Its moving day, no it's not, we are just marking time.

The rusty meat cleaver repeatedly strikes the bundle of wires until they are completely severed. The tangled mess is then shoved into some fiberglass crevasse. Job done thinks the wire butcher, now what needs my finesse?

When boats ship by truck, they have to be lower than 13' 6" on the trailer to meet most height restrictions. So in this case, a Viking 53" Sport Cruiser was shipping out of Sarasota. Everything had to be removed off of the hardtop, packed, and stowed somewhere on the vessel. On this boat, as you can see below, Jeremy has already removed the Furuno radar, and is starting to pull the bolts for the stainless steel structure. I'm down below, getting ready to catch the stainless steel tower as it tips back, taking some pictures, talking on the phone, and doing other less than important things. There is also a Stratus TV antenna (serving no purpose in life now), Furuno GPS receiver, a pair of electric horns, a Digital Antenna VHF, and a Digital Antenna FM antenna. This is a pretty basic set of gear on this boat. You can also encounter satellite domes of various types and functions, and many other types of antennas, and flag poles. 

So here is what important to me, having been on the receiving end of many boats that have been shipped, is how much care did the other guy put into the disassembly? Did he leave me notes behind, saying where things were stowed? Was care taken in labeling the wiring, so I don't have to guess what was connected to what? Or did he just have his pet beaver chew the wires apart, and shove them unlabeled into the hole. In the case of this boat, there are two four foot antennas, that appear to be identical. One is the VHF antenna, and the other is an FM antenna, although from their appearance, you can't tell the difference. What ever nomenclature was originally on these antennas, is long gone. So out comes the labels, and in a minute or two, the problem is solved for the next guy. In the picture below, everything has been removed, a clear piece of plastic was used to close the radar mount hole, and the other penetrations have been sealed. 

I carry this little Brother label maker with me in the truck. It is inexpensive, doesn't take up much room, and is indispensable. Like printer companies who almost give the hardware away, just so they can sell you the ink, the label maker companies, are really in the business of selling you the labels. Regardless of this, a label costs pennies to make, and can save hours of effort when you are reassembling a tangled wad of wiring. I also use this little machine to label anything on a boat, that I have struggled to identify, so the next time I visit, I won't have to do it again. I love adding something new to a boat years later, and finding that pull string, or label I left in place is still there. I think to myself, "What a good boy I was", at least on that day.  

So our job was done for the day. While we were removing the electronics, some colleagues of mine, using wrenches, and socket sets that take two hands to carry, were pulling the props, and stowing them in the engine compartment. The truck pulls up the next day, but there is a problem, the boat is still to high. A new trailer is needed, and the shafts, rudders, and struts have to be removed. Seven hours later, minus lots of difficult to remove running gear, the boat is set on the new trailer, and the tape measure still says it is too high. Gods from afar consult, and command the boat is to be reassembled, and a captain will transport it to its destination. My phone rings, and would we please reassemble the electronics. It took a little over 5 five hours to remove the stuff, and stow it. It took three and a half hours to reassemble, and test the gear. Good thing we labeled all of that colorful spaghetti! I'm not surprised, it's a boat 

Fifty posts plus, "To infinity and beyond".

I passed fifty posts this week, and I want to say a couple words about this. On a rainy weekend last October, I was milling around on the internet looking at blogs, and pondering a particularly odious example of boat building, that had just been giving me fits all week. I thought to myself, I can write a blog, and I always have something to say, which my wife Kate will aver to. So I down loaded Google's Blogger, and spent the weekend getting this less than perfect piece of software to work, and published my first post.

I had no idea at the time how much I would enjoy it. Over the years, I have written thousands of pages of technical proposal materials, that would end up in the hands of various aerospace companies. A simple rule of thumb was one pound of proposal paper, per million dollars sold. Now sell a $20,000,000 system, and see how many banker boxes it takes to deliver 10 copies to the client. I was good at it, and fast, although keeping engineers engaged in the proposal writing process is a lot like herding cats. Writing for myself is a truly a pleasure, and better than a good bourbon, at least before five.

So I wanted to thank my wife Kate for her patience, even though she says at times I have turned her into an "Internet Widow", Ben Ellison for the the kind words and link, Dick Reston for his editorial insights, and his always erudite conversations with me, George Flavell, for finding all of those typos, and of course, all of the readers.

Although I don't mind the technical writing, It's the whimsical stories that are far more enjoyable. I hope that the occasional whimsy, doesn't detract from what can be the more important issues sometimes being discussed. So below are some of the stories I had the the most fun playing with.

Bob and Carol, and Ted and Alice buy a boat, a Goofus and Gallant story.

After I wrote that, so many people asked me, much to my surprise, who Goofus and Gallant were.

Goofus-and-Gallant explained

Although I didn't write this, I think it is a true nautical gem, and I thought it was perfect for Thanksgiving.

The yarn of the Nancy Belle

And....

RIP LORAN

One final personal note here. My dad is a civil engineer, and turned 83 a few weeks ago. His health is good, and he will always be smarter, and wiser than I. As a kid, the family always had some sort of boat under construction. This has included a Piver trimaran, various Bolger vessels, a John Marples 35" Searuner, a 40' cold molded catamaran, and many others. Although he can tell you where you are, within a couple of hundred feet with a sextant, and a current copy the Nautical Almanac, the Internet is not one of his fortes, and he has never read my blog. So with this post, Happy Birthday Dad, thanks for the education, and a copy of this, in book form is heading toward you.

Thanks everyone,  Bill Bishop  

The case of the dueling pilots.

It was a gloomy drizzly day. I was sitting at my desk, having a conversation with my old buddy Woodford, when the phone rings. I needed a case badly, and answered the phone. It was a dame with a sultry Danish accent. She was passing through town, and was having problems with a couple of miscreant pilots, and she needed my help. I took a last swig of my buddy Woodford, put a couple fresh AA slugs in my DVM, grabbed my fedora, and headed out into the drizzle. She was hanging out down at the docks, and wasn't hard to find. She was a well seasoned babe, with enough curves to straighten the bent hawse pipe of a freighter. In short, she was my kind of women.

Redundancy is a wonderful thing, but if it isn't done with much care, it can cause endless problems. In this case, it did. This is also a little bit about navigation system evolution.

The boat, a Nordhavn 40 trawler, had originally been originally been outfitted with a Raymarine RL series system, that had a Raymarine RN300 GPS. At some point, one of the two RL80 chart plotters had been removed, and it was replaced with a new Raymarine E-120 chart plotter, with a new radar, leaving the original RL 80 radar as back up. The original RN 300 GPS passed away quietly in its sleep one night, and a new Raystar 125 was connected to the old RL80 system, via Seatalk for position data.

At some point, a second, and redundant autopilot was then added. In the picture above, you can see the new autopilot control head next to the Raymarine E-120. In the picture below, you can see the original autopilot's control head above the console.

This was a first for me. I had briefly seen the boat a year earlier, and provided some assistance to its captain, and I arranged to have some autopilot hydraulic leaks fixed. There are two Raymarine autopilot pumps, two rotary rudder references (one now), two course computers of different vintage, and two autopilot control heads. Below you can see one of the pumps, and the yellow handles are used to change the hydraulic lines from one pump to another. You can also see one of the two original rudder references.

In the picture below is the second hydraulic pump, which is just a couple of feet away from its twin.

The problem with the autopilot systems, was both were tracking poorly. Looking at the boats wake, it was always curvy, and not straight as it is supposed to be. My first sense, was that maybe they were not set up properly, but this was not the case. I also noticed that the rudder bars were flickering, and not solid. Ha, I thought, we have a bad rudder reference here, and I have seen this exact symptom before. So I identify the new autopilot's rudder reference, and disconnect it, but to my dismay, the new pilot's control head rudder bars, are still flickering, and worse, there is no rudder reference connected to it at all, so what's going on? If I turn the helm, the rudder bars still change, but there is not a rudder reference connected, or is there?

I spoke to the clever tech staff at Raymarine, and with some helpful insight from them, and coupled with the slowly dawning epiphany that somehow, both autopilot systems were seeing both rudder references at the same time. It turns out that they actually were.

The original installer's concept, was to install a switch that would remove power from one autopilot, and transfer it to the other. You would then switch the pumps with the valving, and you would be back in business. Even though the autopilot's control head, for the back up system was not lit up, meaning to me, at the time, there was no power, I ohmed out the switch. Lo and behold it was leaking current, and leaking just enough to give the second auto pilot computer some power, but not enough to power up the control head. What was powered on the second autopilot, was some portion of the course computer's system, and the Seatalk network. When I took the second autopilot's power wire off the switch, the flickering immediately stopped. Even though the course computer did not have a rudder reference attached, it still remembered the last position that it had been at, and was reporting it via Seatalk.

What I think happed here, is when the old RN 300 GPS failed, someone used the Seatalk network to provide position data to the old Raymarine RL system with the new Raystar 125 GPS that was connected to the new E-series system, and ended up connecting both Raymarine systems together, including the two autopilots via Seatalk. This could have been better. When the original RN 300 GPS failed, a second GPS could have been added just for it, or the installer could have used a NMEA output from the E120 to give position info to the RL system. Each autopilot should have been tied to one system only, with no link between the systems at all. Redundancy is alway desirable, but it must always be very well thought out.

The boat was leaving, to cross the Gulf to Mobile Al, and they were worried about the oil slick. I was running out of time, so I disconnected the older pilot, did a seatrial, and a new "Auto Learn", and she tracked beautifully. I will think about the problems, and make some suggestions to the owner on how to correct it from afar.

The dame thanked me for handling her scurrilous pilots, but with a sad smile, and a kiss on the cheek, said she had to keep moving on. I watched her curves disappear over the horizon. Oh well, we will always have Sarasota. I pulled my collar up, and fedora down, and headed back through the murk to the office, to visit again with my old buddy Woodford, and wait for another dame to call.

The photo of the Nordhavn 40 trawler is in the public domain, and came from the Picses.eu website

BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill

Gulf of Mexico boaters can find detailed information on the current, and projected locations of the oil spill at the NOAA link below. This will have a long term profound impact on the Gulf. What a waste, what a shame.

NOAA Deepwater Horizon oil spill page

The accidental lesson in 72 Colregs "Lines of Demarcation"

Today I'm channeling James Burke, author of "Connections, and the host of the like named PBS TV show. The story starts with a boating accident, we learn a bit about "Metes and Bounds" surveys, and then onto, hopefully in a James Burke "Connected" way to the mysterious 72 Colregs "Lines of Demarcation".

Doc and Jean were in a bad boating accident, and this happen on the very last day of their "Great Loop" trip. They are friends of mine, and own the boat you see on the title page of this blog. Both are very skilled boaters, and multi engine rated pilots. They have logged over 10,000 miles on their 44' Manta power cat. The boat was heading south down the west coast of Florida, on auto pilot, about 10 miles offshore, in three foot seas. Doc had a call to nature, so he cleared port, starboard, and ahead for traffic, Jean takes the helm, and Doc goes to the head. This is where the first technical error occurred. When Doc looked port, he did not look port, and way off to the aft behind the boat. In the distance behind them, was lurking another boat, also on autopilot. 

So this is what happened. The boat behind them was a crab boat, and all of the crew was aft throwing crab traps out. What Jean sees initially, out of the corner of her left eye is a boat that is crossing her bow from the port side at an angle.

There is a huge impact, and the crab boat is impaled at amidships by the Manta's bow. Doc is catapulted out of the head into the next cabin, and Jeans slams into the helm. Both boats still have engines running, and the two boats start to turn in circles together. Jean shifts the boat into reverse, and backs off from the crab boat. One of the bows had been literally been torn off Doc and Jean's boat. The crab boat, seeing that the Manta wasn't sinking, and they were, started toward land, and shallower water. Doc scrambles up to the helm, and he is badly hurt.

A Mayday goes out to the Coast Guard, and shortly a chopper is above them. An interesting side note about the Mayday call was the Coast Guard initially was requesting their position in TD's, and it took a few extra moments to sort this out. Doc gave them the Lat/Longs.

Jean tends to Doc, and a medic is dropped from the chopper on board. He takes one look at Doc, and says "you're leaving". On the bow of the boat, Doc is strapped in, and lifted up, up, and away to St. Petersburg's Bayfront hospital.

Jean is left on the boat by herself briefly, until a Coast Guard vessel shows up. The crew gets her description of the accident, examine the boat, and decide it can be "very" slowly limped into shore. They assist Jean in getting the boat to the only available dock in the area, and this happens to be the floating town dock in Cedar Key Florida, and I mean this is the only dock in Cedar Key, and there is no other dock for 40 miles, or more in any direction. The bow was ripped off about 6 inches above the waterline, and back about three feet at the deck. A 6" wave would put water in the bow compartment. The boat could not be moved, without temporary repairs. Jean was taken home by her daughter. I orchestrated temporary repairs, and five painful days later, the boat was moved to a location where real repairs could be made. I may tell this story later, but this is not a place to be with your boat, if you have a problem.

Doc was pretty beat up, lost a lot of blood, (the boat looked like a CSI serial killer crime scene), had a bunch of things cracked, but he's a tough bird, and after a few weeks he was up and running again.

The Coast Guard does their investigation, and Jean (she was at the helm at the time) gets two citations.

The first was under rule five, Lookout: Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision (the other vessel violated the right of way, but being technically right was not much of a bonus.)

The second was under rule seven, Risk of Collision: (a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist. 

(b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects.

That's the technical jargon, I will now translate these tickets, an a way everybody will clearly understand. Under rule 5 "Lookout", if you have been in any kind of a boating accident, you should have been looking out for other boats, so unless a bunch of Nazi frogmen in a submarine surfaces directly under your boat, you will get this citation.

Under rule 7, if you have an operational radar, and it is not on at the time of the accident, and in this case it was not, you will get a citation. If you have a radar, it should be turned on, and used while underway.

After the accident, Doc and Jean speak with a maritime lawyer, and the lawyer wants to know if the accident occurred in international waters, or inland waters from a "Rules Of The Road"  viewpoint. They ask me to find out. No problem, I will look at the track on the chartplotter, see where the accident happened, and tell you. I could see exactly on the chartplotter track where the accident happened, but now where are those pesky Lines of Demarcation? I get the paper charts out, nope, not here either, so off to Google I go for an answer.

With the exception of where the Lines of Demarcation pass across a harbor entrance, or the ilk, these lines do not appear on your charts. Look at where the red arrow is pointing, and you will see a pink dashed line and a note off to the left side saying "Colregs Demarcation Line". These are the only places on your charts where you will see them.

These lines do exist, but in a "Metes and Bounds" written format. This is a very old survey system style, that uses compass directions, distance, and descriptions to define boundaries. For example, a property boundary  might read "Beginning at a stone on the Bank of Doe River, at a point where the highway from A. to B. crosses said river (see point marked C. on Diagram 1); thence 40 degrees North of West 100 rods to a large stump; then 10 degrees North of West 90 rods; thence 15 degrees West of North 80 rods to an oak tree".... This is an overly simplified description of this system, but here is a real description of  "Lines of Demarcation".

Race Point, MA, to Watch Hill, RI.

(a) Except inside lines specifically described in this section, the 72 COLREGS shall apply on the sounds, bays, harbors, and inlets along the coast of Cape Cod and the southern coasts of Massachusetts and Rhode Island from Race Point to Watch Hill.

(b) A line drawn from Nobska Point Light to Tarpaulin Cove Light on the southeastern side of Naushon Island; thence from the southernmost tangent of Naushon Island to the easternmost extremity of Nashawena Island; thence from the southwestern most extremity of Nashawena Island to the easternmost extremity of Cuttyhunk Island; thence from the southwestern tangent of Cuttyhunk Island to the tower on Gooseberry Neck charted in approximate position latitude 41°29.1' N. longitude 71°02.3' W.

(c) A line drawn from Sakonnet Breakwater Light 2 tangent to the southernmost part of Sachuest Point charted in approximate position latitude 41°28.5' N. longitude 71°14.8' W.

(d) An east-west line drawn through Beavertail Light between Brenton Point and the Boston Neck shoreline.

Piece of cake, now you know, in a somewhat antiquarian way, exactly where they are for this part of the east coast.

All in all, I enjoyed this intellectual exercise. Like most of us, I knew what the Lines of Demarcation were for, but not where they actually were, and it took some level of effort to find them. I have attached the link below to a Navy site with them. So in a James Burke sort of way, we have connected the "Colregs 72 Lines of Demarcation", to "Metes and Bounds surveys", to an accident off the west coast of Florida, and learned that short of having a submarine full of Nazi frogmen surface under you, what kind of tickets you can get from this type of unfortunate event.

Despair not if you don't know exactly where the Lines of Demarcation are, because as a practical matter there are now few differences between the international, and inland rules of the road from the average boaters perspective. I was thinking about how you could add them to your chartplotter, and I think the easiest way to do it would be to build a route following the lines in your area. You could also blow the dust off your parallel ruler, and divider, and with one of those old fashioned pencil things draw them on your paper charts

Doc and Jean are currently in the Bahamas, running their radar all the time, (I have done some additional MARPA training), and the boat is now sporting a shiny new Garmin 600 AIS transponder. They are now ever more vigilant.

For those that are interested, below is the Navy site that sports the Lines of Demarcation.

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/mwv/regulations/33CFR080/33CFR80.htm

James Burke is a well known author, and was the host of the PBS/BBC TV series "Connections". His view of the history of science is most eclectic, and  demonstrates that where you start out in history is never where you end up. So if you want to know what the invention of plastics has to do with development of the Flyut, a type of Dutch cargo ship, this is the guy who knows. Here is the link to the Wikipedia page about him, and the TV show.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_(TV_series)

The yacht club, rockets, and the electron police. The quest for the electrically perfect marina.

Something bad happened in the marina. A small cute day sailor had a hidden secret. It had an electric drive system, and the boat was loaded with batteries and multiple battery chargers. Something shorted, and the very large battery bank was discharging itself, in part to the boat next door through the sea water. In a surprisingly short period of time, the rudder shaft was completely cut off the adjacent boat with electrolysis being the culprit. The owner of the damaged boat was not happy, and the club members were deservedly concerned. The club members decided something should be done to prevent this from happening again, and a committee was charged with looking into the problem. The goal of having the safest possible yacht basin was born.

I sold large scale, custom built robotic systems, that operated in extremely hazardous environments, for many years. One of the systems I sold was a custom built mixing bowl cleaning robot, referred to in-house as the "Pot Licker". Solid fuel rock propellant, (think of those two big white rockets on each side of the space shuttle) is mixed in very large stainless steel bowls (around 10 feet across, and about 5 feet deep).

Large mixer blades take a highly explosive set of materials and very carefully turn them into a gray goo with the consistency of thin peanut butter. The mixture is poured into the rocket motor's case, and the bowl then has to be cleaned for another cycle. Before the robot was built, people cleaned these bowls, again very carefully by hand with rags and solvents. It was dangerous work.

When a piece of equipment is designed to do this type of job, every aspect of the system's design is very carefully reviewed, over, and over again to prevent a failure, whose outcome could be catastrophic. In effect, you had to know where every electron was at all times, because a spark caused by electrostatic discharge, or a shorting wire, could have tragic human consequences. I sat in on innumerable meetings that discussed how to do the grounding of all aspects of the system, how to measure any potential charge build-ups, how to dissipate any charges that could build up, reviewing the electrical systems, and sensors for safe operation, and on, and on, and on.

In this business, things deflagrate (burns slower than the speed of sound), or detonate (burns faster than the speed of sound). To the employees at these facilities this means if it deflagrates, you see the flash, then you die. If it detonates, you don't get to see the flash.

The above picture is a test firing of a space shuttle solid fuel propellant booster. It produces approximately 2.8 million pounds of thrust in 1 minute and 58 seconds.

So what does any of this have to do this boats and marinas? In the real world, there are striking similarities. Both the marina and the propellant mixing facility have very complex electrical systems that are all interacting with each other.

For example, one hundred boats live in a marina, all with different electrical systems, that interact with each other through the conductive sea water they float in, and the common shore power system, they all share. Like the explosive environment, the robot works in, there are life and safety issues also for the boat occupants, the divers who clean the bottoms, and the people who repair them. 

So this is the story about some aspects of the effort to achieve the goal of the electrically perfect marina, docking electrically perfect vessels. This type of effort has not often been done, there are few if any guidelines to follow, and the learning curve has been difficult to climb at times. It's tough to be a pioneer, as everyone involved will attest. My observations about what has been done are being given on a constructive note. So off we go with this saga.

An electrical contractor was hired to scrub, and test the dock shore power pedestals, dock wiring, and ground systems. A marine surveyor was hired to test all of the boats in the basin. No boats were boarded, (some exceptions here) during the majority of the testing.

The testing involved checking the hull potential (how good are the bonding systems, and the zincs on the boats), and measuring for stray AC currents coming from the boats. The AC measurements were done by adding a short section of shore power cable, in line with the plugged in shore power cable, that had the wires (black, white, and green et al) exposed for measurement. A clamp-on ammeter was used to measure the current in the cable altogether. If the reading was zero, it meant that all of the current was all accounted for, and the boat passed. If it did not measure zero, each of the wires in the shore power cord was individually measured with the meter, and the results were recorded. The ground lug on the unplugged shore power plug was used to measure the hull potential. 

If the boat failed either of these tests, the owners were sent a letter with the measurements and were told they had thirty days to correct the problem. The technician who corrected the problem, like me, had to sign and date the letter, which was then returned to the committee, and the boat was re-tested to verify the results.

This is where, in my mind, the difficulties started. When the tests were completed, a very high number of boats were flagged as having a problem, and many of them were in clusters. A lot of these yachts were late model, high-end vessels from good builders, and all had been built to current AYBC (American Yacht and Boat Council) electrical standards. So after some time, it was discovered that there were some bugs in the testing system. For example, all of the boats with isolation transformers (no direct ground connection to the dock) had initially failed the hull potential test. Since the shore power cable was being used to do the measurement, and there was no direct connection to the boat because of the isolation transformer, it would always measure zero, and those boats failed. These boats were later boarded, and tested from the inside. 

In addition, you are measuring the hull potential through what might be slightly, (more or less) corroded shore power connectors, and also, in most boats, through the galvanic isolators. I think doing this measurement works best, will be more accurate, and more consistent, if the testing is done by direct connection to the bonding system inside the boat. Although I understand that Mr. Ohm, may technically disagree, I still believe that the closer to the bonding system you are, the better the veracity of the readings will be. What’s even better about this approach, is that as long as you are in boat’s basement, you can also take a couple of minutes to check the bonding system at the same time for any problems.

Another issue that popped up was in defining what hull type you were measuring. Current ABYC standards were being used to define what hull potential measurements were acceptable. For example, a fiberglass boat that measured 800 millivolts would be okay, and 2000 millivolts would not. But what measurement standards do you apply to a cold molded boat or a wood boat that is sheathed with fiberglass? At first blush, it not always easy to tell exactly what hull type you may be dealing with. The standards do not easily fit well in some cases, and this also caused some issues. 

There are reading differences in measuring hull potential depending on where the probe is located in the water relative to the boat. An example of this would be a large sailboat with its bow into the dock. If you take the measurement from the bow, you can be quite a distance to the closest zinc or a connected through hull, and again the measurements can vary. 

Now onto the AC side of the fence. For the record, and from the very beginning, I was uncomfortable with just throwing the breaker on a boat’s power pedestal, unplugging the cable, doing the testing, plugging the boat back in, and throwing the breaker back on, and maybe doing some more testing. My concern was that Murphy's Laws would raise its ugly head, and those unpredictable events could and would happen. 

Let's say the boat has two air conditioning systems running when the power is turned off. When power is restored, both air conditioning systems may try to restart at the same time. The combined loads of both units (maybe 40 amps or more alone on the startup cycle), and everything else on the boat starting up at the same time could pop the ship’s main breaker. The air conditioning system won't be hurt, but oops, the refrigerator now has no AC power so it switches over to DC power. But alas, now the battery charger is also off because there is no AC power, and the owners won't be back for two weeks. They return to the odious fragrance of a decomposing two week shut down refrigerator, coupled with flat batteries. I do not want the liability that could come, and will eventually occur, with this approach, even if it’s only in the owner's mind, knowing what has been done to his or her boat. It’s an accident looking for a place to occur.

I know that Mother Nature is fickle and can produce an outage on a casual whim, or do worse, coupled with the electricity suppliers systemic issues, but it won't be me! Every boat's owners manual describes how to properly disconnect a vessel from shore power, and it doesn't start with "Throw the shore power pedestal breaker off, and jerk out the plug".

So after some of the bugs in the testing system were discovered, the number of failed boats dropped, but it was still a pretty big number. From the surveyor's viewpoint, the testing was simple, On the AC tests, you pass, or you fail. If the ammeter produces a reading, the boat failed. I looked at a number of "failed" boats, and on some, there were real problems like a bad inverter transfer switch, or faulty wiring discovered. But on several boats, I could not find a problem at all. The panels tested fine, the resistors on the reverse polarity lights were fine. No shorts or leaks could be found, but the boats had still failed. 

So recently, in a gentle fit of peak, I had the opportunity to collect the owner of a boat that had repeatedly failed the testing, (and one that I could not find a problem with), the surveyor, and representatives of the committee, and we go down the dock to the boat. The boat is tested, and it fails. It is leaking on the ground wire and with a fair amount of current. This vessel's shore power cable goes to a junction box in the engine room, with a breaker that turns off both the black hot wire and the white neutral wire. I turn off the breaker and ask to have the boat tested, and it fails again. Now here is the pivotal question? If everything on the boat is off, and there is no electrical connection to the boat, and with no inverter on board that could make AC current, where is the leakage coming from? The answer had to be the dock’s ground system or another vessel with problems attached to the same ground system.  

Through most of this process, the original clubhouse being torn down, and a new one was being constructed (it's a beauty). This meant temporary power at the site, all kinds of electrical construction equipment was operating, and temporary club facilities were being used. Despite a lot of effort, the shore power wiring system was problematic and changeable. It was the dock's ground system at fault on this particular occasion, although it could have been caused by another boat on the same circuit. All testing was ended, to the best of my knowledge, for the time being.

This is the real problem. There are so many variables involved here, that a few simple tests, at best, indicate that there may be issues, but can’t always specifically identify exactly what the problems really are, and where they are coming from. In other words, you have information, but what does it mean? Is the AC current in the water, coming from another a boat with a real problem, or is it coming from an old dock power cable from years ago that is laying in the water? Was something on, in the boat one time when it was measured, that was not on the next time it was measured? Is another boat leaking AC current on the dock grounding system, that you're reading on the boat next door? And to top it off, since you don’t board the boat, you never know what the true operating state of the vessel is. What’s running, and what is not, at the time of measurement, can be an important part of the data, if electrical perfection is the goal. 

There are many questions to ask, and there are always answers to be had. But sometimes the costs of some answers can be very high. In my opinion, in order to achieve the goal of having perfectly electrically safe boats, the boats tested ideally should be isolated away from variables of the marina shore power system, other vessels, and then tested.

This is all about how you interpret the data. For the flagged boats that had no problems, despite a substantial investment in my hours chasing ghosts, I couldn't bring my self to bill the owners. It was not their fault, and I did much of the work gratis. 

So what's the moral of this story? The interaction of both marina shore power systems and the vessels themselves are very complex, and, and you can't always easily identify the actual source of the problem using simple tests. Because of this a lot of money can be expended on one boat, only to discover it's the boat on next dock, or one five docks down that's causing the problem. Now, who pays for what?

Added to this is what are the real goals of doing this type of investigation, and what does the word "Safe" really encompass? Should hoses and through hull fittings be inspected? How about checking fuel fillers for good grounding (you don't want a spark to cause a deflagration or conflagration)? The resistance in shore power cords? If a vessel is leaking 2 milliamps, is it safe? How about 4.7 milliamps? And by the way, almost all boats do leak some AC, by design, at small levels. These are difficult decisions, and the closer to perfection you get, the more costly, and time consuming achieving the goals become. In the end, true perfection may not even be possible. Close yes, but not perfect.

In the beginning, it all looked to be simple. Test the boats, get the bad ones fixed, and we all will live happily ever after. As I said, the goal is laudable, important, and a number of boats had real and serious problems, including one boat I found with a subtle, but a bad problem the manufacturer had to fix in many boats from that production run. The downside was that during the process, boats with no problems, ended up being flagged, and owners were spending money trying to fix problems that didn't really exist. I think a more comprehensive methodology would have been better at identifying vessels with real problems, and fewer vessels with no problems would have been flagged. Few things in life are truly simple. A kiss is but a kiss and raw data is only as good as its interpretation.

So here are my suggestions for those who want to embark on this type of program.

1. Educate your self well, and understand exactly what you are trying to accomplish. This includes talking to industry professionals, and trade organizations. 

2. When you have group meetings, work hard at couching the discussion in terms owners can understand. If it gets too geeky, what people hear is blah, blah, blah, and most won't tell you they don't understand.

3. Develop a solid group consensus about the project goals, and work with and listen to those who may disagree with various aspects of the approach. This works best if all participate and are listened to.

4. Find the right professionals with experience in this area of expertise to help you.

5. Professionals hired to do testing work, should not be allowed to do repairs. This gives the appearance of a conflict of interest, at the very minimum.

6. Be flexible. This is a complicated process, and it does not lend itself well to fixed timetables. Be prepared to be surprised daily as you learn. Gird your loins for increased costs for both the organization and the owners.

7. Even if you make mistakes, and you will, learn from them.

8. Understand your goals, the technical tools that will be needed to achieve them, and the potential cost impacts.

9. And lastly, remember that there are few things in life that are truly black and white. In my life, things range from greyish black to greyish white. I work on boats you know.  

I personally assure you the boat above is electrically perfect, in a grayish sort of way.

The above photograph is from Wikimedia Commons and was taken by Steve Bulgin in Twillingate Newfoundland. It is called a "Rodney" and is typically a one-person boat used for hook, and line fishing, or squid jigging.

BOAT TRAVELS AT 65MPH WHILE BEING RUN BY AUTOPILOT! CITIZENS ARE OUTRAGED, CARRY TORCHES TO CITY HALL! MAYOR DEMANDS IMMEDIATE ACTION!

The installer's steely blue eyes stare steadily forward over the endless rolling seas. His weathered finger touches a spot on the display, and he commands the helmsman to "bring her about to 091 degrees, and steer small damn your eyes". The installer engages the autopilot, and tells the helmsman to take her to 20mph, and hold for a moment. Now take her to 30, now 40, now 50, now 60, and hold her there. A small smile of satisfaction briefly flashes over the installer lips, as the sleek vessel surges through the 3ft seas at break neck speeds. He is still alive.

To say, I was impassive during this exercise, would not be quite the truth. Although I wasn't exactly screaming on the inside, I have to admit to some degree of trepidation as we approached 60mph in 3ft seas with a 10 mph head wind. I have installed many autopilots throughout the years, and have never been moving so quickly under autopilot control. I have also seen some erratic behavior from autopilot systems that were not properly set up, or had other issues. A sudden veer, at these speeds, could cause precipitous events to occur. By the end of the day, the autopilot had run the boat out, and back for a total of about 120 miles, and for a brief period the boat had reached 65+ mph and the average speed was 60mph. The limiting factor here was the sea conditions. I reminded the owner, that the autopilot can't steer the boat when it is out of the water. Had the seas been a bit calmer, I am confident that the pilot would have worked well at the boats max speed of about 75mph. I also know of a boat with this pilot, that ran at 83 mph. Amazing technology, to say the least.

The boat was a new 38 foot Fountain center console open fish. It's powered by three 300hp Mercury Verados, and is a poster child for Garmin equipment. It has the GHP 10 autopilot, twin 5212 touch screen displays, GSD 22 sounder module, 1kw Airmar tilted element transducer, GXM 51 weather module, twin N2K GPS engines, 24" high definition radar, GMI 10 N2K display, and last, but not least, the Garmin 200 VHF.

The GHP 10 is an outstanding autopilot for this boat. One of the things that gave me the confidence to travel at these speeds, is the fact that the autopilot is monitoring engine rpm's in real time. The rpm's feedback to the pilot, controls the amount of motion allowed by the pilot, and a sudden loss of rpm's by an engine will cause the pilot to immediately disengage, and trip alarms. The other nice feature of this pilot, is the shadow drive. You see a crab trap float ahead, you take the helm, and steer around it. The shadow drive, senses you have taken command, and disengages the autopilot. You let go of the helm, and the pilot re-engages. The Garmin GHP 10 autopilot is the son of the Nautamatic TR-1 which was purchased by Garmin. Hah, I knew it was the first pilot approved for use on the Verado engines, I installed many of them.

The down side of traveling at these speeds, is the relative wind speed. For someone standing in the boat, it's like being in a hurricane. I was standing to the side of the console, and was being buffeted by 65mph to 75mph winds. The winds were literally trying to rip my clothes off and forget wearing a hat, or sunglasses. The bouncing at those speeds required a "White Knuckled" grip on some solid stationary object. It was definitely one of those "Mr Toads Wild Rides." The good news was that in an hour, we had arrived at a destination that would have taken most boats a couple of hours or more to get there.

Taking a segue now the reason for this trip was the owner learned that I had never been fishing. That's not really true, because I fish at Publix all the time. For most all of my life, I have lived near the water, with the exception of about 6 years when I lived in Minneapolis (Does the Mississippi count?). Although I have boated for as long as I can remember, I have never gone fishing, and my friends will tell you I often say "I can't afford $50.00 a pound Grouper". There is some truth to this statement, as many fisherman realize when they refill their fuel tanks at the end of a trip

So in the picture above, is your wind burnt, and disheveled writer in the green shirt, proudly displaying the very first fish he ever caught. It was an Amber Jack, which I caught with some excellent tutelage from charter captain extraordinaire Brian Martel from Sarasota Fl. I have learned that when most boaters tell me, "They know these waters like the back of their hand", I better hang on tight to something sturdy. In Brian's case he really does know the waters like the back of his hand, and if you want to catch fish, this captain knows where they all are. Brian's e-mail address is (midniteson56@aol.com), if you are in the Sarasota area, this is one of the very best captains here.

The Garmin GDS 22 sounder module can see a metaphorical quarter on the bottom, and you could clearly see the Amberjack in a column, bait on the bottom, and much larger fish on the 5212 display. On the very same day, Ben Ellison (Panbo.com) was on a similarly equipped boat in the Gulf, and he has a screen shot of the Garmin GSD 22 sounder info displayed on a Garmin touch screen MDF. This will give you an idea of how well this fish finder works. I caught a 4lb Red Snapper, but go check out the "Bad Ass Snapper" Ben caught, and the Garmin sounder screen shots. Follow the link here to read Ben's piece about Garmin gear, and fishing.
http://www.panbo.com/archives/2010/04/garmin_visit_3_wfo.html#more

After catching about a dozen Amberjacks, and one Red Snapper, I needed a break. Apparently this little guy, who was sixty miles from land needed a break also, and hung out on my rod for a while.

So you want an enlargement of your anchor locker? The doctor will be with you shortly.

Like a lot of projects on a boat, it is not uncommon to run into the "Laws of  unforeseen circumstances". The owner wanted an anchor winch installed. The problem was that the locker, although wide, was only about 16" deep. This looked, at a first askance glance to be a straightforward project. If the anchor locker floor could be cut away, the locker would then extend down to the bottom of the hull. I called the builder, and asked if this was the case, and they said "yes, and no structural issues would arise, the locker liner is part of the deck structure". You can see in the picture below, the original locker had hangers for a Danforth anchor (not my favorite type), and the pipe structure is where the anchor shank went. You can see on the right aft side of the locker a wee drain hole.

So off we go. I pop off the Beckson plate, and I'm chagrined to find the space below is full of water. What the heck is this? The only thing I am sure of, is that this is not likely the fresh water storage tank for the boat. I call the builder again, and tell them my problem. No problem they say, someone just forgot to drill the weep hole. When you cut the floor out, just drill the weep hole at the bottom center near the keel, and the water will drain to the amidships bilge. Okay, I can do this, and I have the technology. I drop my cool little Rule pump into the hole, and pump out the water.

I tape off the cut out, and Josh (a most excellent glass guy) is in charge of getting the floor out, grinding the edges back, and gel coating the exposed hull. With an assortment of ugly "Freddy Krueger" style tools, the locker floor is removed exposing the vessel's entrails.

You can now see the locker minus the floor below. The edges were ground back, and the pipe structure has been removed,  The locker is now 36" deep at the aft end. But oops, see that grey blob hanging down on the right hand side? The good news is that we know there was enough hull bonding putty being used, the bad news was that it was very difficult to remove. Some improvised tools, a very sharp chisel, and several hours of hard work cleaned it off the hull.

Looks pretty good now in the picture below. Everything is now smooth and white. It's not quite factory, but making it look good was not that hard. You can now see the new weep hole drilled into the aft bulkhead. It's a nice hole if only it went somewhere. Seems the builder's provided advice, was not quite on the money. The place where they said to drill the hole, has a longitudinal stringer behind it. Wait, it gets better. When the hole was drilled, I had it done with a 1 1/8" bit. I had to do this because I needed to seal the exposed wood edges with epoxy. So when the bit hit the stringer, there was about 1/4" gap on each side of the stringer that was open to the next compartment. I stick my wire fish into one side, and swizzle it around, and I hear water splashing, and the same thing on the other side. Now, if we had some ham, we could have a ham sandwich, if we had some bread, or if we had a drain hole, the water could drain into the next compartment, if it had a drain hole.

The last twist to this story I haven't mentioned yet, is there was an anchor locker drain fitting going through the hull about 1"  below the weep hole that was drilled into the locker floor. The stub of the fitting protruded about 1/4" into the inside making it impossible to attached a hose to it. The Solution to the problem here is to just ignore it, drill a weep hole in the locker floor, and get the boat sold before anyone notices.

So lets review this. We had a weep hole in the anchor locker, that was draining water into a sort of  sealed compartment, a through hull fitting that was never connected, and couldn't be, water was where it shouldn't be in two compartments, and the builder really wasn't very knowledgeable about the product. The "Laws of  unforeseen circumstances" have raised their many ugly heads here.

Here is the finished locker, and it turned out very nice. It currently has 400' of rode in the locker, and it barely reaches the floor of the original locker. A piece of starboard was attached to the back of the locker to cover the area where the pipe thingy was, and because the original anchor locker never had a tie off point for the bitter end, I thought it was prudent to add one. What's next is to have a little chute made to direct the rode back about 8" into the deeper portion of the locker, and to pull the winch wire, another odious task on this boat. The wire length needed is almost twice the length of the boat, and needs to be a #2. This is another place where some design forethought would have helped everybody. I have now been waiting for over two weeks for words of advice from this builder on how to correct the trapped water problem. I am hoping they will rise to the occasion, and not be weep holes about this.

Where was the word professional in this inverter install?

I will start this little written tirade with the fact that I am not a big fan of using inverters on a boat. Improperly installed, they can be very dangerous, and wring them into ship electrical systems requires very close attention to detail. On older boats, that have had AC wiring systems less than professionally modified through the years, safe installation can be very difficult. A typical inverter installation requires that the output neutrals be bonded through the inverter, and tracking down these neutral wires, and getting all of them on an older boat, can be tedious at best, and in some cases fiscally impossible. When I install them, I try to convince owners to keep it very simple, and let me wire the system to dedicated stand alone outlets. For example a galley outlet for the microwave, and one outlet for a TV. The downside to this that you always have to use the inverter to watch TV and make popcorn in the microwave. Wiring directly into the primary ships primary AC input buss requires transfer switches (at the minimum), and there is always the possibility of applying too large of a load to the inverter. So, in short, if I can't install it in a way that lets me sleep well at night, I just won't do it, period. I'm not going to be the guy who burned down the boat, it's hard to get more work after that.

I do not consider the Coleman unit above to be a marine grade product. I just removed it from a recently purchased vessel. The new owner had been told the unit was professionally installed. I looked at at the installation, and took some umbrage to that assertion. The only thing professional, or marine about the install, was the use of a piece of starboard to mount the inverter. The installer had taken Romex house wiring, had attached a three prong plug, and jacked it into the inverter outlet. The other end went to the AC panel, and  was connected directly to the main buss. Since it was Romex wire, the ground lead had no insulation, and the installer had wrapped it in some black tape that was now falling off.  The outlet circuit breaker had an additional Romex wire attached, and this had been run to a new outlet in the galley.

The DC feeds to the unit, were also marginally sized. To invert, you had to access an under seat compartment, and turn on the inverter via the red switch. Oops, plugged in to shore power because you forgot to turn it off? I shudder to think what could happen. The new owner was told to be very careful, to make sure the inverter was off, before plugging in to shore power. All in all, this was a really poor, unprofessional, and unsafe piece of work, "professionally" installed on a piece of starboard. The new owner agreed, and I professionally ripped it out. 

I know that some boaters need, or want inverters, and they can be safely installed, but like entertainment systems on a boat, simpler is alway safer, and better. 

Tools, "In Situ", and MacGyver

There are several interlinked themes here, all dealing with tools. I have a love/hate relationship with my tools. I learned early, that tools used in a marine environment, like veal, "live fast, and die young". The everyday vessel offers a multitude of opportunities to lose tools, soak them in salt water, or just wear them out. Fiberglass dust eats my tools for dinner, and has anything that has a sharp edge for dessert. So the first time my $400 Fluke voltmeter ended up submerged in the bilge, I said, "Thats it, I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it any more". Not really, but I now just buy inexpensive, but adequate tools, and I have resigned myself to tools living a shorter life. I buy the $50.00 "On Sale" Black & Decker drill, instead of the $250.00 Makita. When the Black & Decker passes on, I sigh, and stop at Home Depot to buy a new one. Even if they don't actually wear out, everything will get rusty, in short order. 

Below is one of my favorite tools. It is an Ace Hardware socket set. It has a composite ratchet, standard and metric sockets, and a variety of screwdriver bits. It costs about $16.00, and fits well in the tool bag. It's about 4 months old, is getting rusty, two of the sockets, and several of the bits have already disappeared into the bowels of some vessel. Next to it is the new replacement, all shinny, and ready to go, when the old one becomes to dilapidated, or embarrassing  to use.

My young associate is smart, works very hard, and unlike me, is very organized. This translates to, "the marine electronics installation business, on some days, literally drives him nuts". His tool bag is always neat, and is stuffed full of very nice tools. He has a Makita drill, lots of Snap-on tools, and sharp drill bits (my new ones always seem to migrate to his bag, because then he "knows where they are"). He believes tools should be used properly, and only for the intended purpose. Screw drivers are not pry bars or chisels, a pipe wrench is not a hammer, a drill bit is only used to drill straight holes, and there is the correct tool available for every purpose.

One afternoon we have to enlarge an existing hole in a T-top's rectangular tube. The hole is about 3/8" in diameter, and it needs to be about a 5/8" oval shape to get the wires through. My bag is down on the ground, so I ask to borrow his Makita, and a 1/2" bit. He winces, and hands it to me, already anticipating the horrible torture that will occur to his tools in my hands. I drill the hole, and start to wallow it out with circular motions with the drill bit, and he freaks out. "Stop, that's not the way to use the bit, you're dulling the edges, it's brand new". "Okay", I said, "come up here, and tell me what tool we need". So up he pops, and says "we need a hole saw". I point out that the hole saw centering bit will drill out through the bottom of the tube, and besides the hole needs to be oval. What else do you have in mind? In the end, he is sure there is a good tool to do this, and I should, but don't have it. 

So it's lesson time. We take off in the truck, and go to the local hardware store. About thirty minutes later, he hasn't found the right tool. Off to Home Depot we go, and again the search is fruitless. Two hours later, we are back at the boat. I take my drill and 1/2" bit, and in about 5 minutes, the hole is done. Over two hours searching around town cost about $200.00 in lost billing, plus the cost of his wages. I'm sure somewhere there was that perfect tool, but a new bit was less than $10.00. In the end, the bit wasn't ruined, mostly, okay it didn't do it much good, but it did do the job quickly, and it was cost effective. My point was made. 

"In situ" comes from Latin, and means "in place, or in position". I have to go to the boat, and drag everything I need with me. If I am short some part, or tool, it is costly to stop, and go out and buy it. Many times, in the end you have to invent something to get the job done. I have shortened drill bits to get into some tight spot, used screw drivers as pry bars, and chisels, and yes, a pipe wrench can be a hammer if it needs to be.

The improvised tool below is a bow saw blade with a duct tape handle. It was used to cut off a big blob of bonding putty in a anchor locker rehab project that will post next week. It was flexible, and could cut against the hull with out going through it, and the big teeth did not gum up, like the 60 grit grinder kept doing. I will keep it, but I suspect it will never be used again. 

So in the end, in situ, there is alway a way, even if you have to be MacGyver for just a little while to solve the problem.

Stochastic analysis of navigation systems single point failures, you just can't easily always find out what is broken.

The headline is meant to say, that even if you're smart, sometimes you just don't always have good tools to definitively say, this is what's wrong. As a case in point, I often get cases of "no depth is showing on my what ever device".  So this is where playing the odds comes in. If you call the sounder tech support group, they always tell me two things. The first is try another transducer, to which I say " I don't have one of every transducer laying around, so what's plan B. The tech says, "well I don't know, because it is usually the transducer, and not our equipment". I say thanks, and hang up. What I don't do is call Airmar to see what they think, because it is a very rare occasion the transducer is bad. So the solution to the problem is to rip the sounder/module out and ship it in for repair. Lo and behold, ten days later the unit is back, I plug it in, the system works, and it's another Christmas miracle. The real problem is that without some expensive, and exotic equipment, or a box full of transducers, there is no real way to tell which is DOA. You use your instinct, and experience to find the least costly solution for the client.

Sometimes, but not often, the wrathful odds gods do not favor you. That's me below, starting off on what turned out to be about three hours in the dreaded bosun's chair. I wish there was a more comfortable admirals chair. This starts with a radar which had worked for five and a half years, suddenly ceasing to work (scanner not responding). This message tells me we have a failure to communicate going on. Now who is not talking to whom? Is the radar not talking? Is the display not listening, or is the cable bad? My sense of the odds here are that the radar dome is the most likely suspect (it lives outside), followed by the display, and then the cable. 

So up the mast I go assisted by the owner, his broker, and some other local club members helping, and watching the show. I pop the dome cover, and it is clean as whistle inside. I check the power, and it is good. I pull the data connector and it is also fine. My assistant was off on another job, so I didn't have the capability to wring out the cable on the spot with the available crew. Besides the cable had been fine for five and a half years, and there was no evidence of damage, or splices in the cable. So I decide to pull the dome, and ship it for repair. 

The radar is a big package, and I ship it ground to save some bucks. A few days later, the boat sells, and now everybody wants it done yesterday. I instruct the vendor that we will pay a $50.00 expediting fee, and in a couple of days I get a call from the tech saying there is no problem with the dome.  Shoot, so I toss the dice and send the display in to be checked out with the dome. The tech calls back, and tells me "so sad, too bad" they're both good. So like Sherlock Holmes says" When everything else has been eliminated, what's left, however unlikely, is what it must be". 

Before I'm chided for not checking the cable, I want to point out, in my opinion, that it takes three people at the minimum to go up the mast. My butt in the chair is one, somebody manages the winch, and a third to handle the safety line. It's cheaper to send the module off, and have it checked. If the module was bad, job done, if not, it's the cable. So on a dreary Sunday morning, a crew of four assembles. I go up the mast, and attach the pull line, and the cable comes out, and a new cable is pulled in. The dome goes back on, the display is re-installed, and it all works. While we are there, a spreader bulb is replaced, and I get a good view of the marina from the top of the mast while I straighten out a windex.

Well, as you have now surmised, it was the cable. In the picture below you can see a series of cuts, caused by the conduit pipe at the bottom of the mast. Who ever installed it, got a little rough on the haul up. Given the depth of the cuts, and the amount of exposed copper, I'm amazed it worked at all, much less for over five years. Most of the time, I can tell you exactly what's wrong, but sometimes you just have to roll the dice."Are you feeling lucky today?"