[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference unifix::sailing

Title:SAILING
Notice:Please read Note 2.* before participating in this conference
Moderator:UNIFIX::BERENS
Created:Wed Jul 01 1992
Last Modified:Mon Jun 02 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2299
Total number of notes:20724

2146.0. "Tinker dinghy/lifeboat" by SX4GTO::WANNOOR () Fri Jul 22 1994 20:00

    I saw a really neat inflatable at the last Oakland Boat Show and have
    the brochure. This is a British inflatable dinghy, 9' or 12', made of
    Hypalon like Avons, but the big difference is that it comes with a
    sailing rig!! The mast is of three aluminium sections, has a small jib,
    a roller-furling 100% jib and a mainsail. The centerboard goes through
    the thwart seat, just like a rigid dinghy, and it has a kick-up rudder.
    This inflatable really sails well, 45 degrees off the true upwind.
    
    Like any inflatable, it rows, but because it is designed to sail well,
    it rows like no other inflatable, in a straight line like it should.
    Also, it takes a 4 or 5hp motor on the transom if you detatch the
    rudder.
    
    But the real difference is that you can buy an inflatable canopy with a
    storm drogue, and the Tinker becomes a very creditable lifeboat with
    the key advantage that it can be sailed or rowed to the best chance of
    rescue after the abandon-ship situation is over!!
    
    We sold our liferaft and Achilles dinghy, and bought a 6-person 12'
    Tinker Traveller instead with just about the same money, so now we can
    sail, row, motor and survive in the same boat, and no yearly
    inspections. This is really great, and rolled up (the floorboards are
    an integral part of the boat, they don't come out), and
    inflatable canopy fitted with storm drogue, automatic CO2 inflation
    cylinders clamped on and tied down with the quick-release lanyard, it
    takes up a lot less space than both our dinghy and liferaft did.
                                                           
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
2146.1Liferaft/lifeboat comparison trialsSX4GTO::WANNOORFri Jul 22 1994 20:17754
    I got this from CompuServe, a test that West Marine did with the Tinker
    and comparing the lifeboat approach against the liferaft survival
    philosopy:
    
    Page 1
    
    Copyright West Marine and Sea Star Yachting Products
    
    
    West Marine/Sea Star Life Raft Test
    Copyright West Marine and Sea Star Yachting Products
    
    June 25, 1994
    
    Sponsored by:
    West Marine Products
    Sea Star Yachting Products
    Switlik Parachute Co.
    Henshaw Inflatables, Ltd.
    
    Introduction
    This report documents a heavy weather test comparing the new Switlik
    MD-2 yachtsmanUs life raft and the Tinker Traveller life boat. The test
    was conducted on June 25, 1994 by West Marine Products, of Watsonville,
    CA, and Sea Star Yachting Products of Alameda, CA.
    
    Objectives
    This test evaluated  two distinctly different types of craft reflecting
    two approaches to survival and rescue after abandoning ship. The
    Switlik MD-2 life raft is a conventional type raft designed to be
    stored for extended periods of time and inflated only during an abandon
    ship emergency. It can be readied for boarding in less than a minute,
    using conventional CO2/nitrogen inflation systems, and is packed with a
    modest inventory of survival gear. It provides environmental protection
    for up to six individuals. Due to its octagonal shape and lack of
    propulsion and steering methods, it is not maneuverable. 
    The Tinker Traveller is a combination inflatable dinghy and survival
    craft. In appearance, it is similar to an inflatable dinghy like those
    made by Avon, Zodiac, and West Marine. It has a segmented plywood
    floor, hard transom, and small dodger on the bow. It incorporates an
    inflatable survival canopy which encloses the occupants to reduce
    exposure. In addition, it is supplied with a compact sloop sailing rig
    with a daggerboard and rudder. This rig, plus conventional oars, allow
    the Tinker to be sailed or rowed reasonably well so that its crew might
    be able to reach land or travel to shipping lanes where the chance of
    rescue is greater. 
    
    Location
    This test was conducted in the open ocean, in an area NW of the Golden
    Gate of San Francisco Bay known as the Potato Patch Shoal. This area is
    north of the main ship channel into San Francisco Bay which is on an
    approximate course of 60!/240! magnetic. While the ship channel is
    dredged to about 10 fathoms, the shoals to the north and south of this
    channel are very rough due to the shallow depths of around 4 fathoms.
    Waves frequently break during storm conditions, especially during an
    ebb tide. Due to the strong currents and constricted entrance at the
    Golden Gate, short wavelength and steep sided chop is abundant, along
    with the longer Pacific swells. The characteristic "beaten egg white"
    chop of the Golden Gate provided a remarkably tippy surface to test the
    capsize resistance of the tested craft.
    
    Weather
    Typical summer conditions for this area prevailed during this test.
    Winds at the 1000 PDT aunch time were from the NW at 20 knots (force
    5). Over the course of the day, winds increased to a steady 25 knots
    with frequent gusts above 30 knots (force 6-7). Waves were about four
    feet at the start (sea state 3), building to 6-8 feet (sea state 4-5)
    at 1400. Whitecaps were present all day long. 
    
    Support Vessels
    The primary support vessel was a Garden 51 fiberglass ketch, Sea Star.
    In addition, a Tinker 10' dinghy was used to ferry participants between
    the life rafts and Sea Star.
    Participants
    Ray Thackeray provided his vessel Sea Star, the Tinkers, and three crew
    members who helped to document the event on video and slide film. West
    Marine provided six associates, most of whom had extensive offshore
    sailing experience. Due to the rough conditions, it was not possible to
    exchange crews as we had done in past tests. Ray Thackeray and Chuck
    Hawley were the primary testers, with Scott Lonsway and Pepe Parsons
    also spending time in the MD-2 raft.
    
    Seasickness
    Conditions were perfect for inducing motion sickness, and several crew
    members on the large support vessel were affected by it. Both of our
    liferaft testers became sufficiently nauseated to vomit. This was
    associated with specific functions on board the rafts: orally inflating
    the MD-2 floor, victim recovery from the water where water was
    ingested, and projects requiring concentration inside the canopies.
    Normal methods for reducing motion sickness were effective,
    particularly getting outside the enclosures so that the visual
    equilibrium was established. 
    
    Communications
    A Navico Axis handheld VHF radio was used for communications between
    the rafts and the support vessel . This worked well until it was
    immersed. We believe that the presence of water in the microphone area
    made the transmission excessively garbled, although the battery may
    have run down at that point. A Standard Communications HX-230S was also
    used in a protective vinyl bag, and it performed well. Since it has a
    relatively large PTT button, the HX-230S was quite easy to operate.
    
    Craft Tested
    Below is a brief description of the craft tested:
    
    Switlik MD-2
    The Switlik MD-2 is a 6 person raft, meeting the ORC regulations for
    offshore sailing races. It has two buoyancy tubes with a large
    self-supported canopy. It is constructed of heat welded polyurethane
    fabric and is octagonal in shape. It was supplied with Switlik's
    optional inflatable floor. It was packed in the Switlik Cordura nylon
    valise. 
    The MD-2 is the newest of Switlik's yachting life rafts, and it borrows
    many design features from their other models. Some of these features
    are as follows:
    1.      Materials: Urethane coated nylon fabric using heat welded
    construction. The compressed gas inflation system is the same as those
    used on USCG approved life rafts. The canopy is an orange outside/blue
    inside material.
    2.      Stability: Ballast pockets are the same as those used in USCG
    approved rafts. Octagonal shape for stability.
    3.      Access: Two large doors for greater versatility in ventilation
    and visibility. Door closure via large marine grade zippers.
    4.      Price: Competitive with imported rafts with fewer features to
    induce customers to buy true offshore life rafts rather than inshore or
    coastal rafts.
    
    Tinker Traveller
    The Tinker Traveller is a dual purpose dinghy and life boat. Without
    its sailing rig and canopy, it resembles a conventional 12' inflatable
    sportboat. With its sailing rig in place, the Traveller can be sailed
    reasonably well upwind and down. With the inflatable canopy in place,
    the Traveller resembles a small covered wagon, with enough space for
    two or three adults and some provisions. It can also be fitted with
    manually operable CO2 inflation cylinders for rapid inflation of the
    hull chambers. The hull fabric is a Hypalon/neoprene mixture, while
    other components appear to be heat welded polyurethane/nylon fabric.
    The Traveller is a six person dinghy, although is does not have enough
    room for six as a life boat.
    The Traveller features "hull within a hull" construction. Inflatable
    inner portions of the main tubes provide reserve buoyancy should the
    outer tubes become punctured. This capability was not tested.
    The Tinker Lifeboat was designed after the Fastnet Race of 1979 in
    which hundreds of boats were subjected to gale conditions, and 15
    yachtsmen lost their lives. The requirements were as follows:
    1.      Stability: High capsize resistance through hull design and
    drogue, keeping the lifeboat beam-on to the seas and wind.
    2.      Capsize: Easily righted from within, maintaining thermal
    protection while inverted.
    3.      Navigation: Ability to maneuver towards rescue.
    4.      Comfort: Thermal insulation from ocean and air, ability to be
    made dry inside, protection against "fish hits" from below.
    5.      Deployment: Ability to be kept ready for use on deck, or
    inflated quickly using the hand pump or CO2 inflation.
    6.      Drills: Ability to practice Abandon Ship evolutions except for
    CO2 inflation. 
    7.      Durability: Ability to be used for many years as a working
    dinghy in addition to life boat duties.
    8.      Cost: Competitive with high quality inflatable dinghies and
    life rafts combined.
    
    Comparison of Equipment/Construction/Specs
    
            Switlik Tinker
            MD-2    Traveller Life Boat
    Price:  $3,970.00       $5,361.00
    Price (5 yrs, assuming re-packing):     $5,320.00       $5,361.00
    Shape:  8-sided Sportboat
    Storage Cordura nylon valise    PVC coated polyester valise
    Tube diameter:  9 1/2S x 2      12S
    Outside Dimensions:     7'0S x 7'0"     12'0" x 4'9"
    Inside dimensions:      5'5" x 5'5"     10'5" x 1'8"1
    Weight as Tested:       65      121
    Main Tube Inflation     CO2/Nitrogen    Hand bellows/CO2 (opt.)
    Canopy Inflation:       Automatic/CO2   Hand bellows
    Canopy Openings Two inverted V doors    Two drawstring closures
    Arch Tubes:     One     Self-supporting
    Ladders:        Two     Over the bow boarding
    Water:  96 oz.  Opt.
    Flares: 3 Hand/2 Parachute      Opt.
    Paddles:        Yes     6' Jointed Oars
    First aid kit:  No      Opt.
    Repair Kit      Yes     Yes
    Flashlight:     Yes     Opt.
    Water act. lights:      One     Opt.
    Sailing Rig     No      Yes, sloop rigged
    Sailing Hardware        No      Mast, rudder, daggerboard, shrouds,
    sails
    Seat/transom    No      Central wooden thwart, transom
    Drogue  Yes     Yes
    
    ORC Specifications
    One of the strongest motivators for equipping a yacht with a life raft
    is that it is required if the boat is to participate in offshore races.
    The Recommendations for Offshore Sailing, published in the US by the US
    Sailing Association, describe in detail the attributes which a life
    raft must have to be approved for use while racing. The following is
    taken from Appendix II of the 1994 Special Regulations:
    
                    Switlik Tinker
            Requirement     MD-2    Traveller
    1.a     Stowage         Yes     Yes
    1.b     Only saving of life at sea      Yes     No
    1.c     Stable  Yes     Yes
    1.d     Canopy, highly visible, can collect rain        Yes     Yes2
    1.e     Painter, outer lifeline, inner lifeline Yes     No3
    1.f     Capable of being righted by a single person if inverted.       
    Yes     Yes
    1.g     Fitted at each opening with an efficient method to board       
    Yes     No
    1.h     Buoyant and rugged valise       Yes     Yes
    1.i     Buoyancy divided into separate compartments     Yes4    Yes
    1.j.1   Capacity, based on buoyancy of tubes    6       6
    1.j.2   Capacity, based on floor area   6       3
    1.k     Floor design    Yes     Yes
    2.a     Rescue quoit    Yes     No
    2.b     Knife and bailer        Yes     No
    2.c     Two sponges     Yes     No
    2.d     Sea anchor or drogue    Yes     Yes
    2.e     Two paddles     Yes     Yes
    2.f     Repair outfit   Yes     Yes
    2.g     Topping off pump        Yes     Yes
    2.h     Electric torch  Yes     No
    2.i     Three handheld flares   Yes     No
    2.j     Six sea sickness pills/person   Yes     No
    2.k     Waterproof survival instructions        Yes     Yes
    2.l     Non-toxic gas, auto inflation, able to be topped off    Yes    
    Yes
    
    Deployment/Inflation
    Crew members Hawley and Thackeray simulated an abandon ship evolution
    for each craft. An abandon ship bag was prepared in advance for each
    raft. Due to the different design concept of each raft, a different
    launch methods were used.
    The MD-2 is a conventional raft which should only be deployed when it
    is clear that the primary vessel  is sinking, since it cannot be
    re-used or stored after inflation. In fact, there is a chance of
    damaging the raft if it is kept alongside a damaged vessel. 
    With the painter secured to the support vessel, the MD-2 was tossed to
    leeward and its inflation line was pulled. The raft inflated quickly
    (approximately 20 seconds), in the upright position, and with the
    canopy doors in the down position. After the raft inflated, the over
    pressure valves released excess gas causing the raft to "hiss" for
    about four minutes. The testers lowered themselves through the canopy
    door (with some difficulty owing to the rolling of the support vessel
    and its high freeboard), accepted the prepared "grab bag" from one of
    the support crew, and cut the painter free. 
    Deployment of the Traveller requires a different approach. It is stowed
    on deck like an inflatable sportboat, with its sailing rig stored
    separately in a 6' x 1' zippered duffel. As with the MD-2, a separate
    grab bag was used to store the majority of the survival equipment. To
    deploy the Traveller, its valise was removed, and it was unfolded on
    the stern deck. One crewmember reached inside the transom and turned on
    two valves which controlled the flow of CO2 to the right and left hull
    tubes. The CO2 supplied was enough to inflate the hull tubes about half
    way. Apparently, the soft nature of the boat makes it more stable
    initially, since it effectively "sticks" to the water alongside the
    mother vessel which reduces the chance that the raft will "skip away"
    in high winds. The boat was put over the lifelines in this partially
    inflated state.  At this point, the sailing rig was slid inside the
    deflated canopy so that it would be available for use after boarding. 
    The flaccid nature of the boat made launching without damage
    challenging, since it sort of draped over the lifelines and stanchions.
    Two scenarios would have made launching easier: the raft could have
    been more fully inflated while on deck before launching, and launching
    from the boat as it sank would have reduced the substantial freeboard.
    Alternatively, the Traveller can be kept inflated on deck, as with any
    inflatable dinghy. This would eliminate the need for the CO2 inflation
    cylinders. Optionally, additional cylinders might be installed which
    would inflate the life boat more fully. Henshaw believes that pressure
    release valves are unreliable and expensive and has therefore elected
    not to use them on the Traveller. This accounts for the partial
    inflation with CO2 followed by topping off by hand.
    
    Boarding
    Switlik believes that life rafts should be as easy to board as
    possible. To this end, their rafts are packed with the doors in the
    canopies as open as possible. The MD-2 has two large triangular-shaped
    doors which we found easy to enter. 
    The partially inflated Traveller was difficult to board, since it
    filled with water from waves and the added weight of the two crew
    members. The canopy was deflated, and lying on top of the sailing rig
    duffel, which made it difficult to figure out where to sit.
    Interestingly, the canopy covers the entire interior of the raft,
    necessitating entering the canopy by crawling into the fore and aft
    openings.
    When the painter was cut free, one crewmember set to work  bailing
    about 8" of water out of the boat, while the other began to top off the
    inflation chambers. This proved difficult due to three factors: the
    valves were located several inches underwater, the pump was designed to
    be used on a hard surface, and the inflation hose tended to kink if not
    held in a smooth arc.
    After approximately 10 minutes of steady manual inflation, the tubes
    became firm to the touch, and  the crew began to inflate the canopy.
    Bailing continued via a dinghy style piston-type pump, which proved
    tiring and ineffective. A standard scoop bailer would have worked
    infinitely better, being faster and less tiring. Had the Traveller been
    inflated firmly before launch, it would no doubt have remained drier
    and would have been easier to board. 
    
    Drogue Deployment
    Each craft was supplied with a conical drogue mesuring approximately
    24" in diameter by 36" long. The MD-2's drogue was tethered to one
    "end" of the raft, so that the doors face across the wind. The valise,
    which was attached to the raft near the port side door, created
    substantial drag which caused the raft to yaw about 45! away from the
    wind. The attachment point of the drogue could be moved from side to
    side along a section of one of the perimeter lifelines, allowing some
    variation in drift orientation. It appeared that the attachment point
    of the drogue to the raft would chafe over time, possibly causing
    either the lifeline or drogue line to part.
    The Traveller's drogue is deployed off the starboard beam, which
    increases the stability of the raft in heavy conditions according to
    tests run by the National Maritime Institute Limited. The drogue is
    made from a brilliant orange mesh that is easy to see from rescue craft
    due to its distinctive color. It uses a substantially longer rode of
    approximately 75' as compared to the MD-2's 35'. The Traveller has a
    length of plastic tubing to protect the line and the tube fabric where
    the line passes over the inflation tube.
    Both drogues would occasionally cavitate on the surface as large waves
    hit the rafts. The Switlik drogue actually broke the surface several
    times, although it rapidly sank back into the water. Neither appeared
    unstable, and neither fouled. While we did not experiment with
    different drogue line lengths, it would be interesting to compare the
    rate of drift and the effect on comfort in the raft using different
    line lengths. In our opinion, both drogues would benefit from
    additional weighting.
    
    Canopy Design
    The Switlik MD-2 has a single canopy support tube which is placed
    outboard of the upper inflation chamber. The height and location of the
    canopy support creates sitting headroom for at least four of the
    occupants: two at each end under the vertical portion of the tube. The
    other two crew members would be adjacent to the door, and would have
    headroom if the doors were open. As with other Switlik rafts, the
    canopy is bright orange on the outside, and blue on the inside. The
    blue color is intended to reduce motion sickness orange canopies often
    seem to induce. The primary effect is to dramatically darken the
    interior since the combination of the orange and blue colors
    effectively block most of the light. 
    The two doors zip from bottom to top, allowing the crew members to
    trade off freeboard for ventilation and visibility as conditions
    dictate. There is no designated viewing port. Since the doors zip up,
    there is a large variation in how much protection vs. ventilation is
    available. In the conditions which we encountered, it was possible to
    stand in the raft and grab the arch tube for stability, so that one's
    height of eye and visibility was increased.
    As expected, it was claustrophobic with both doors shut tightly, and
    neither crew member desired to remain in that state for more than a
    minute. Light streamed in through the stitching holes along the zipper
    and it appeared that water might leak in, although none did during our
    test. The 9 o'clock canopy door had a small rain collection tube,
    although there was no trough for guiding the rain to the tube.
    Fabric tape zipper pulls were located on the outside of the raft, with
    only the standard zipper pulls on the inside. This seemed odd, since
    the need is greatest on the inside of the raft.
    The Traveller's canopy is made from a bright orange heat welded vinyl
    fabric that has multiple lengthwise tubes. It is inflated using the
    hand inflation pump, and forms a lengthwise arched tube which covers
    the hull from the transom to the aft edge of the covered bow. 
    The Traveller 's canopy can be completely removed, or removed from one
    side to open the raft to the elements, as when sailing. The ends of the
    canopy serve as viewing and ventilation ports, and their openings can
    be adjusted with the light line which is provided. To stand watch, it
    is necessary to sit on the transom or forward on one of the tubes, as
    the canopy effectively covers the entire interior of the boat.
    The canopy is laced in place with light line using a chain stitch that
    can be removed in less than a minute. It is far slower to install, but
    can be done with the boat in the water. Normally the boat would be
    stored with the canopy in place, so that it would only have to be
    inflated to be ready for use. A system for compressed gas inflation of
    the canopy is available as an option.
    The thickness of the inflated canopy provides both insulation in cold
    weather and flotation in the event of a capsize. Each end of the canopy
    can be drawn down tightly with lines to seal the interior.
    Headroom is limited, although there is enough if the occupants sit on
    the Traveller's sole. If the sailing rig is fitted, the canopy can be
    partially deflated and pulled back so that the mast has clearance.
    The Traveller canopy can be partially deflated to form a rain water
    collection pocket, and the sails make effective "catchers" as well.
    
    Floor Design
    The MD-2 was supplied with an optional inflatable floor, which is made
    from a light heat welded fabric in two halves. These are inflated
    orally using a tube similar to those found on inflatable lifejackets.
    The "tufted" type floor used C-shaped welds to hold the floor in a more
    or less even thickness. This was comfortable, but not as effective as
    the drop-stitch floor of the Switlik Coastal raft we tested in 1991
    which has a practically flat surface which did not collect water. 
    We managed to tear off one of the tie-down straps for the floor when we
    re-boarded the raft from the water, but this did not puncture the air
    chamber. It is not obvious why the floor is supplied in two halves, but
    it does complicate the installation and leaves a seam in the center
    which seems unnecessary.
    The Traveller has a plywood floor glued into the fabric of the hull.
    This makes it somewhat effective for insulation, and also makes it
    difficult to lose items since there are no intermediate layers. It is
    quite solid under foot. One area where the plywood floor is clearly
    superior to inflatable floors is that many survivors have mentioned
    "fish hits" where large fish (including sharks) have bumped against the
    bottom of the raft's occupants, resulting in painful bruises. 
    
    Ease of Familiarization
    Once the inflation lanyard/painter ion the MD-2 s pulled , there is
    little need for further instructions (a good thing since there are
    almost no instructions in evidence). The floor must be blown up and
    attached, and the contents of the survival pack need to be inspected,
    but for the most part the occupants are left to their own devices. The
    survival pack is tied to the interior of the raft and is packed in
    bright yellow fabric to make it easy to find. The knife is in the
    standard location by one door, along with a water activated light. The
    drogue was deployed by yanking it free and allowing it to stream
    upwind. The knife was a collapsible design.
    The Traveller was equally devoid of instructions, although anyone
    familiar with assembling an inflatable sportboat or a sailing dinghy
    should have no trouble during the day. At night we suspect that it
    might be very difficult, since the boat needs to have its buoyancy
    chambers topped off, be supplied with additional gear including the
    sailing rig, have its canopy inflated, and be launched. This challenge
    would be reduced if the boat were kept fully inflated.
    If the Traveller is launched before the canopy is inflated, it becomes
    challenging to complete the process since it is necessary to duck under
    the unsupported canopy to find the pump, bailers, sailing rig, etc.
    This proved very nauseating for at least one participant (but there
    wasn't much during the day of testing that wasn't nauseating). It would
    be very difficult to complete the process of readying the boat for
    survival either on deck in the dark, or in the water in the dark.
    One advantage, however, is that the Traveller can be inflated manually
    and deflated any number of times before the actual emergency. In fact,
    it is likely to be been used many times as a dinghy, so that the
    location of valves and other equipment would be known to the users.
    Also, depending on the safety orientation of the ship's crew, mock
    drills could be carried out with the exception of the CO2 inflation
    which would simulate the process of abandoning ship. While this is
    possible with a life raft, it is impractical to actually inflate the
    raft since it must be professionally re-packed each time, and repeated
    inflation has a tendency to gradually weaken the fabric.
    
    Air Holding Ability/Ease of Repair
    The MD-2 has the traditional stacked independent buoyancy tubes. The
    canopy  arch tube is an integral part of the upper tube. In other
    words, if the upper tube is violated, the arch tube deflates. Other
    rafts have a one-way valve connecting the arch tube to the upper
    buoyancy tube so that the arch tube remains inflated separately.
    The urethane based MD-2 fabric is light and strong, and is unlikely to
    be punctured except at the time of launching. It comes with several
    clamp-type leak stoppers in its equipment bag. No air loss was noticed
    during the test.
    The Traveller uses a heavier Hypalon/neoprene fabric as befits an
    inflatable dinghy which might be used on beaches and other rough
    surfaces. Its patch kit consists of a container with patches, glue, and
    sandpaper. While not tested, this is probably more suitable to
    land-based repairs, and would be difficult to use at sea. The twin
    chambers of each side of the Traveller provide redundant air holding if
    one tube is somehow damaged. No air loss was noticed during the test.
    
    Survival Kits
    The survival kits packed in most liferafts, as has been documented in
    numerous articles on survival in the past, are meager in their
    contents. Depending on the degree of completeness supplied by the
    manufacturer, and purchased by the customer, life rafts may or may not
    contain water, flares, fishing kits, first aid kits, repair kits, etc.
    Life raft buyers are extremely resistant to paying for more complete
    kits when buying the raft; however at sea, they believe that every kit
    is woefully inadequate.
    Every life raft owner should know what his/her raft contains. If
    unknown, it should be documented at the raftUs next repack. No one, in
    our opinion, should rely solely on the equipment supplied in even the
    highest specification life raft, but should rather augment it with a
    separate kit.
    This separate kit, often referred to as an Abandon Ship Bag, should
    contain an EPIRB, a water maker, and additional SOLAS-grade flares at a
    minimum. Although these items can be packed within the raft, there are
    numerous stories of needing these items without needing to launch the
    raft. Therefore, we believe that they should be in the raft only if
    there are similar items carried on board outside of the raft.
    
    Personal Volume/Floor Space
    The MD-2 meets Ocean Racing Council specifications, which require 4 sq.
    ft. per person, and minimum equipment inventories. We only attempted to
    put four men inside, and while crowded, it was not horribly cramped.
    The octagonal shape provides fewer places to get out of each other's
    way, compared to the oval shape of the Switlik Coastal. he use of a
    vertical canopy arch tube, which is set outboard of the upper tube,
    provided excellent headroom reminiscent of the Plastimo Offshore raft
    we found most comfortable in our last test.
    The Traveller's interior beam is only about 20" across. Since the
    canopy attaches to the center of the top of each hull tube, it is
    possible for three persons to sit on top of the buoyancy tubes on each
    side, with one's head bowed toward the center and with one's knees
    against those on the opposite side. With only two aboard, the
    Traveller's space seemed cramped but adequate. Three or more would have
    been pretty horrible. The daggerboard trunk/thwart and the bow dodger
    take up a lot of interior space that might be used for reclining,
    although one's legs can be extended underneath both items if seated on
    the floor. If the person on watch were to sit forward, while the person
    asleep were to lie aft, it might be possible to rest on board.
    In general, the Traveller felt too small to spend an appreciable time
    aboard, and it would benefit by being taller and beamier before we
    would consider it comfortable at sea.
    The ORC regulations require 4 sq. ft. of floor area per person, which
    the MD-2 achieves with its 24 sq. ft. The Traveller has 15.75 sq. ft.,
    so it barely misses the requirement for a four person life raft. 
    
    Capsize Resistance and Righting
    An important part of the test was to purposely capsize the rafts and
    then attempt to right them and re-board them. While we purposely held
    the test in rough conditions, neither raft felt unstable when inflated,
    bailed, and with the drogue deployed. 
    We tried to establish the relative capsize resistance by loading the
    rafts with all the weight on one side. In the case of the MD-2, two
    crewmembers sat in the starboard side gunwale, which caused the port
    side to lift rapidly. It took a short time for the water to drain from
    the ballast pockets, whereupon a wave hit the raft and it capsized
    quickly. Observers reported that the pockets appeared to be 1/3 full of
    water, at most, at the time of capsize, although the raft had been
    deployed for 30 minutes or so. We were frankly surprised at how easy it
    was to capsize the raft.
    The raft floated at about a 135! angle of inclination, supported by the
    arch tube. One crewman was able to climb aboard the overturned raft,
    pull the righting strap free of its snaps, and pull the raft over
    easily.
    Both crew members boarded without assistance through the doors by means
    of the webbing ladders. Like all such ladders, they tended to swing
    under the raft and it took several tries to use the ladder correctly.
    At night it was felt that the ladders would have been hard to find and
    use, particularly if the victim were hypothermic.
    The MD-2 was capsized a second time to check our observations. In this
    case, the raft was capsized with three persons on board, and it was
    only necessary to get them on one side of the raft to initiate the
    capsize. Righting was accomplished by reaching up to the webbing and
    pulling the raft over while still in the water.
    When righted, the MD-2 had 40 gallons of water inside after the first
    capsize, and perhaps 10 gallons after the second capsize. The
    difference was due to the method of righting. Since we did not stand on
    the raft during the second righting, there seemed to be less chance of
    scooping water as it came over.
    To find out why the MD-2 capsized reasonably easily, we examined the
    ballast bags while the raft was upright. Even though ballasted with
    chain, the bags tended to collapse and not hold their "bread box"
    shape. We are of the opinion that stiff stainless steel wire or the
    equivalent might be used to force the bags into the shape resulting in
    the maximum volume.
    The Traveller was capsized twice with the canopy in place. Since there
    are no openings athartships, the two crewmembers had to lean against
    the inside of canopy, opposite of the drogue. The life boat rolled
    reluctantly, and the crew ended up lying inside the inflatable canopy.
    This attitude could have been maintained for some time without
    discomfort; in fact, the Traveller was arguably more comfortable upside
    down than right side up. 
    To right the Traveller, the crew simply rolled their bodies in the
    opposite direction, which caused the boat to resume its upright
    position. The boat was practically dry when righted, with only a gallon
    or so left in the hull. This proved to be a much more efficient method
    of bailing than the pump. 
    We also tried to use the catamaran righting method of using a line on
    the high side of the boat (in this case the drogue rode) to pull the
    boat over. This worked well. Crew members in the water could either
    slide inside the canopy, or right the boat from the outside. If they
    elected to use the "inside" method, they would avoid the need to
    re-board the raft over the bow.
    
    Ease of Crew Recovery
    Most yachtsman's rafts are equipped with a throwing quoit and line to
    assist in making contact with a person in the water. We threw the MD-2
    quoit (the Traveller was not so equipped) using a variety of different
    techniques, and were able to throw it about 25-40 feet. The weighted
    rubber ring was effective against the wind as well as downwind.
    To simulate the recovery of a disabled crew member, one person in the
    water  was pulled aboard by a crewman in the raft. We used a surf
    rescue technique where the victim faces away from the raft, and the
    rescuer lifts the victim' by the armpits while falling backwards into
    the raft. This worked reasonably well , although we were of equal size
    and not hypothermic. We did not attempt to deflate the MD-2 top tube to
    lower the freeboard, which is apparently a technique that can be used
    to make the process easier for rescuers who are of smaller stature.
    The method for the Traveller is somewhat different: the low bow area is
    used as a boarding ramp, and the reduced buoyancy there makes for much
    lower freeboard. This reduced freeboard made recovering the person in
    the water much easier.
    
    Water Shipped at Sea/Bailing
    The MD-2 was almost entirely dry when initially inflated, and took on
    water only as wet crew members climbed in and out, and as it was
    righted after capsize. The high sides of the raft seemed unlikely to
    allow water in except when struck by breaking waves. The whitecaps that
    were prevalent during our trails did not cause water to come aboard.
    Once it had been bailed dry initially, the Traveller remained dry as
    well . Some water leaked in through the grommets in the dodger where
    the sailing control lines passed through the fabric. In severe
    conditions, it is possible that water might leak under the canopy along
    the top of each buoyancy tube, but we did not notice any during the
    test.
    Once again, a bailer with a flat bottom would have been far superior to
    the dinghy-style piston pump we used.
    
    Rate of Drift/Maneuverability/Sailability
    While it was difficult to determine the rate of drift of the rafts with
    any certaintly due to the strong currents in the vicinity of the test,
    we estimate that, in 25 knots of wind, the rafts drifted at about one
    knot. 
    The MD-2's drift rate could have been increased by retrieving the
    drogue and/or collapsing the ballast pockets with a line under the
    raft. Otherwise, it was not obvious how to affect its course.
    While testing the stability of the Tinker, a large container ship was
    noted approaching the ship channel, and about four miles to seaward.
    Judging this to be an opportune time to get out of the ship channel, we
    elected to erect the sailing rig immediately.
    The Traveller 's sailing rig consists of a three-piece jointed mast,
    shrouds with adjusters, boom, two sails, and some running rigging. The
    kit also includes a kick-up rudder and a daggerboard. After striking
    the canopy, the crew of two were able to assemble the sailing rig in
    about 10 minutes. With about 20 knots of wind, only the jib was used,
    and it propelled the boat at 3-4 knots. There was some trouble with the
    kick-up rudder, but that was remedied and the boat remained under
    control. Total distance sailed was probably four miles in very rough
    water.
    The sailing kit, while effective, consists of numerous small items, the
    loss of any one of which would have rendered the sailing rig
    inoperable. For example, the shackles were the loose pin type. The mast
    sections were not joined with shock cord like tent poles. Because this
    was also the first time that the rig had been stepped, we would
    anticipate that tricks could be employed by an experienced crew to make
    it easier in successive attempts.
    This is really where the two craft differed the most: the MD-2 is
    designed to be a stable, practically immobile, survival platform in
    which the occupants can safely wait for rescue, assuming the rescue
    agencies have been alerted due to an EPIRB signal or visual sighting.
    The Traveller provides the option of sailing to a place where a rescue
    is more likely, or conceivably to land. Several accounts exist of
    survival in Tinker dinghies where the crew has been able to sail to a
    higher traffic area and be rescued.
    
    Conclusions
    Nearly all boaters who travel out of sight of land should have some
    sort of survival raft in our opinion. The numerous documented cases of
    vessels sinking, due to known causes or unknown, and the short time
    that a person can survive without protection makes life rafts a
    necessary part of offshore survival gear. 
    The craft tested in this test represent two of the best examples of
    their type: a stable, commodious, unmaneuverable life raft capable of
    sheltering six occupants; and a multipurpose, maneuverable life boat
    that can hold five as a dinghy, and 2-3 as a life boat. The Traveller
    proved that is indeed sailable, and stable, under our test conditions.
    We have summarized our conclusions by listing the outstanding features
    and shortcomings of each type of craft tested. Note that these comments
    are specifically aimed at the craft tested: there are life rafts and
    dinghies which are far worse than our samples, and which may have
    additional shortcomings.
    
    Life Raft Advantages:
    1.      Life raft contains minimum survival inventory even without
    additional gear bag.
    2.      Rapid deployment technique does not require much practice
    technique. Most life rafts are identical in operation, and require only
    general familiarization.
    3.      Optional "automatic" hydrostatic deployment available
    4.      Reasonable area per person when loaded to capacity. Good
    headroom.
    5.      High stability when loaded evenly.
    6.      Good environmental protection.
    7.      Large search target.
    8.      Rugged construction and reliability5
    9.      High freeboard reduces water shipped in heavy seas.
    
    Life Raft Disadvantages:
    1.      If capsized, occupants will likely have to right it from the
    outside, exposing them to heat loss.
    2.      High freeboard makes it difficult to board from the water.
    3.      Stability of the raft depends on the use of a drogue; if the
    drogue is lost, the raft is more likely to capsize.
    4.      Annual re-packing expense expected to cost $200 over the life
    of the raft. Risk of deterioration if raft is not re-packed, and
    possible deterioration between repack dates.
    5.      Single floor life rafts promote heat loss and are very
    uncomfortable in cold water
    6.      Maneuverability, even using paddles, is practically nil.
    7.      Canopy deterioration has been reported which makes collected
    water unpalatable.
    8.      Inability to practice MOB drills without re-packing raft.
    
    Life Boat Advantages:
    1.      Can be sailed or rowed to land or to somewhere where the chance
    of rescue is increased.
    2.      Multiple opportunities to collect rain water, using sails or
    canopy, which will have less tendency to pollute the water.
    3.      Boarding is relatively easy over the bow.
    4.      Canopy provides buoyancy when inverted, and hypothermia
    protection when upright and inverted.
    5.      Can be righted from inside the craft, with less heat loss.
    6.      Heavy construction using Hypalon fabric.
    7.      Wooden floor protects against fish impacts.
    8.      Wooden floor offers some hypothermia protection and cannot
    deflate with a loss of properties.
    9.      Redundant air holding in each "side" of the boat.
    10.     Opportunity for Abandon Ship Drills due to re-packable design.
    11.     No annual maintenance.
    
    Life Boat Disadvantages:
    1.      Low freeboard makes water intrusion more likely.
    2.      Less comfortable, especially when loaded with more than two or
    three individuals.
    3.      Does not meet ORC size specifications for more than 3 persons,
    and fails ORC standards in many areas.
    4.      Weight of complete craft is heavier than many cruisers will be
    able to launch easily.
    5.      More owner responsibility in making sure that craft is ready
    for use at sea6
    6.      More incremental processes prior to launch.
    7.      Color of canopy is nauseating while inside during the day.
    8.      Likelihood of launching boat with substantial water aboard if
    not done correctly.
    
    PARTICIPANTS:
    Sea Star
    Capt. Ray Thackeray, Sea Star Yachting Products, Skipper and "Victim"
    Amy Ewing, Masterworks, Documentation 
    Tim Schaaf, Masterworks, Video crew
    Dan Spradlin, Deckhand
    
    Chuck Hawley, West Marine, "Victim"
    Paul "Pepe" Parsons, West Marine, Deckhand
    Howard Wright, West Marine, Helmsman
    Scott Lonsway, West Marine, Photographer
    Chris Smith, West Marine, Deckhand
    Linda Day, West Marine, Deckhand
    
    Vendors:
    Switlik Parachute Company, Trenton, NJ
    Henshaw Inflatables Limited, Somerset, England
    Navico Navigation and Communications Systems
    
    FOOTNOTES:
    1       The bow dodger of the Traveller covers an area approximately 2
    feet in length, which could be used for storage or leg room. It is a
    wedge-shaped area which tapers towards the bow.
    2       While the Traveller canopy can collect rain, the rules require
    that "means shall be provided for collecting rain". It is not obvious
    if this has to be a special apparatus, or whether a method is
    sufficient.
    3       The Traveller has an outer lifeline along about 60% of its
    length and no interior lifeline.
    4       With stacked tube rafts, the floor is left unsuppoted if the
    bottom tube deflates, while the canopy is unsupported if the upper tube
    deflates and the arch tube is not independent.
    5       This is primarily an attribute of Switlik rafts which use
    polyurethane coated nylon and heat welded seams. Other rafts employ
    different fabrics, which may not have the same properties. Other
    manufacturers also seal the raft in a vacuum bag to protect it against
    the elements.
    6       This is arguably an advantage, and is consistent with the life
    boat "participatory" survival philosophy.
    
    
2146.2UNIFIX::BERENSAlan BerensMon Jul 25 1994 13:1814
re .0: 

Given the most interesting report in .1, I'm not sure how you reached
the conclusion that a Tinker is acceptable alternative to a liferaft.
I'd be most especially concerned about the Tinker inflation, launching,
rigging, and capacity issues. The conclusion I draw from .1 is that when
it comes time to replace my Avon dinghy, I'll seriously consider buying
a Tinker dinghy. I'll also continue to carry a normal liferaft. Our boat
is considerably smaller than yours. Inflating our Avon dinghy on board
is less than easy in good weather. I can't really imagine trusting my
life to my ability to inflate and get aboard a Tinker (with all
necessary gear) rough seas. 

Alan
2146.3And the advantages...SX4GTO::WANNOORMon Jul 25 1994 22:0498
    That's a conclusion one might reach when reading the report, but as in
    all boat (and lifecraft design), it's all a matter of compromise.
    Agreed, a traditional liferaft is clearly easier to launch, assuming
    that one is using the Tinker rolled up in the quick-release harness and
    has to be rolled out and inflated with the CO2 cannisters. The liferaft
    merely needs to be thrown over the side. On the other hand, a cruiser
    could be using the Tinker fully or partially inflated on deck, as many
    inflatable users do, dramatically simplifing the equation. Or on
    coastal trips, one may well have the Tinker hanging fully inflated in
    davits. The report does paint a rather one-dimensional picture there.
    
    That's where the liferaft (possible) advantages end, in our opinion.
    The conclusions at the end of the report spell out very important
    issues, for example:
    
    1)	To right a capsized liferaft, one has to exit, climb up the floor,
    grab a ring or strap and then pull it over, then swim around to the
    entrance, try to find the rope ladder and do the usual gymnastics to
    climb in, assuming the liferaft does not capsize on you. Let alone
    hypothermia getting to you!
    
    The Tinker was proven to be more stable and if capsized, still
    comfortable, the occupants above the water on the inflatable canopy.
    Righting a capsize was done from the inside, an obvious advantage.
    Also, you might have noticed that the Tinker's bouyancy figures comply
    with the ORC rules for 6 people. The canopy, which is not included in
    this equasion, add 700lb more buoyancy and the roof's buoyancy gives
    the Tinker the capability for self-righting, like a good boat should
    have.
    
    2) Ability of the Tinker to navigate, using either sail or oars, to
    best chance of rescue. There have been many reports of survivors
    passing islands, shipping lanes, etc. in a liferaft with no hope of
    paddling more than a few feet!
    
    3) Ruggedness. Liferafts are designed for light weight and for rescue
    within a few days. There are many reports from survivors demonstrating
    that their liferafts deteriorated around them, especially long-term
    survivors; this includes punctures, chafing, loss of drogue because of
    the toy-like quality of lines and equipment, etc. A Tinker, being of
    Hypalon construction like an Avon, is clearly more rugged and likely to
    survive long-term or launch damage.
    
    4) Far better opportunity to collect water, using sails or canopy in a
    Tinker, than using the tiny water collection pockets in a typical
    liferaft canopy.
    
    5) The liferaft needs, over five years, a typical $1350 for inspections
    and repacking. We will inspect our own Tinker.
    
    We did the following calculation, comparing a liferaft plus dinghy,
    which was our first option, then the Tinker rigged as a lifeboat. Look
    at this, and bear in mind that most people have a limited budget....
    
    11'2" AVON AND LIFERAFT:
    	Plastimo 6-person inc. 1 pint water each, repair kit, fishing kit
    	paddles, pump, bailer, sponge, line, flashlight, 3 flares
    		$4435
    Inspection and repacking over 5 years
    		$1350
    Avon Roll Away 3.50
    		$2875
    Total	$8660
    
    TINKER SAILING DINGHY AND LIFEBOAT RIG WITH PANIC BAG
    Tinker 12' dinghy with saiing rig and pump, repair kit & oars
    		$3764
    Tinker lifeboat kit inc. storm drogue, CO2 inflation, canopy
    		$1432
    6 ACR strob/flashlights
    		$119.70
    RLB-24 Category II 406 EPIRB
    		$899
    6 emergency space blankets
    		$29.70
    1 Thermal protective suit
    		$27.95
    Pains-Wessex ORC Category 2 flare pack
    		$339
    Food rations 3,600 calories/pack (x6) six day supply for six
    		$37.50
    Signalling mirror
    		$6.95
    Emergency drinking water packs 2 gallons (3 day supply)
    		$15.55
    Rescue throw bag heaving line 70'
    		$27.95
    ACR Radar Reflector-inflates with helium and flies 100' up
    		$159.95
    Emergency fishing kit and spear
    		$83.27
    PUR Survivor 06 watermaker 2 pints/hour
    		$499.50
    Total	$7442.02
    
    I know which I'd rather have!
    
    
2146.4not so simple .....UNIFIX::BERENSAlan BerensTue Jul 26 1994 10:1533
re .3:

You raise some good points, but let's agree to disagree. One thing you 
overlook is that you own a rather larger than average size boat. Most of 
us own boats much smaller than 51'. 

Smaller boats simply have less usable/available space. There isn't room
on my deck for an inflated dinghy, nor, with the design of my boat, are
davits an option (besides, no way would I leave a dinghy on davits when 
offshore, but that's another matter). Thus, either I have a traditional
liferaft or I take the (very large in my view) risk of trying to inflate
a Tinker and get all of the loose pieces aboard, quite possibly at night
and in a big sea. I don't find this a comforting idea. All of this
inflation and collecting of stuff takes time. Boats have (unfortunately)
been known to sink very quickly, ie, perhaps faster than one could
assemble and launch a Tinker. And I do usually sail with just one other 
person and even occasionally alone.

Also, in .1: "Three or more would have been pretty horrible" (referring 
to the space available in a Tinker). Do you sail your 51' boat with just
two aboard? 

Also, the capsizing mentioned in .1 was intentional. I have some Coast 
Guard reports of liferaft performance in much, much worse conditions 
than those in .1. The rafts did not always capsize. Moreover, liferaft
designs vary. Did you consider a Givens raft when thinking about the
capsize issue? 

Of course, your decision is the right one for you. I think, however, 
that making one's personal choice is rather more difficult and complex
than you indicate. 

Alan
2146.5SX4GTO::WANNOORWed Jul 27 1994 01:3153
    Yes, we considered a Givens. Too expensive. Also, having a liferaft AND
    a dinghy was too expensive. And the main disadvantage of a liferaft
    (e.g. no chance for self-rescue or navigating to best chance of rescue)
    was not for us, too much a passive option. As you say, this is an area
    where some people feel happy with liferafts, others just a hard dinghy
    with positive flotation, others an Avon. We feel that for cost, sheer
    survivability in bad conditions, ability to fully practice abandon ship
    and train crew, etc. are more than compensation for the more complex
    launch procedure. We not have it down to a couple of minutes, including
    panic bag and sail bag.
    
    We feel that a crew that has fully practised an Abandon-ship drill and
    has the Panic Bag properly packed, in a sailing Tinker lifeboat, has a
    far better chance of survival, because they are forced to take more
    responsibility for their survival. That's the lifeboat philosophy.
    
    We've discovered that most people with liferafts feel that once they've
    bought it and installed it, they can forget everything else, and
    sometimes even the yearly inspections!! Larry and Lin Pardey recently
    documented that 95% of liferafts inspected have a serious deficiency.
    That's not good enough for us.
    
    As for the report mentioning cramped conditions, that also turns out to
    be a matter of opinion. Last year, we had the opportunity to get into
    an Avon liferaft passed downwind to us by a freighter that was kind
    enough to stop and give us fuel southwest of Burmuda, and I'd rather be
    one of six in our hard floored Tinker and drier, not worrying about
    leaks or fish hits (A typical Dorado is reported to hit like a punch
    from a 200lb man!); we've tried six mixed size people, and it's true
    that they can't all lie down, but at least they all have their own seat
    on a tube, knees between knees and heads on shoulders. In a typical
    soft-floor liferaft, bodies are all on top of each other, or people are
    sitting in pools of water being hit by fish from below, black and blue
    with bruises.
    
    Try reading "Survivor" by Alan Greenwald, as we did, for these typical
    stories...
    
    The ORC specifies 4 sq' per person, and the Tinker does not meet that,
    but there is at least a proper seating arrangement. I think that life
    in any kind of liferaft is going to be pretty horrible, however, and
    that's not the main concern. Rather, in our opinion, its:
    
    	Ability to sail or row to best chance of rescue
    	Capability of righting a capsize without having to exit
    	Solid floor (and no saltwater boils!)
    	Cheap enough to allow our budget to stretch to a watermaker,
    		a VHF handheld, 406MHz EPIRB and big set of pyrotechnics
    	Ability to perform full abandon-ship drills, like on big ships.
    	When we pack the lifeboat before offshore passage, we *know* it's
    		in good condition.
                                             
    	
2146.6NEWOA::GIDDINGS_DThe third world starts hereWed Jul 27 1994 06:1410
A lot of lessons were learnt after the 1979 Fastnet race, when a number of 
liferafts overturned and a few actually fell apart. I've seen a survival film
showing Avon liferafts being tested in winter off Iceland in a Force 14.
Impressive! Whether Tinkers are designed to withstand this sort of stuff
I wouldn't know.

I also know someone who hit a wreck off the Isle of Wight while racing.
The boat sank in less than 1 minute.

Dave 
2146.7SX4GTO::WANNOORWed Jul 27 1994 21:3910
    Well  to answer the question about Tinkers in high winds...we got a
    copy of a video of tank tests comparing liferaft and Tinker stability,
    and it was shown that Tinkers are as good as or at least as stable as a
    typical offshore liferaft with water ballast pockets and drogue. As for
    ruggedness, well ther's obviously no comparision. The Tinker is
    designed as a working boat of Hypalon, rugged construction, and far
    stronger than any liferaft could be. Of course, that makes it heavier!
    I suppose that's all part of boat design compromise. But we've read
    reports of survivors in liferafts that had the rafts literally "folding
    up" around them.