"Legacy"

Up the mast

2011-09-18T20:23:00.000-07:00

We found out a couple weekends ago that our Anchor light on the masthead wasn't working. Figuring that it was a bad bulb, I decided to go up the mast for a look. Given that we normally have to do things shorthanded, I got an ATN Mastclimber to make the accent.

The climber worked very well. I got my Mom to go along with me and then my daughter decided to tag along as well. I used the spinnaker halyard as the climbing line and the boom lift as a safety line. My mom tailed the slack on the boom lift as I went up.

It actually worked well, although I did have one problem. I had fastened the Spinnaker halyard to the base of the mast before climbing. However, once my 215 pounds put tension on the halyard it stretched, leaving too much slack in the line below me to easily slide the ascenders up the line. My Mom (age 77 btw) put a winch on the halyard and was able to raise me up about 6 inches to remove the slack. That made it a lot easier.

I got to the top and found that the bulb looked good but I wasn't getting any power to it. While I was up there, I took a few photos, then came down again.

The ATN Mastclimber worked great. If an old, fat, out of shape guy like me with a bum knee can do it, most anyone can. I will admit to a few sore muscles over the next couple days however.

This is the view from the top.

Legacy's stern from the Masthead


Legacy's bow from the Masthead

View of my Marina from the top.


Murphy's Landing

Panorama's of Gig Harbor. There is some wide angle distortion of course, the Harbor really isn't shaped that way.

Replacing aft Wilcox-Crittendon Head

2011-09-07T21:27:00.000-07:00

I have been very unhappy with the WC Headmate toilets that came with the 2005 C400. Frankly, they are a piece of junk. I wanted to replace them with a better designed unit, but didn't want to have to do a lot of changes to the existing plumbing. Two reasons for this, I'm lazy and my wife doesn't like extra holes in the boat.

After doing a lot of research and making a general pest of myself asking questions on the C400 International Association website and the C400 Yahoo group list, I settled on the Raritan PHC. The PHC uses the same pump as the Raritan PHII, but with a compact "marine" bowl. When Defender had them on sale for $199, I jumped at it and bought one.

First, I'd like to offer a lot of thanks to Tom Sokoloski of Juniper. He replaced his WC Headmates with Raritan PHII's and provided a lot of suggestions and advice.

Parts Needed:

Raritan PHC Head
1 - 5/16 x 1.5" Stainless Steel Lag screw
1 SS washer
1 SS locking washer
epoxy and thickener
Life-Calk
Super Lube
2 SS hose clamps for 3/4" ID hose
1 90 degree elbow for 3/4" ID hose

The first step is to remove the existing head. This is just a matter of making sure the sea cock is closed then disconnecting the hoses to the toilet. Try to be careful of the hoses as you disconnect them because you will reuse the hoses and you don't want to distort the hoses. Applying a bit of heat with a hair dryer can help get the hoses off the ribbed fittings. Then, unscrew the three stainless steal lag screws that attach the head to the raised pedestal. Hang on to these screws and their washers as you will reuse them. Having a container to catch the raw water from the hoses can help reduce the mess.

Here is what it looks like when you get the head removed.

You can see the three holes from the Headmate mounts. The PHC has four mounting points. I reused the farthest forward mounting hole from the Headmate for the PHC. That means that I only had to drill three additional holes instead of four, and only had to fill two of the old holes.

I brought the PHC in and test fitted in place.

Note the lag screw that I placed for test fitting. That is the hole that will be kept. With the PHC in place, I connected the waste hose temporarily.

The arrow is pointing to the elbow that leaves the head. From Raritan, this elbow is pointing down. The two bolts have to be loosened and the elbow rotated to point to the waste hose that comes out of the wall. With that hose in place and the mounting slot placed against the one bolt forward, I marked the position of the other three slots. Then I took off the waste hose and removed the head.

Here you can see the marks for the new holes. I've already filled the two unused holes with thickened epoxy. The arrow is pointing to one of the hole positions that is very close to an existing hole. This is one of the reasons I used the epoxy and simply didn't fill them with Life-Calk. I wanted that new hole to have a sturdy support around it. By the way, you will need another SS lag screw. A smart person would have taken one of the existing screws to the hardware store and simply matched it. I, on the other hand, forgot to do that and had to select a lag screw from memory. I picked a 5/16 x 2" screw. I was close, it should have been 1 1/2". You also need a washer and lock washer.

Drill the holes in the marked locations using a brad point drill, and counter sink them. I made a really stupid error at this point. If you notice, the mounting points are slots, not holes in the base of the PHC. I drilled the holes at the inside edge of the slots. This meant that when I mounted the toilet I didn't have enough room for the washer at one of the screws. It also meant that I wasn't able to get a socket around the head of both the forward and aft screw at the pump housing and so had to screw them in using an open end wrench. I was muttering to myself the entire time. See below. Use Life-Calk or equivalent in the holes to seal them.

After mounting, it is just a matter of making the hose connections. Using some Super Lube on on the hose connections makes it a lot easier to get the hoses on. When the PHC came from Raritan, it had a hose connected from the back of the pump to the back of the bowl. This is fine for above the waterline installations, but for below the waterline installations, Raritan wants an a vented loop. Fortunately, Catalina had already provided one for the head I just removed. I removed the Raritan hose from the pump to the bowl and simply connected the hoses that I had disconnected from the Headmate.

The raw water intake hose doesn't reach the pump comfortably. The Headmade had the raw water intake located in the back of the pump and the PHC has it in the front. I copied what Tom Sokoloski had done, and using a 90 elbow and 2" of hose I cut from the piece of Raritan hose I had removed from the toilet, I fashioned this.

Then it was just a matter of opening the raw water sea cock and testing for leaks. It was at this point that I found I had a large leak at the back of the pump where the flushing water goes out to the vented loop. The end of the hose had been distorted somewhat as I removed it from the Headmate and it wasn't sealing well. I simply cut off 3/4" of the end of the hose and reconnected it and it solved the problem. Before I do something like this again however, I'm going to buy a hose cutter. The OEM hoses are really tough to cut with a knife.

This is what it looks like installed. You can see the one old hole that is visible. I may get some gelcoat from Catalina to clean that up a bit.

Another option to consider is that Raritan sells just the PHC Lower Base Assembly as a separate item. The Headmate bowl will bolt directly on this. The PHC LBA can be purchased for about $220 which makes it much less expensive than the normal PHC unit. I chose to buy the whole unit since Defender had such a good price, but otherwise would have gotten just the LBA. You can put either a "household" size bowl or a compact “marine” bowl such as the WC Headmate’s. Also, the PHII can be used instead. The reason I didn't is that the PHII base molding would have overhung the toilet pedestal

I couldn't be happier. The pump of the PHC (The same as the PHII) works so much better than the Headmate and seems a much more sensible design.

Family Visit

2011-08-15T19:44:00.000-07:00

At the end of July, we were fortunate to have my wife's sister and her family come up for a visit from Southern California. My brother-in-law likes to sail but hasn't had much chance and hasn't seen Legacy before. We took the opportunity to take their family out for a little sail. We decided to just run down to Wollochet Bay (yeah, it is a favorite) and give the kids a chance to play at the TYC Outstation. We didn't have a lot of wind, but we did have some opportunity to sail.

Here is my brother-in-law at the wheel as we are leaving Gig Harbor. I think he is enjoying himself.

My sister-in-law, while not as excited seems to be having a good time.

My nephew liked it. It took quite a while for him to get over the trauma of having to put on a life-jacket. He complained as only a 2 year-old can, but he dealt with it eventually.

Legacy at the dock in Wollochet. The TYC dock was almost full but there was a spot at the end of the dock for us. Of course, there is was only a few inches of water under her keel, but fortunately the tide was coming in.

The kids had a great time on the dry playing in the shade. The one with the freckles is my daughter.

Once the tide was slack, we headed back to Gig Harbor on the ebb. We all had a great time and the family promised to come back next year to maybe spend a night or two on Legacy with us. My niece got adventuresome on the way home, even if we didn't have any wind.

July 4th

2011-08-15T09:10:00.000-07:00

Kids Summer work schedules being what they are, it was tough getting folks together for the 4th. We decided to just take Legacy down to the TYC outstation at Wollochet Bay. Wollochet is a small bay in South Puget Sound that is nice and protected. Unfortunately, on nice days it is also filled with idiots that either don't know, or don't care about the no-wake zone law in Pierce County.

It is a nice place to hang out for the 4th as the small bay is surrounded with homes owned by folks with more money than sense. They spend huge sums of money each year on their own personal fireworks displays. Great for those of us who just like to watch.

I had to go to work the next day, so I went home that night leaving the family on Legacy. The next day after work, I came out and my wife and I took Legacy back to Gig Harbor. It was nice to finally have some decent Summer weather (at least by PNW standards).

AutoProp Install (Finally)

2011-06-03T13:24:00.000-07:00

Back when I first had Legacy hauled for the survey, I was struck by how much that big three-blade prop would affect sailing performance. It was then that I decided on some type of feathering prop. I agonized over the decision and wrote two blog posts, Decisions, decisions verse 1- Propeller, and Autoprop it is back in August of last year. Well, I did get the Autoprop but received it too late to have it installed while the boat was out of the water. I finally got around to getting it done this weekend.

My Mom and I took the boat over to Gig Harbor Marina to be hauled and have them install the prop. Gig Harbor Marina has the only Travelift and haul-out facility in Gig Harbor. It is a lot more convenient than taking the boat into Tacoma to have it hauled and my experience with them there at Gig Harbor Marina was excellent. The staff is friendly and helpful and seem very knowledgeable. Installing the Autoprop isn't a hard job, but I decided that since I don't have a prop puller, I'd let them do it. While the boat was out of the water, I had them wash down the hull and replace all the zincs. I have a diver that takes care of that for me, but since it was out it was easy.

The install went well. We did need to grind away some of the prop strut to give adequate clearance for the prop. Fortunately, a Catalina 400 owner who also has an Autoprop on the Catalina400 Yahoo group had mentioned the potential problem with clearing the strut. If he hadn't mentioned it, I'm not sure if either me or the installer would have noticed it. If you look at the photos you can see that the prop could have hit strut as it was changing from forward to reverse. A few minutes with a grinder and that problem was taken care of.

Here is a close up of where the prop would hit the strut.

After a couple minutes with a grinder, this is what it looked like.

Another, closer shot.

After waiting four hours for the tide to come in to give us enough water under the Travelift (it was a -2 tide today) we dropped Legacy back in the water.

With the standard 3-blade prop, 2500rpm would give us 6.1 knots on flat water with no wind. After the Autoprop was installed, we went out sailing on a beautiful day. Temperatures were in the 70's, we had 15 knots of wind, and it was bright and clear. (Those of you not from the PNW have no idea how unusual this is. We almost never get the combination of wind, sun, and warm temperatures. We are lucky if we get two out of the three.) Anyway with a 15 knot headwind and a light chop, 2500rpm now gave us 6.9 knots. More importantly, 2000-2200 rpm, which is a very comfortable power level for the Yanmar, gave a respectable 6.4 knots.

Reverse performance was better but it didn't eliminate the prop walk in reverse. This still means that getting in and out of our slip is going to continue to be a challenge depending on wind and tide.

Anyway, after just a short time I'm happy with it. Time will tell of course. Given the typical light winds we have here, I'm looking forward to seeing how it improves motor sailing performance.

Companionway Doors

2011-05-29T09:40:00.000-07:00

One of the features that we really liked on my folks Catalina 36, were the teak companionway doors that they had made. While at the Seattle boat show this winter, we ran into the same gentleman who made those doors and asked him to make some for Legacy.

He has a website at Cruising Concepts and does nice work in teak for all kinds of projects. He isn't cheap, and he isn't fast, but I like everything that I've seen him do.

The Catalina 400 comes with the typical teak companionway boards. While these are a great for using when out in heavy seas, they aren't the most convenient for coastal cruising. Catalina provides a handy shelf in the cabin for the boards, but that is space that we would like to use for other things. So the answer was to install some hinged companionway doors that could be left in place, or removed if you like.

My woodworking skills are not that good. Well, most of my skills aren't that good. So while the installation is not that difficult, it did take me a few hours, which was a couple hours longer than it should have. During the installation, you do have to use a sanding block to adjust the fit of the doors for your own boat. If I can do it, anyone can.

I was pleased with the way they turned out. We opted for teak doors with screens and removable plexiglass windows. Rather than varnish, I elected to just oil the doors.

From outside, doors closed. Notice how you can't see into the cabin, but just see reflections on the windows.

Outside, doors open.

Inside cabin, doors closed. Notice how well you can see through the dark plexiglass.

SmartPlug

2011-02-06T09:06:00.000-08:00

Yesterday I converted Legacy's shore power plug to a SmartPlug. I have been wanting to do this since I bought the boat and it was one of the things that I was going to do to my 36 before I decided to move to the 400. Fisheries Supply in Seattle had some good Seattle Boat Show pricing so I decided to pull the trigger on it. It is not a cheap conversion since it is a relatively small start-up company with lots of R&D expenses. Getting ETL approval of their system has been a challenge but they received it in October. They are still working on approval for the dockside plugs.

Anyway, I purchased a conversion kit as well as a molded, 50ft shore power chord. My rational for doing this was that I always like having two shore power chords. I'm essentially a lazy person and want as little to do as I'm heading our for an overnight or weekend as possible. It isn't hard to coil up a shore power chord and bring it on board, but I prefer to keep one on the boat and leave one permanently on the dock. Part of the reason is that I'm particular about how my dock chord is attached to the dock. So, I'll convert the end of the chord that I keep on the boat, and use a new molded chord for the one that is left on the dock. This increased the cost a lot, but for me it is worth it.

Changing out the plug on the on the boat isn't that difficult. However, it would have been a lot easier and quicker with another pair of hands. I have long arms, and I'm not sure someone shorter, with shorter arms, would have been able to do it solo. The hole that was drilled in my stern to accept the existing plug (receptacle or boatside connector is more accurate I suppose) is just slightly too small to accept the SmartPlug connector. My Dremel would have made short work of making it a tad larger, but since I had no 120 power on the boat (since it was shut off and disconnected obviously) and I didn't have a long enough extension chord, I had to use a hand file. It took a bit longer but was not difficult. Dropping tools, nuts, and washers down into the aft lazarette and retrieving them took a bit longer as well.

One thing that I didn't have with me and I wish I did was some electrical grease. After wiring the connector, I would have liked to cover the connections with grease to keep moisture out of the connections. That is something that will be pretty easy to do when I go out to boat since the connector is readily accessible to the aft lazarette. Here are some photos:

Interior of existing connector:

Interior of SmartPlug connector:

Exterior, connector installed:

Exterior with power chord attached:

LEDs

2010-09-24T17:27:00.000-07:00

One of the common issues folks have with boats is enough electrical power from their battery banks. Most sailors know more than I ever will about batteries, chargers, solar or wind power, gensets, etc... However, I do know that my wife likes to turn on lights, and the more lights that are on, the less time my batteries will last. I don't yet have a separate starting battery, so this is even more critical.

One solution is to use LEDs instead of the incandescent bulbs for lighting. The LEDs last longer, burn cooler, and use about 1/4 of the amount of power as an equivalent Halogen bulb.

Legacy has about 25 interior light fixtures, not counting the shear lighting which is made up of rope lights. All but the Nav table light and head lights use 10w G4 Halogen bulbs. The bulbs in the lights in the heads are a 5w G4 Halogen frosted bulb. Not counting the Nav table light, there are 5 types of fixtures on the boat. It is nice that Catalina chose fixtures that use the same bulb. This makes keeping spares much easier. What I wanted to do was find an affordable LED alternative to the 10w G4 Halogen. The Halogen give off great light, but they are also incredibly hot. Not only is this heat unwanted in the Summer, but they are exposed so are a real burn hazard.

This is the bulb that I found. You can order it directly from the company, LEDwholesalers.com, or you can do what I did and order through Amazon.com. If you order enough from Amazon, the shipping is free. This may offset the sales tax paid at Amazon depending on where you are. LEDWholesalers.com describes this bulb as G4 Base 18 Warm White LED 183 Lumen 360 degree 12V ACDC The price as of now on these through Amazon is only $14 each, they are $16 right now from LEDWholesalers.com Either way, much less expensive than other alternatives I've found. Anyway, it produces 186 Lumens of warm white light at the cost of 2.6 watts, 220mA @ 12v.

Here is a photo of the LED bulb compared to the G4 Halogen. Notice the different in size.

I ordered three of the bulbs to try out. I finally got a chance to get down to Legacy and give them a try. It was daylight, but I installed some in the aft cabin and blocked the ports to make it dark. I then took some comparison shots of the lights.

First we have the reading lights by the aft bunk. Here are two shots. The Halogen is on the left, the LED on the right. The color balance won't be exact, the Canon Digital Rebel was set for Auto color balance since was too lazy to do a custom color balance. On my screen, the LED has a faint green cast that wasn't there in the boat.

Next we've got the square lights that are in the upper corners of the aft cabin as well as one in the front cabin. I couldn't do side by side shots of these obviously, so here they are in sequence.

Here is the stock Halogen Bulb.

Here is the LED Bulb.

You'll notice there is very little difference between the two. However, here is a shot of the LED bulb in the fixture. Notice how low the LED bulb hangs. It does fit, but the three diodes on the end of the bulb are right up next to the cover. The pins of the LED are longer than the G4 bulbs,so one option would be to cut the pins shorter. Another would be to bend the pins to the side.

I think a better alternative would be to use a different bulb. One option would be the Disc Type G4 Base Side Pin 15 SMD LED, 10 Watt Holagen 197 Lumen Bulb. The pins would need to be bent at 90 degrees but it would fit and all the light would be aimed down, which is where you want it anyway. The price of this bulb from LEDWholesalers.com is $16 each.

Another alternative is a similar bulb but one that has the pins in the center back. Then you don't have to worry about bending the pins. Through Amazon again I found G4 Base LED Lamp - Rear Pin, Warm White 140 Lumen manufactured by a company called "Scintiluna". It is a back pin lamp similar to the one pictured below and was only $9 a piece. I ended up getting three of them. They claim 140 Lumens a 2w. Who knows?

Update: I received the bulbs from Scintiluna. G4 Base LED Lamp - Rear Pin, Warm White 140 Lumen . Total cost for 3 includeing S&H was $31.47. Here is what they actually look like.

Here is the bulb installed in the fixture.

OK, next we have the small swivel spot lights that are all over the Catalina 400. These provide great lighting and it is handy they can be aimed. There are two of these light in the aft cabin right in front of the mirror above the engine. Here are a couple shots of those. Here the LED is on the left, the Halogen is on the right. Ignore the man in the mirror.

At least in my 400 (Hull #328) there are a total of three of these types of fixtures, two in the aft head and one in the front. They have a white plastic cover retained by a small phillips head screw. Inside, are two frosted 5w G4 bulbs. I have no idea why they are frosted.

The LED tower bulb fit in this fixture just fine. Here is a shot of it again with one LED bulb installed. While I don't have a picture of it, the cover went on just fine and it gave great light.

Even though that bulb fits OK in the fixture, with the I decided to try the 15 led flat, round bulb by LEDWholesalers that was pictured earlier. I think they will just fit in the fixture and should give good light. I'll update when I get those flat bulbs installed.

Update: Here is the fixture with the Disc Type G4 Base Side Pin 15 SMD LED, 10 Watt Holagen 197 Lumen Bulb Replacemnt For RV Camper Trailer Boat Marine Warm White, 1114WW bulbs installed. These were $16 each from LEDWholesalers through Amazon.

Here they are installed. The light is actually very good and much brighter than the two 5w bulbs provide. The fixture is marked not to exceed 2x5w bulbs.

I didn't take any shots of the two sconce lights in the main cabin but this LED tower bulb fits well in that fixture and gives great light.
Update: Here is the sconce light with the 18 LED tower bulb installed.

The only odd ball on my boat is the flexible light at the Nav table. It is the only fixture that uses a bayonet bulb. I wasn't able to determine the size when I was on the boat, I could tell it was either a 6w or 8w halogen bulb. I need to bring my more recent glasses to the boat. However, when I got back home and looked at the shot that I took of it, the "6w" was pretty easily readable. The wonders of digital photography. So I just need to find an LED replacement for this bulb.

Since I'm not at the boat, I don't know if it is a BA9s or BA7s bulb. My guess is a BA9s as the BA7s bases seem to be more prevalent in Europe. For now, I won't do anything with it.

Holding tank vent

2010-09-19T08:21:00.000-07:00

With the direction of some other Catalina 400 owners, I found the aft holding tank vent behind the access panel in the shower. The vent thru-hull was right there. I took off the hose, created a packing with some small line, and back-flushed the vent hose with a water hose. It seemed to flow free. Looking at the clam shell vent though, I think that I want to replace it with a standard through hull. The right angle of the OEM vent works well for the hoses, and I know that I can find a plastic thru-hull vent in the right diameter with a 90 angle to replace it.

Here is a shot of the inside of the thru-hull. The large white hose to the left is the aft holding tank pump out hose. What I haven't figured out is how to actually remove this fitting. Yet another question I'll ask current Catalina owners. They are very helpful.

Here is a vent that I'm considering replacing it with.

I may also just use a straight through Marelon vent but I'm not sure if there is enough clearance for the hose.

Heads and tanks

2010-09-12T16:34:00.000-07:00

One of the issues we discovered with Legacy right away was that the aft head didn't work. It would pump out just fine, but not flush with raw water. We just used the forward head until I had the time to tear into it to find out the problem.

The heads in the Catalina 400, at least in my year, were a Wilcox-Crittendon Headmate. This is a typical, cheap, marine toilet. When I opened it up, I found that their is a two-flap valve on the intake side of the pump. Essentially this is a flat piece of rubber, about the size of dual plug electrical outlet, with two flaps cut into it. Attached to these flaps are brass and stainless steel washers to provide weight and rigidity to the flaps. When I took it apart, these washers fell out of the housing. The rivet holding them on had corroded completely away.

I picked up a Refurbishing kit for the head from Fisheries Supply in Seattle. This kit, about $75, contains various seals, springs, and pistons for the head. The only part I needed was this dual flapper valved. Next time, I'm going to see if I can get that part alone from Wilcox-Crittendon. I took the head apart, greased up the parts with Super Lube, replaced the one part, and the head works fine.

Unfortunately, I think it is just a matter of time before that part rusts away again. With the way the head is setup, there is no way to flush the head with fresh water, which would reduce the rust significantly. On Vision, our Catalina 36, my Dad had plumbed the head so the head intake shared the line with the sink drain. The advantage was that after using the boat, you could then close the intake through-hull, and run fresh water in the sink using that fresh water to then flush the head. This resulted in only fresh water being left in the pump assembly, as well as the discharge lines between the head and the holding tank. This cuts down on odors significantly.

Looking at the heads, I could do this pretty easily in the forward head, as all the fittings are located together under the head sink. However in the aft head, the head intake is in a separate compartment from the sink plumbing and there isn't any good way to join them. I'll have to give that some thought.

Speaking of heads, we emptied both holding tanks on Sunday. On the 400, each Waste outlet is on a different side of the boat, making it less than convenient to empty both tanks. However, we managed without too much of a mess. Unfortunately, the city dock that has the pump-out only has it available from April through October, meaning we'll have to find another location, not nearly as convenient, for the winter months.

Finally. Since we put Legacy in the water, we had not put fuel in it. The fuel gauge still read "Full" but according to some other 400 owners, this gauge can be unreliable. We had put only 8 hours on the engine since we put it in the water (in 2 weeks of ownership we put 4% of the total engine hours on this 5 year old boat). When we filled up the diesel tank, it took 7.7 gallons. Typically, fuel consumption for these is about 1 gal/hr. When Legacy was shipped, her fuel tank was essentially full!

A decent night's sleep

2010-09-12T16:30:00.000-07:00

After getting the boat in the water and to our marina, my wife and I went back the next night and spend the night on the boat. One of the primary reasons for choosing the Catalina 400 was it's aft cabin. After spending a night on the boat, we are very happy with our choice. The berth is very spacious, even for two tall folks. While you do have to watch to keep from hitting your head, there is enough headroom in the berth and the cabin to be comfortable. The biggest issue will be finding sheets to fit the berth. It is a bit wider than a Queen at the head, and a bit narrower at the foot. While we could buy specialty sheet from Catalina, I'm not willing to spend the money.

Splashed!

2010-08-28T08:38:00.000-07:00

We got Legacy in the water yesterday afternoon and sailed it from the Hylebos waterway to Gig Harbor.

The commissioning went pretty well. I hired two guys to do the work, Steve Brown and Glenn Cowling who work as "Something Special". Silly name, but these guys are great. They did work for my folks on the Catalina 36, and come highly recommended by many sailors around the Tacoma area. After watching them work, I highly recommend them.

The yard had an opening for the Travellift at 4:00 in the afternoon. By 5:00pm, the backstays were on, the rig tensioned correctly, and we were set. Initially, my wife and I were going to sail it to our slip in Gig Harbor with another couple (our broker and her husband), both avid sailors and friends. Unfortunately, she wasn't able to get away at the last minute as she had another sailboat she had to show.

So, this meant my wife and I would take our maiden voyage on our own. This made my wife a bit nervous as she doesn't have that much sailing experience and I've not had experience with anything larger than our Catalina 36.

The sun was out, it was warm, and their was a nice 10 knot breeze. That is an almost unheard of combination hear in the Puget Sound. We might be cold, sunny and windy, or cold, cloudy and windy, or sunny, warm and dead calm, but never warm, sunny, with a nice sailing breeze. A good omen?

Initially we decided to motor, but after clearing the Hylebos waterway, with the conditions so perfect we decided to unfurl the Genoa. That went smoothly enough and we were sailing about about 5.5 knots under the Genoa alone. The wind was about 13 knots apparent, and we decided to unfurl the main. I've not used a roller furled main before so I knew this would be a bit of a learning curve.

We got the main out and at about the same time the wind picked up to about 15-16 knots apparent. We soon found out what we hadn't secured well enough in the cabin. "Legacy" handled wonderfully. With the 130% Genoa, the helm was nicely balanced. We found that the two of us could easily handle the boat as she is setup.

I then decided to try reefing the main. It didn't go so smoothly. However, I got it done eventually and practiced bringing the main out and in under sail, playing with the loads to get an idea of the best way to do it with the furler. I can see that getting the tensions and angles correct to avoid any folds or creases in the main will be a trick. All in all, it sailed wonderfully.

Getting into my slip was another story. This is a new slip to us and this was the first time we had approached it from the water, in a harbor that I haven't been real familiar with in over 40 years. We are at the inmost end of a long dock. There is a lot less room there than what it looked like when I saw the slip from the dock. It is a starboard tie with a turn to port to bow in to the slip. The wind was from my stern as I ghosted in between the docks. I ended up making my turn too late, being more used to how the 36 will spin. I got the bow in the slip, but the wind was pushing my stern beyond the slip. Unfortunately, there isn't any more room to just back out and come at the slip from the other direction. I figured I was OK and would use the prop-walk to kick my stern to port. Well once again, I was thinking about how my 36 behaved. The 400 has very, very little prop-walk compared to the 36.

it was ugly, but in the end, I didn't damage my boat, the dock, or hit my slip-mates boat to my port. Fortunately, the marina was empty so no-one saw my grand display of docking skills. On the other hand, if there had been someone to toss a line to, it would have gone much smoother.

So today, we will go back out to the boat and start to clean up the aftereffects of a 1000 miles of Interstate travel and a few days in a very dirty yard.

Shipping "Legacy"

2010-08-21T08:06:00.000-07:00

On Friday, Aug 20th, Legacy was picked up in Marina Del Rey and put on a trailer for the trip North. You will note that she still has the name Sally Marie II on her and the rather silly mermaid on the bow. Those will be removed ASAP.

If things go smoothly, (and they have so far) Legacy should be delivered to Hylebos Marina Tuesday at 1:00pm.

Autoprop it is

2010-08-18T07:31:00.000-07:00

I finally decided on the propeller. I'm going to go with the Autoprop. It was a decision between the Autoprop and the Max-Prop. Here is how I broke the decision down.

Pros for Autoprop vs Max-Prop
1) Autoprop is more efficient under power than Max-Prop. Lots of arguments can be made about the so-called, "auto" pitching of the Autoprop, but it is simply a more efficient prop than the Max-Prop. In the Salish Sea, we spend a lot of time under power (unfortunately).

2) Don't have to circumcise the prop shaft with the Autoprop like you do the Max-Prop. This was a big one. Once you cut off the end of the shaft, then using another prop, such as if I hit a rock, damage the prop, and need a replacement, becomes more difficult. With the Autoprop, I can always throw on the old 3 blade if need be.

Cons for Autoprop vs Max-Prop
1) The Autoprop isn't as efficient under sail as the Max-Prop, as it doesn't feather as well, but I'm not going to be racing and the Autoprop is still a lot more efficient than the fixed prop on there now.

2) The Autoprop is more expensive. While a buddy of mine claims to be able to get a Max-Prop for me for less than direct from PYI, he hasn't gotten back to me. If he could, the Max-Prop would be about $1500 less than the Autoprop. That is a LOT of money.

3) Max-Prop is local to me. Any problems and they are just up the freeway about an hour. Being local, there are a lot of folks that have used them in this area.

4) Timeliness of delivery. I could get the Max-Prop next-day. The autoprop is more likely next week. Given that the boat may be sitting on the hard waiting for the prop, this is a consideration as well. However, AB-Marine assured me that I could get it early next week (we'll see if AB-Marine comes through).

So I finally decided that the "pros" for Autoprop outweighed the "cons" and ordered it this morning from AB-Marine.

Depending on who you listen to, the boat will either magically float across the water, burning nary a drop of fuel, or the blades will fly off, causing catastrophic failure and resulting in the sinking of the vessel. We will see...

Decision, decisions, verse 2 - Radar Reflectors

2010-08-14T10:11:00.000-07:00

We all know that having a radar reflector is a good idea. Anytime you sail anywhere near commercial shipping lanes, it is a good idea to be seen. For those of us that sail in the Salish Sea we have frequent encounters with commercial shipping of all kinds and have to cross these commercial lanes to get most anywhere. Fiberglass or wooden boats don't show up on radar so we usually use some type of device designed to reflect back the radar signal to it's source so that we can seen. All very good and reasonable.

For Legacy, I have been thinking about what type of reflector to use. It was suggested to me by Ron Marcuse on the Catalina 400 Yahoo group to consider a Tri-Lens reflector. As I looked into it, what I found out was a bit distressing.

For years on our boats, our family has used an octahedral reflector like the Davis Echom aster. We just assumed this would work just fine. Most of the time we hoisted it on a spreader halyard using the handy attachment points at the top and bottom of the reflector. This placed the reflector in the vertical position, rather than the ideal "catch rain" position (as shown in the photo). What I didn't know until I did a little research, is that hanging the reflector vertically reduces it's effectiveness significantly. According to testing done by a number of organizations, including Practical Sailor and the UK Marine Accident Investigation Branch, this design simply is not very effective at best, and is less so if not properly mounted or if the boat is on a heel. The problem is that if the reflector is oriented just right to the radar source, it reflects pretty well. However, is also has a lot of dead zones, angles where there is would be no return to the radar source. Apparently, many commercial radar systems have alarms who will only sound if it picks up a consistent radar target. If the target keeps disappearing, the alarm won't sound so you are at the mercy of whoever is manning the radar display. So, while the Davis Echomaster is relatively inexpensive (for a piece of boat equipment), it may not be worth the bother.

So if what I've used for years isn't very effective, what about the Tri-Lens? The Tri-Lens uses three Luneberg lenses to focus the radar energy and then reflect it back. Testing reveals that it is very effective without the large dead zones in the octahedral designs. This makes the average Radar Cross Section, much better. The problem though, is that for any radar reflector, the strength of the return signal is based on it's Radar Cross Section (RCS) . The RCS is related exponentially to the size of the of the reflector. Also to be effecting the cross section size of the reflector needs to be at least a few times the size of the wavelength of the radar signal, which for the S-band radar used by many (most?) commercial vessels, is about 4".

All this means is that the standard Tri-Lens, where each Luneberg lens is about 5.25" inches in diameter is marginal. The design produces a very consistent signal with few dead spots that is effected little by heel. However, that consistent RCS is not that large. The large Tri-Lens has Luneberg lenses that are about 7.25" in diameter and provide a much better signal return. However, the standard Tri-Lens already weighs about 5.5lbs. The large Tri-Lens is about 15 pounds!

Cost is another issue. The standard Tri-Lens is over $300 at West Marine. The large Tri-Lens is over $800. They also have a mini Tri-lens that is under $200 but from what I can tell, it wouldn't be worth it.

There is another option. The Echomax 230 reflector is a series of stacked corner arrays in a plastic cylinder. It performs very as long as it remains upright. As soon as the boat heels, even a little, the performance drop way down. This makes using it on a sailboat under sail problematic. It still has the same problems of expense and weight as the Tri-Lens. The Echomax 230 weighs about 5.5lbs and, with mast mounting bracket, costs over $350 at West Marine.

So what to do? The Davis Echomaster might get you noticed in the fog if the radar watch on a commercial vessel was paying attention and the vessel was in exactly the right position and the reflector was mounted exactly the correct way. Too many "ifs" for my liking. Still, it is inexpensive. I think all things considered, the standard Tri-Lens would be the best option, balancing performance, cost, and weight. I could mount it a foot or two above the radar dome on the mast and it would be reasonably high, and out of the way of most of the rigging.

We'll see....

Decisions, decisions verse 1- Propeller

2010-08-14T07:44:00.000-07:00

As we work to figure out the logistics of getting the purchase finalized, and transporting Legacy (still named the Sally Marie II) up to Tacoma, there are all kinds of other decisions that I'm faced with.

The Catalina 400 comes with an 18"x 2" fixed prop. When the boat was hauled for the survey, that big prop looks like a sea anchor hanging back there. I started to consider a feathering or folding prop. With a little research, two options presented themselves, Max-Prop and Autoprop.

There are some real advantages to these propellers. Under forward power, the blades rotate to give forward thrust, under no power the blades feather or fold to present less drag, and when in reverse, they rotate to provide reverse thrust. The advantages are much less drag when sailing and much better reverse performance than a fixed prop. Other owners of Catalina 400s report an increase in sailing speed of at least 1 knot using these propeller and much less prop-walk in reverse. This would make backing into a slip much easier. The cost is significant. I was quoted $3,150 from Max-Prop and found an Autoprop for sale for $3999! The other disadvantage is that there is increased maintenance required as the mechanisms need to be greased regularly. While the manufacturers may claim otherwise, this would be difficult to do in the water, so the boat would need to be hauled at least every two years to have this done.

Max-Prop is made by PYI Inc. , a company based in Lynnewood, WA., essentially a bit over an hour up I-5 from me. These are the same folks who manufacture the PSS Shaft Seal used on many production sailboats. Max-Prop is a feathering propeller. The Max-Prop has flat blades, rather than the curved blades common on propellers. This allows the blades to feather, presenting a small profile to the water. Because of the flat blades, there is a small reduction in prop efficiency in forward gear.

Max-Prop installation requires that you cut off maybe an inch of the prop shaft. This means that using a prop other than the Max-Prop could be an issue if I ever decided I wasn't happy with it, or needed to replace the prop after an accident or failure.

Autoprop is a little different. It's blades are curved and cupped, giving a little more efficiency than the Max-Prop (or so claims Autoprop). This also results in a bit more drag than Max-Prop under sail. They also are designed so that the pitch angle varies with the speed of the boat and the power from the engine. Frankly, this seems a little like voodoo, but it apparently works. Sailors report significant improvements in under-power performance with the Autoprop.

So what to do? The advantages to Autoprop are increased powered performance, no modification to the prop shaft, and easier installation. The Max-Prop on the other hand has less drag under sail, easier maintenance, is a local company. The Max-Prop likely would be as much as $1500 less in cost as I have a friend who is a dealer. The other issue is that I could easily get a Max-Prop in a few days, plenty of time to install it before Legacy is splashed here in Tacoma. I don't know about the availability of an Autoprop but my guess it would be at least a few weeks which would delay the commissioning of Legacy.

Who knows, I have a little time to think about it but at this point I'll probably go with the local favorite, Max-Prop.

Inspection and Sea Trial

2010-08-13T08:31:00.000-07:00

We had some specific requirements when looking for a Catalina 400. We wanted a newer boat. After owning an older boat, I've found I'm more about using a boat, than working on a boat. While my Dad loved a project, I love a sail.

We also wanted in-mast furling. Yeah, I know about sail shape, lack of roach etc... I also know that if it takes 10 minutes to take off a sail cover and another 10 minutes to wrestle it back on later, that the sails won't go up for a 20 minute sail. I'm not that much of a purist.

We found a 2005 Catalina 400 in Marina Del Rey, CA and made an offer. I flew down for a sea trial, inspection and survey. All went well. Very few problems identified. Now it is just a matter of working out the logistics of getting the boat shipped up to Tacoma and put in the water again.