Local
:: Boat Building Task Team Feedback :: (454 Reads)
Posted by
warwick
on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 - 07:45 AM
They also spent time negotiating agreements with local suppliers to assess the costs of locally manufactured and assembled boats.
This report was received recently from Rudolph and CJ.
Dear 505 Exco and class members,
Since our previous update, we can report the following feedback:
1. Albrecht concluded the measurement of the hull (and deck) mould and found the set to be compliant on all aspects of measurement, including baseline distances, template station points, overall length, mast gate height etc. We have also applied the templates to existing boats (Albrecht's - Rondar 8707 and Rudolph's - Kyrwood 8520) both of which also comply (!) and have found that the moulds represent a shape similar and even flatter than the Kyrwood - especially near the stern. The front seemed to be more like the Rondar. Above the waterline, the moulds are significantly narrower than both Kyrwood and Rondar. Our general feeling was that this would make quite a good hull shape as it is flatter on the planing surface, but narrower directly above the water line.
2. After clearing the measurement process, we commissioned composites expert Pierre van der Waldt for general inspection and advice on the moulds, maintenance, costs and the project going forward. On closer inspection, Pierre pointed out several problems with the moulds:
- Tiny wave like indentations are visible (with the light at a low angle to the surface) all along the length of the hull mould, including the below - waterline surface.
- The Y-curves (lines parallel to the keel band but slightly higher and lower) seem to be badly distorted near the mast area. The waterline also makes a sharp bend on both sides near the mast.
- Pierre also pointed out some minor repaired damage on the left rear of the hull mould as well as several tiny cracks - mostly above the waterline near the top.
Pierre advised us that, in its current state, these moulds will not produce quality boats. He suggested two possible routes:
a. Repair the hull mould by applying a filler material across the entire length of the hull surface and working it down (hand sanding with bending straight edge) until the desired shape has been achieved. This would be the most labour intensive process and the mould should be able to produce +- 5 more boats after this upgrade.
b. Produce a hull from the mould, fair this hull (plug) into the best possible and most desirable shape - again by applying filler and sanding down, and use this plug to produce a new mould for further production of boats. This option is slightly less labour intensive, but still costly as it requires re-manufacturing of the entire hull mould, as well as producing the initial plug.
In summary, the moulds will not produce quality boats before a minimum of R175,000.00 has been spent repairing the moulds. This is slightly less that the costs incurred by the recent Flying Fifteen mould manufacturing process, which included mostly volunteered labour over several months (years?).
c. A third option would therefore be to fair an existing boat in the fleet and draw a mould from this boat. This process would not involve the current moulds, and can produce a new mould for approximately R200,000.00.
We have also visited another site (in Johannesburg) which reportedly stored old 505 moulds. On this site we found a complete Finn mould, as well as a J22 hull mould (ex Mendes tooling) but together with the site owner we were unable to locale the 505 moulds.
In conclusion we can therefore state that we are not aware of any moulds in South Africa suitable for manufacturing world class boats. Furthermore, we recommend that the moulds collected by this task team from Midmar, and currently stored at Albrecht's premises, be destroyed and discarded of as soon as possible in order to avoid storage costs and prevent further low quality locally manufactured boats.
The outcome of this survey is certainly disappointing as we had all hoped to have a good quality local boat built in the near future. However, in order for the class to move forward, this was a necessary step.
Please feel free to comment or ask questions.
Regards,
Rudolph & CJ
| Boat Building Task Team Feedback | Log-in or register a new user account | 0 Comments | |
|
| |
| Comments are statements made by the person that posted them. They do not necessarily represent the opinions of the site editor. |

