starcrafttom
Active member
Oh and all the projects look good. Like the storage under the helm.
Some of my winter/spring modifications
- Thread starter rogerbum
- Start date
Tom all of the life rafts I have seen are self inflating but not exactly what I would call "auto" inflating. For all the rafts I have looked at the self inflating mechanism is manually activated by giving a sharp tug on the painter line once the painter line has been pulled all the way out. E.g. you toss either the valise or the container in the water, pull out 30 foot or so of line and then tug on it to open the raft. Only then does it self inflate. Until then, the container or valise just floats on the water. The logic is that in the vast majority of times one needs to deploy a raft, there is wind (sometimes substantial wind) and you want to users of the raft to have manual control over when the raft inflates lest it blow away faster than they can swim. Even if the reason for needing the raft is not weather related, it is rare that the ocean is dead calm with no wind.
What one does with the painter line when the raft is in normal storage is up to the owner. If you leave it untied from the boat prior to deployment, you have to remember to tie it to the boat prior to throwing it overboard and you have to be careful to not lose the raft overboard (which would be easy to do in pitching water if the raft is on the roof). If you tie the painter line to the boat (or to a portion of the hydrostatic release), then you just need to get the container overboard and need not remember to tie it off nor do you need to worry about the container sliding off inadvertently without you having the painter line available. The hydrostatic release does have a place to tie off the painter line that should break free in the sinking ship event. In theory, the sinking boat will release the cradle when it is 5m under water, the life raft will inflate and eventually the painter line will break free prior to the raft being fully tugged down with the boat (assuming the painter line doesn't tangle in something else). At that point in time one needs to be close enough to wherever the life raft pops up that you can swim to it before it blows away. So you are correct in that in some scenarios, the hydrostatic release might be useful. I just think those scenarios are likely to be incredibly rare for the kinds of boating I do. I suppose I can use the release I have for two years with little negative impact but I'm not going to pay $100 every two years to replace it. The only downside to using the release I already have is that you can't get the raft cinched down quite as tight to the cradle since the hydro release has some give to it. If I had to option to get the cradle without the release for less money, I would have. I'd be better off spending that money on some other safety device (like water activated strobe lights for each PFD - I don't have enough of these). Of course, I will spend the $800 every 3 years that it costs to assure the life raft remains serviceable through its 12 year lifespan. BTW - a lot of people don't realize that buying a $2000-$3000 life raft commits you to a $650-800 expense every 3 years to keep it serviceable.
Most of the liferaft experts/sales people I talked to at the boat show advised against the cradle and instead recommended a lighter weight raft in a valise. Their recommendation was based on the idea that the hydrostatic release was rarely useful and most people would have a hard time deploying the canister raft from the roof. My logic was that I didn't want to have to dig a raft out from the limited number of easily accessible storage locations I have board as I want those for fishing gear. Also, I didn't want others on the boat to be able to move the raft around or store stuff on top of it. Finally, the lightweight rafts don't have insulated floors and around these parts I thought I'd want that. So I bought the cradle/container model. However, as I soon discovered, launching the raft from the roof is no easy feat and I had to devise a method to solve that problem. Joyce is too weak to deploy the raft I have and would be too weak to even throw the same raft packed in a valise over the rail. For her use a light weight but less capable raft would be better. But for the majority of cases where I'm far offshore the more capable raft is better as I generally have at least two other people with me. Like everything, there are tradeoffs between choices.
What one does with the painter line when the raft is in normal storage is up to the owner. If you leave it untied from the boat prior to deployment, you have to remember to tie it to the boat prior to throwing it overboard and you have to be careful to not lose the raft overboard (which would be easy to do in pitching water if the raft is on the roof). If you tie the painter line to the boat (or to a portion of the hydrostatic release), then you just need to get the container overboard and need not remember to tie it off nor do you need to worry about the container sliding off inadvertently without you having the painter line available. The hydrostatic release does have a place to tie off the painter line that should break free in the sinking ship event. In theory, the sinking boat will release the cradle when it is 5m under water, the life raft will inflate and eventually the painter line will break free prior to the raft being fully tugged down with the boat (assuming the painter line doesn't tangle in something else). At that point in time one needs to be close enough to wherever the life raft pops up that you can swim to it before it blows away. So you are correct in that in some scenarios, the hydrostatic release might be useful. I just think those scenarios are likely to be incredibly rare for the kinds of boating I do. I suppose I can use the release I have for two years with little negative impact but I'm not going to pay $100 every two years to replace it. The only downside to using the release I already have is that you can't get the raft cinched down quite as tight to the cradle since the hydro release has some give to it. If I had to option to get the cradle without the release for less money, I would have. I'd be better off spending that money on some other safety device (like water activated strobe lights for each PFD - I don't have enough of these). Of course, I will spend the $800 every 3 years that it costs to assure the life raft remains serviceable through its 12 year lifespan. BTW - a lot of people don't realize that buying a $2000-$3000 life raft commits you to a $650-800 expense every 3 years to keep it serviceable.
Most of the liferaft experts/sales people I talked to at the boat show advised against the cradle and instead recommended a lighter weight raft in a valise. Their recommendation was based on the idea that the hydrostatic release was rarely useful and most people would have a hard time deploying the canister raft from the roof. My logic was that I didn't want to have to dig a raft out from the limited number of easily accessible storage locations I have board as I want those for fishing gear. Also, I didn't want others on the boat to be able to move the raft around or store stuff on top of it. Finally, the lightweight rafts don't have insulated floors and around these parts I thought I'd want that. So I bought the cradle/container model. However, as I soon discovered, launching the raft from the roof is no easy feat and I had to devise a method to solve that problem. Joyce is too weak to deploy the raft I have and would be too weak to even throw the same raft packed in a valise over the rail. For her use a light weight but less capable raft would be better. But for the majority of cases where I'm far offshore the more capable raft is better as I generally have at least two other people with me. Like everything, there are tradeoffs between choices.
starcrafttom
Active member
I was also put off by the $500 to $800 repack inspection every 3 to 5 years ( depending on models). I did find a video on youtube on how to do it yourself.
I agree with you on the mounting on the roof.
I agree with you on the mounting on the roof.
I think you'll be much happier with the new Helm seat.
My biggest issues with the Helm seating on our 24, was it was uncomfortable for any long runs, and it was shoved behind the wheel. I'm 6'1", and felt stuck behind the wheel.
I think the one I bought, came from Cabelas also. Good quality, and a decent price as well.
I purchased arm rests for the stock seat, and when I changed it to the new cushy one, and shifted the seat over into the aisle, I added the second on the controls side. They bolted right on to the newer Cabelas seat.
My biggest issues with the Helm seating on our 24, was it was uncomfortable for any long runs, and it was shoved behind the wheel. I'm 6'1", and felt stuck behind the wheel.
I think the one I bought, came from Cabelas also. Good quality, and a decent price as well.
I purchased arm rests for the stock seat, and when I changed it to the new cushy one, and shifted the seat over into the aisle, I added the second on the controls side. They bolted right on to the newer Cabelas seat.
Sea Wolf":2kame7bo said:katkt":2kame7bo said:
Hi, Gordon!
Here's the look-see your post above makes one curious to view: (nice job!)
Thanks for that
Is that just using the Img tab, and a cut and paste inserted from my album?I noticed on the forum, where somebody else had hated being shoehorned behind the wheel and shifted the seat out. It helps a lot on the 24. I've never been behind the Helm on a 25.5 to know if it is the same.
The arm rest are great, and cut fatigue alot, especially when things get a little choppier.
redbaronace
New member
Looking at the helm seat change I was wondering if it is a huge improvement over the stock seat.
My helm seat does not seem uncomfortable but then again I have nothing to compare it to. Perhaps similar to back in the days when I thought my Volkswagen seats were plenty good.
My helm seat does not seem uncomfortable but then again I have nothing to compare it to. Perhaps similar to back in the days when I thought my Volkswagen seats were plenty good.
Gordon-
I use
after it to show photos.
The photo address is not the full Internet address, but I can't tell you the difference.
I get the photo address by holding the control key down, the depressing the cursor on the photo, and then clicking on the drop down menu, which copies the photo address on the clipboard (iMac protocol). (Different for PC style computers.)
Then I write the
down with the keyboard, inserting (copying) the address off the clipboard.
Similar procedures can be used to make photos become links.
Hope this helps somewhat!
Joe. :teeth :thup
I use
The photo address is not the full Internet address, but I can't tell you the difference.
I get the photo address by holding the control key down, the depressing the cursor on the photo, and then clicking on the drop down menu, which copies the photo address on the clipboard (iMac protocol). (Different for PC style computers.)
Then I write the
Similar procedures can be used to make photos become links.
Hope this helps somewhat!
Joe. :teeth :thup
One issue may be that you are taking the 'image address" of the thumbnail and not the full-sized photo.
Another tip: You can preview your post before posting it. If the photo doesn't display properly to you in the preview, it will also not do so in the post. So you can continue to preview/change/fix/preview until you get it right, and then post (or just not go on to post if it never works that time).
Another tip: You can preview your post before posting it. If the photo doesn't display properly to you in the preview, it will also not do so in the post. So you can continue to preview/change/fix/preview until you get it right, and then post (or just not go on to post if it never works that time).