• Ahoy and Welcome to the New SSS Forums!!

    As you can see, we have migrated our old forums to new software. All your old posts, threads, attachments, and messages should be here. If you see anything out of place or have any questions, please scroll to the very bottom of the page and click "Contact Us" and leave a note with as much detail as possible.

    You should be able to login with your old credentials. If you have any issues, try resetting your password before clicking the Contact Us link.

    Cheers
    - Bryan

Sea Wisdom: What happened out there?

AlanH said:
It looks to me like the steering box, the fiberglass one...the box itself is plenty strong enough. The box didn't fail, the attachment of box to deck failed.

Do I have that right?
Click to expand...

The attachment between the box and the deck could be the weakest link here, which would be a shame as a design flaw. I'm waiting to hear back from the yard and the surveyor.
 
It's surprising that there were no mechanical fasteners.

If you duplicate the metal "box" seen on the other boat, I'd go up a thickness on the material. While the SS plate on deck is impressive, I assume the box underneath is aluminum and it looks light, especially with its open end.
.
 
Last edited:
Interesting... surprised the upper rudder bearing is not affixed to the cockpit sole... so its putting the sole in compression in the direction the sole is strongest... the way most boats do it. This "box" below the sole so the bearing is torquing the box - puts a lot of force into tension on an epoxy bond. And the distance between the upper and lower bearings made shorter then if the upper bearing was affixed to the sole... dramatically increasing the forces on the upper bearing. I wonder if this is all about a sole mounted bearing being more expensive then they wanted to pay (complex larger casting?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top