Peterduck
regular
Reged: 10/04/2002
Posts: 1032
Loc: Melbourne, Australia
|
|
I don't quite understand your "unhappy with the state of flux" about LEDs. I fitted the lightboard-mounted nav Lights on my old 'Swallow' with LEDs and they worked very well. Mind you, these were not the LED-in-a-bulb-base that you can buy over the counter. I made up my own setup, so that the LEDs were facing the lens of the lamp, maximising the output. Also, I used red and green LEDs, not white ones. I found that white LEDs in the coloured nav lamps produced a white spot in the middle of a coloured lens, and from a distance you couldn't see the colour properly. The stern light is of course, white.
Peter.
|
CBT
regular
Reged: 16/02/2005
Posts: 263
Loc: UK
|
|
Good subject for those who are working keeping a classic seaworthy. But is it really a case of either or? Maintaining a useable vessel in a seaworthy condition is in itself preservation. I do not have a problem either with uprating or improving the yacht's systems by using modern materials or fittings/instruments etc. Lots of newer stuff is better than the original and can be used without spoiling the 'originality'. 
|
oldharry
regular
Reged: 30/05/2001
Posts: 3942
Loc: North from the Nab about 10 mi...
|
|
While I agree that maintenance will help to preserve something, I dont think it is the same really: while maintenance does 'preserve' a boat in working order, I'm not at all sure a 'preserved' boat would be useable. Cutty Sark before she caught fire was a case in point. 'Preserved' yes. Seaworthy? very far from it. Would Victory or Warrior be able to put to sea in their current state of preservation? Let alone fight a battle and survive it - assuming there is anyone around who would actually know how to handle them.
--------------------
If you cant fix it, get a bigger hammer...
|
Clifford_Pope
regular
Reged: 28/10/2005
Posts: 788
Loc: Pembrokeshire
|
|
I think the main difference is that preservation places a premium on originality, both of design and of actual materials.
So a perfectly preserved Viking longship recovered from a salt marsh has original timber. It is important to conserve and preserve as much of that as possible, even if seriously weakened by age and decay.
An old boat that has been maintained however will have a constantly evolving turnover of materials and design features.
So if galvanised wire came in 1860 or Wykeham-Martin in 1885 or synthetic hemp lookalike in 1983, that's fine.
But it would be a major error on a "preserved" museum piece to incorporate a feature that hadn't been invented when the boat was launched.
|
Seagreen
regular
Reged: 30/07/2005
Posts: 1421
Loc: ked myself in the locker again...
|
|
I'm really all on the "maintenance" side of things.
Ideally, I'd like vessels which are still notionally whole, like the Cutty Sark, Trincomalee and Warrior, and the Victory for that matter, to be refurbished to working standard. The Warrior and Trincomalee and especially the Cutty Sark should be restored to full working order. There are enough people who skipper other square rigged sail training vessels to provide a pool of knowledge to provide expertise.
The Cutty Sark, since it has to have fundamental reconstruction anyway, ought to be brought back to working spec and be used again as a sail training vessel. I think the reconstruction budget is about £25 million, but rebuilding as a vessel maybe wouldn't add more than £5 million to the budget, and then she'd have a whole new lease of life.
--------------------
"Let Joy be unconfined!"
I'll get her chastity belt keys, then..
http://www.linesquall.co.uk
|
MBII
regular
Reged: 14/04/2005
Posts: 27
Loc: Gloucestershire
|
|
A very interesting discussion. We had major rot problems in the cabin tops and wheelhouse on Melissa which meant that the whole lid had to be replaced. The hard decision was firstly that 1960s building techniques had inherent structural problems. which had lead to the rot. The original structure was mahogany which does not like fresh water. The old adage that wooden yachts rot from the top down came to mind.
We finally went for teak which is much more rot resistant. We kept the cabin and wheelhouse shape but increased the size of the widows to let in more light and put in an extra door to the wheelhouse for safety as only having one could be a problem. We made a change in the main saloon which had two Pullman type berths which were almost impossible to use and meant the seats were very uncomfortable to sit in when having a meal at the table. Otherwise she is much as John Bain designed her.
The result is a yacht that is much lighter and more pleasant to live in and should last another 40 - 60 years without rot. I hope John Bain would have approved of the slight changes, but should we have used mahogany again and kept the windows to the original design? I wonder.
We have changed the Perkins 4107 36 hp for a Beta 50 hp because she was under powered and the Perkins even afte a rebuild sprayed oil arround and was environmentally unacceptable.
She is now much better suited to the family's needs and a joy to be on but not preserved in aspic.
I suppose a 45 year old yacht now has a new lease of life and is giving pleasure.
A bit of a ramble, but the thread struck a chord with my thought processes.
James
|
Bosunof
regular
Reged: 09/02/2007
Posts: 181
Loc: South Queensferry, Edinburgh
|
|
I agree that use is what preserves a yacht more than anything else. I enjoy adapting and the evidence on board is that previous owners have done that too. If making changes that are not too radical means that more happy useage follows then I am all for it. Bosun will keep being used as long as I can afford it and then I will pass her on to the next careful owner.
|
oldharry
regular
Reged: 30/05/2001
Posts: 3942
Loc: North from the Nab about 10 mi...
|
|
Quote:
But it would be a major error on a "preserved" museum piece to incorporate a feature that hadn't been invented when the boat was launched.
Agree entirely, but I bet Nelson would have given his back teeth, other arm etc, for a hefty diesel in Victory to let him get at the Frogs at Trafalgar more quickly! 
--------------------
If you cant fix it, get a bigger hammer...
|
Seagreen
regular
Reged: 30/07/2005
Posts: 1421
Loc: ked myself in the locker again...
|
|
Quote:
I bet Nelson would have given his back teeth, other arm etc, for a hefty diesel in Victory to let him get at the Frogs at Trafalgar more quickly!
And Radar, so that he didn't have to chase them across the Atlantic and back. He may have thought 18" Naval guns a bit un-sporting, though, and as for Aircraft Carriers! Work of Satan!!
--------------------
"Let Joy be unconfined!"
I'll get her chastity belt keys, then..
http://www.linesquall.co.uk
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
