Hi ya Tony !

I can see the wisdom in the OB's but they do have their
limitations. They are much quieter than they used to be, but still
there are those who have their sensibilities aflicted by those
petrol devices. They'll do the job in a marina, but not sure their
capabilities in the "big" pond.

Electric drive sounds nice but are expensive, likely can only
afford (1) so have to look for alternatives to move around that
50-70 foot point of the LW bow. Sent a response back to Robert
to use the forward rudder but not my first choice as manuevering
instrument. Chartering experience levels vary greatly in their
seafaring skills. Trying to compensate a little with somewhat
familiar operations even in a cramped marina like the US east
Coast.

Regards,

JT

--- In harryproa@..., "Tony Richardson"
<atrichardson@b...> wrote:
> I tend to agree that the outboard option will get you on the water
earlier. It has the added advantage of being fully removable for
service etc.
> As a financial option it is certainly the cheapest.
> As a building option it is the easiest
> An interesting quirk with the rudder system is that if you split
the direction you can very easily crab at 45deg(both rudders
pointing the same way)
> I was dumbstruck when I first saw rob do it on Harry.
> I'm not aware if this is possible on the bigger versions but it
makes docking a breeze(even with a single outboard)
> If you have twin outboards you won't need a bow thruster
anyway.
> If you have ferrys there of the cat variety they are great to watch
and learn how to dock without any steering.
> Bow thrusters? they seem to be mostly on big commercial
boats here
> I watched a 100ft sailing schooner dock the other day against a
beam wind blowing 20kts
> It only had a single prop and no bow thruster. The skipper did it
with what looked like ease.
> He took his time, did a dummy run to access the angles
required, then proceeded to slot it into a marina berth only
marginally wider than the boat(you could get off either side onto
the floating dock)
> My point I suppose is the skill of the skipper can sometimes
make up for alot of additional things(albeit things that make a
task easier)
> One more suggestion if I may. Nozzel attachments for the
honda prop will probably cure the grip in reverse problem.
> Kind Rgs
> Tony
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jjtctaylor
> To: harryproa@...
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:51 PM
> Subject: [harryproa] Aux Drives for Visionarry
>
>
>
> Been so long nearly forgot my password !
>
> With the progress so far with Johnnie's boat, the visionarry in
> latest stage of development, the aux drive has left me with
some
> questions and possibilities for input from our distinguished
> forum. Albeit a quiet forum.
>
> Outboards is the current plan, a pair of 15 horse honda's
which
> is a highly reliable 4-stroke. Certainly the most economical
> choice and most likely to succesfully get it in the water.
>
> The question I have,... is there better choices ? Lot's of history
> with swamped outboards and propulsion woes with prop out
> water in sloppy seas. I find the outboard closest to the WW
hull
> most at risk since it is not really close to the hull itself but
> suspended part way across the beam due the WW hull
> expansion. Yes OB's are a workable solution in moderate
seas,
> and perhaps a little awkward with initial manuevers in close
> marineas cause the motor is not evenly spaced across the
> beam, but functional. Rob's & Mark's plan includes 24 hours
of
> fuel aboard.
>
> As food for thought to kick off the discussion I suggest a
single
> electric drive near the LW hull either as outboard or
extendable
> from inside the LW hull. Must be kept close to the hull,
> upstream of the rudder to insure better helm control and the
prop
> stays in the water. At the other end would be a bow thruster
> likely just aft of the leading rudder. An electric drive is
sufficient
> to replace both outboards (an equivalent 20-25 HP diesel)
and
> slow speed maneuvering can be deftly handled by the bow
> thruster.
>
> Anybody ever had a bow thruster ? Some issues remain
such
> as the thruster tube nacell, will it cause excessive drag in a
> bi-directional shunting kind of mode ? There are retractable
> options but much more costsly than an electric thruster and 2
> batteries. (est 210-220 Lb force required)
>
> Taking input, preferences, previous experience, or technical
> saavy !
>
> Regards,
>
> JT
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/harryproa/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> harryproa-unsubscribe@...
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.