 8 hp Hicks gas (1926) in a 30' Monterey boat that went about as fast as a similar boat with a Chrysler Crown with many times the HP, the only real difference he could keep going slightly longer when the wind got up before his bow got blown off.

 

Guessing 60hp is idle speed for a 300hp engine and using like that at long periods is not recommended. More like running at 150hp and 7.5 gallons per hour which would be 4x more than what TFD used and probably going the same speed.

 

Different engines, different times.
TFD had a limited array of engines to select from.
If you have an issue with 300 hp in what you feel is a very similar design, you should take it up with the designer and have him explain his reasons for doing so.

 

Sounds like a good plan.

I'm kind of mystified myself, having read many of Dave's articles. We're talking almost 15 hp per short ton here in nominal hp. That seems quite steep for a displacement type powerboat, even when considering the actual hp will be from approximately 80 to 90% of the nominal.

Taking the lowest number here: 0.80 x 300 gets us 240 hp. 2/3rds of that, a good 'continuous' rate, nets us 180 hp.

That's still about 9 hp per ton (180 hp/20 tons), which seems overly generous. I've been lead to believe that 5 actual hp per ton is considered quite adequate.

Huge ships have far less than that.

The Olympic class ocean liner (class of the ill fated Titanic) had about 1 hp per ton.

Even keeping in mind that the older engines were much slower turning than today's and probably didn't need gear boxes (which may be why a mere 26 hp worked back in TFD's day), I can't quite get myself to believe the advantage could be as much as 2 to 1.

Maybe the measure of hp in the old days was not entirely accurate. Perhaps, because the old engines turned slower, they were much easier to stop with a brake (the way hp is usually measured).

An IC (Internal Combustion) engine runs on pulses of power created by piston strokes. Between those pulses, the engine relies on rotational momentum to keep turning. Slower turning IC engines have longer periods between such pulses than more modern ones. Add to that the fact that the older engines usually had fewer cylinders per hp and it's easy to see how a brake might be able to stop them easier than it would a much faster turning modern beast, which has more cylinders (hence 'pulses') to boot.

Turning a propeller, an engine never experiences anything like a brake (unless an anchor line wraps around the propeller shaft), but instead experience a steady load, which is limited to the point were the propeller cavitates. Since even then the propeller does not stop, the engine will not stall out, even if it does not have near enough power to reach that point. So the slow turning engine may have considerably more useable hp in the water than it does on the test stand.

 

The 8 hp Hicks rear-valve single I knew turned a 24" x 24" 3 bladed wheel to push a 30' boat with easy lines and not too heavy at over 7 knots. Try that with an 8 hp outboard.
Something different in the power measurement that I don't understand either. And it was bang... pause, bang.... pause when it idled, but turned up about 400-500 rpm flat out. The torque was great and we used to tow houseboats and dead boats with it and used it as a workboat, it survived a major wreck on a lee beach with various parts like the exhaust manifold broken off but ran for two days to get us home after we pumped the boat out and raised it, and was generally a fine piece of machinery if you did not mind being an engineer all the time.
These old things are not something you turn the key and go with, there isn't a starter of any kind but you pull the flywheel over by hand after priming and oiling and the engine must have weighed at least 600 pounds, so you won't find anyone manufacturing such a beast anytime soon.
So we are left with modern, well-developed high speed gas and diesel engines and learn to live with them.
I'm glad I got my now out of production engine of the old type when I did as it will last 50 years with good care. We use distilled water in the FW keel cooler system etc.