Conference vicki::boats

    Ok, I'll start with some more questions.
    
    1.  How robust are outboard motors in rough water?   
        (this assumes a well maintained motor)
    
    2.  If, for instance, your motor dies, what are the proper techniques
        for keeping your boat under control in rough water?
    
    3.  What is the ratio of anchor line to depth of water?
    
    
    --Dale  

    
    
    i'll answer 2 & 3.
    
    2. sea anchor
    
    3. the recommended ratio:  7 or 10 to 1, i also will include 1ft.
       of chain for each ft. of boat length.  and for the finale...
    
             A BRUCE ANCHOR    WHAT ELSE.....
    
    
    JIm

    Why would outboards be any less robust?   Modern outboards are far more
    reliable than sterndrives.  That's why you see most medium size (20-28
    ft) near-offshore fishing boats (Grady/Whaler/Mako/etc) with outboards
    these days (twins if necessary).
    
    The standard way to keep a powerless craft out of trouble in heavy seas
    is to keep the bow into the wind/waves with a sea anchor.
    
    Assuming good holding ground, you need a lot (5:1 or more) of scope to
    anchor in rough weather.  This usually precludes anchoring unless the
    water is shallow (or you have a huge amount of anchor line).  However,
    it is my understanding that you don't really want to be in shallow
    water in a blow - it will make the waves closer together and more
    likely to break.

    I'll try to take 1.  I've buried my outboard (1987 yamaha 200) a few
    times when backing up.  Haven't had a problem, yet, but it is getting
    old.  You've gotta make sure that the engine stays dry, and that you
    don't choke the engine by blocking the exhaust ports with water or get
    water in internally through any exposed exhaust ports.  
    
    Outboards are more exposed, but because of that they're designed to
    try and stay dry.  

re .2:    
    
>>>             A BRUCE ANCHOR    WHAT ELSE.....
    
Well, depending on the bottom, a Danforth type, a CQR, or a Herreshoff 
could be better. The general concensus (supported by practical 
experience and anchor testing) is that there is no one best anchor for
all possible conditions. Each type has virtues and faults that must be
taken into account when choosing which to use. 

    Ill take a crack at these interesting questions too:
    
    1. I agree... keep the bow into the seas.  Sea anchor is good way.
    (How many of you CARRY a sea anchor on your small less than 20 foot
    boat?) I don't, maybe I should.
    
    2. Outboard failure:  This is a question I have thought about alot.
    There is NO way you can insure your not going to have an engine
    failure.  All you can do is plan for it.  With a single engine boat
    your at the 'mercy' of that engine.  So, I have a 5 1/2 HP backup
    outboard on the transom in case the main outboard fails. (which it 
    DID two weekends ago... blew a head gasket).  The 5.5. got me home
    slowly... but it got me there.  Also I carry a two way radio, flares,
    back up anchor (two anchors total) and you can always pray.
    I have been in some pretty rough weather (which came up on me) with
    my outboard, the case was getting DRENCHED but it kept running.
    
    Getting pooped over the stern by following seas is my 'biggest'
    concern. Lets face it, an outboard won't run underwater. Smile
    
    Its news to me that sterndrives aren't as reliable as OB's. I had
    assumed (apprently incorrectly) that it was the other way around.
    Why are OB's more reliable? Is it because of the complexity of the
    stern drives drive unit.... the gearing around corners and all?
    I would think an essentially inboard engine (sten drive) would be
    more reliable?
    
    A friend of mine was out off the Isles of Shoals a few weeks ago and
    BOTH outboards quit. He had to be towed in.  (The moral, don't have
    twin outboards share a COMMON fuel source.)
    
    Anchors:  It depends on the bottom conditions.  I have read extensively
    on this subject.  There is no one anchor thats best for every
    condition.  Mushrooms are great for mud but would be a mooring anchor.
    
    CQR's are great for rough (rocky bottoms) as well as ok in sand in mud.
    
    Danforths are good in bottoms other than flat rock but would jam easily
    in boulder type bottoms.
    
    According to my reading... the Danforth is about as good an ALL AROUND
    anchor your going to find.  The CQR seems to lag the Danforth in
    holding power POUND FOR POUND on a sand or mud bottom.  But the CQR
    would beat the Danforth on a scrabble or rocky bottom.  If your
    cruising you want a HEAVY anchor just to be able to PENETRATE through
    kelp or a scrabble bottom.  The BRUCE anchor (in the article) came
    in behind the Danforth and CQR.
    
    Scope:  Five to one is a minimum,  7 to one is much better, and for
    storm conditions at least 10 to one or MORE.
    
    

    Your basic inboard engine is just as reliable as an outboard.  The
    problem is that a stern drive is an engineering kludge which no amount
    of fixes can work around.   Too many clutch/shift problems for my
    taste, not to mention the cooling system and outdrive "boot", both of
    which manage to put rubber gaskets into stress-prone areas.
    
    The other thing (and I don't know  why this is true) is that there
    appears to have been significant investment in outboard technology
    relatively recently whereas the stern drive appears to be standing
    still.
    
    If I'm wrong, why do 80% of lake cruising carpeted Bayliners have
    sterndrives while 80% of the Grady/Whaler/Robalo/Proline/Mako/et al
    fishing boats are sold with outboards?  Surely it isn't easier to fish
    with an outboard in the way.
    
    (Sure to start some flames but this file has been pretty dull since
    Rick W left  :-).

    Ok... the outdrive is mechanically alot more complex.  I agree. 
    Complexity tends to = more opportunities for breakdowns.  You 
    described my impression of outdrives, I just wanted to hear someone
    else say it.
    
    Jeff

    Gee, it looks like you all haven't had any more than speculative
    experience with rough water, so I'm approaching the obvious conclusion
    that
    
    
    
    You're all a bunch of motorheads with no experience.
    
    
    
    <GRINS>

    Now what would make you say THAT John?  Roughwater experience?  Well
    I guess the fact that we are still alive means that we havn't had TOO
    much roughwater experience.
    
    Smile
    
    Jeff

    <back to .7>
    Ok Jim, I dont usually jump into these subjects cause opinions are
    like... well you know.  But like you said, it's alittle dull so
    what the heck:
    
    Yea, carpeted lake boats have sterndrives; 
    real boats have outboards!  :>)
    
    I kinda think that may be a matter of function in the smaller 'real
    boats'.  It may add some hinderance to fish around an outboard, but
    not as much as having to hop over and around a motor box housing the
    inboard power for an I/O right at the stern.  This is much less an
    issue on a lake boat as the motor box (padded with built in drink
    holders of course) provides a needed function as a place to rest your
    quiche and Evian while you fish the dog (or kids) out of the drink 
    with your boathook.  
    
    OF course, if the boat (either) is large enough to have height allowing 
    the motor to be under the deck then inboards are the 'only logical choice" 
    eh?  I mean, who in thier right mind wants a mechanical kludge sticking
    out the back of thier boat, or for that matter, wants to hang a butt
    ugly smoke belching dont even SOUND like a REAL MOTOR outboard off the
    back of a perfectly pretty boat if they dont absolutly have to cause
    the manufacturer couldnt or wouldnt figure out how to build a real
    motor into his boat????
    
    Speaking of recent advances in BUSBdeSlaRMo technology I cant agree
    with you more; And, it's about time.  I think stern drive
    technology is MATURE and RELIABLE while those other things really need
    some attention bad.  I know that when I am going down lake at night
    I try to follow an outbaord if at all possible. Even though the smell
    is bad and the buzz makes my ears hurt, the lack of bugs in the downwind 
    'fog' zone surrounding it makes it worth it.
    
    I hope I've provided some objective insight into the sterndrive vs.
    outboard comparison on this monday morning.  God, I wish I was still
    at the lake!
    
    See ya,  Tom Urban  (lake boater, Larson, Sterndrive)  
    
    

    Given the number of bearing, seals, internal and external
    greasefittings,  u-joints and the fact that all this runs at engine
    speed until the output shaft where it is reduced, I find it hard to 
    imagine this is more reliable than a straight shaft and one 90 degree
    turn turn to the prop.   Where do you get off saying that outboards
    need attention real bad?  4-cycles are out and the only discomfort
    of two-cycle smoke will be gone.
    
    
    Dale
    

    I believe .12 hit one point exactly..In the 20-30 foot range for a
    fishing boat (walk around etc.) you do end up with much more usable
    space with outboards verse I/O. In the larger boats (30+)you have enough
    free board such that the engines in an I/O or V-Drive are actually
    below the rear deck so space is less of an issue.
     As for anchor's..We used to overnight at various points in L.I. Sound
    and at Block I. and as everyone already noted the weather can change
    easily..In a larger boat the answer is always use two anchors in rough
    or high tide areas to insure you stay hooked..We had one Danforth and
    one CQR which worked very well..I would suggest on any boat that you
    have at least two types as you never know what type of bottom you are
    going to end up trying to hook to..
     As for weather no one mentioned fog..On the L.I. Sound it can move in
    so fast  such that it is beautifull and sunny where you are (say Block
    I.) so you leave and end up hitting a fog bank on the way in the sound.
    Nasty..If you play in the ocean I feel you should plan for the
    unexpected and have the proper navigation gear..Even with the gear when
    you finally have to rely on it 100% it is hard, because we are so 
    dependant on our visuals..
     I do agree that you should always try to plan for the best weather but
    even so it can change very fast..If you fish the canyons, you will at
    one point or another experience rough seas. Some times Long Island
    Sound was great and once you go out to open water, say going to
    Newport, everything changed. You have to plan for the unexpected.
     As for the comments about Sport Fishers/Convertables being poorly
    designed I tend to disagree. The transoms may look low compared to the
    main part of the boat but they are still 3+' high. On our 43 Bert,
    there were steps up to the main salon which kept it very dry, and
    the fishing area gets lots of water just backing down trying to land
    a good fish..I have been caught in very rough seas and just cannot 
    imagine getting sunk due to water over the stern..Oh well
    
    
    Jim
    

    In .12 I was serious about:
    
    <para 3> useable unobstructed space a strong consideration for 
             outboards vs inboards/sterndrives because of a protruding 
             motorbox in 'smaller' fishing boats.
    
    <para 4> When a boat becomes large enough (or a motor box is not an
             intrusion on function) then inboards become the most
             desireable choice due to relative simplicity (IMHO)
    
    <para5>  Sterndrives are relaiable and mature technology.  Not simple,
             not the most mechanically efficient, but from my own
             experiance, reliable.
    
    The rest of the note was written with tongue firmly planted in cheek
    ( well mostly). I thought I had indicated that but...
    
                                                       Tom
    

re .14:

>>>    I have been caught in very rough seas and just cannot 
>>>    imagine getting sunk due to water over the stern..Oh well
    
I too have been in very rough seas, and I can all too easily imagine 
being sunk by a wave coming in over the stern. The worst experience I've 
had at sea was spending nearly a day in a full gale in the Gulf of 
Maine. We (obviously) survived, but the gale sank two sportfishermen, 
one 38' and the other larger, one of them rather close to shore. 

Alan

    re. last few
    
    I fish a lot out in the waters off the Oregon Coast.  When you go out,
    the sea is, obviously, in your face.  I usually go out during slack
    tide to catch the bar at its best.  Some times it can get rough out
    there and you try to come back inside on a following sea.  You lose
    steerage as you come in, so power is a mandatory.  I've come in with
    18'-20' waves following and running at full power to keep them from
    catching and breaking over the stern.  We've lost a few from having
    just that thing happen.
    
    Ken

re big cockpits:

A simple calculation or two can be sobering. A cockpit 8' by 8' by 2' 
deep will hold 128 cubic feet of water, which is about 958 gallons, 
which weighs about 8200 pounds (sea water). It would take about 32 
minutes to pump this back over the side with a 30 gallon per minute
manual bilge (a 30 gpm manual pump is big).

Alan

    re .18
    
    Well put Alan. That really drives home the point. Don't play with
    mother nature, and think you will always win. You won't.
    
    							-mike-

    Aha, but 8200 lbs won't sink a hull with the foam flotation that most
    fishboats under 30' have.   Problem is that over 30' you can't
    physically put enough flotation in, so you get none.   I'm almost
    coming to the conclusion that a 30+ ft sportfisherman may be in fact
    less safe than a 25' Grady or the like.
    
    On the O/B vs I/O arguments, yeah these are all opinions - I've tried
    over the years to get actual facts but they are impossible to come by.
    I'm pretty sure that the MTBF of a sterndrive is lower than an outboard
    of the same year and approx power, but I can't prove it as a
    statistical fact averaged across all manufacturers.  In the case of
    Merc Alpha drives on 5.7L and larger engines, and in the case of
    certain model years of the OMC outdrive, I'm closer to certain than
    pretty sure, but again, I don't have numbers. 
    

    Whats an MTBF?  Your description of a cockpit filling was interesting
    and illustrated the point I was trying to make (in an earlier entry)
    about bilge pumps being essentially useless when large volumes of water
    are concerned.  Your example didn't mention the futility of trying to
    keep FURTHER boarding seas from REfilling the cockpit as you
    frantically pump. Of course your bows should be into the seas anyway
    but since you 'lost power' by getting pooped you better have a sea
    anchor.
    
    Those sportfishermen which were lost in the Gulf of Maine may well have
    gotten pooped running for shore.  Eyewitness Video TV show had an
    episode of a Donzi Sportfisherman getting overwhelmed in a storm off
    the West Coast.  One large sea boarded the boat over the BOW and
    knocked out the electronics and engines in one fell swoop.  If it had
    been over the stern they would have been in even WORSE shape (read sunk
    even FASTER).
    
    IMO boats intended for off shore use should have rounded cabin lines
    with virtually no flat surfaces for waves to bash in easily.  Decks
    should be watertight.  Transoms should be rounded, not the flat low
    forms found in so many 'offshore' sportsfishermen.
    
    Jeff