Hiya,

I'm looking for some advice on a boat I'm restoring.

I bought a house-boat in a pretty sorry state about two years ago and decided to rebuild her from the inside out.  In doing so, I discovered she was a High Speed Launch, although I've never managed to identify her.  She's 40'6" LOA with a 9'6" beam, would originally have taken twin Perkins P6M engines and from this, I think, was probably a 300 class HSL.  One thing I have discovered is that she was, at one time, owned by Richard Dimbleby - some time around 1965-70.

Anyway, I've decided to do a proper (or as near proper as my wallet can afford) job of restoring her and her current condition is a hull with the decks partically stripped up and no superstructure (which was a horrific box a la house-boat).  The hull seems fine to me, although she's been out of the water for a good six months now and some of the seams are opening towards the gunwales.  What I really want to know is, if I put engines back in her and put her to sea, will the hull take it?  How can I truely tell the condition of the hull?  Is it worth my while getting a survey done on her?  I'm loath to do so, as I have a deathly fear of the surveyor shaking his head and declaring my boat firewood.

I understand that, where HSL's have been restored before, the hull has been sheathed in fibreglass - although this is a solution, I would much rather keep the hull more original than that.  Of course, if this is at the expense of refastening al the timbers, I'd have to reconsider...

Any advice will be very gratefully received.

Best Regards,

Paul

Hi Don,

 sorry I've left it so long to reply.

  My boat's an ST as well it turns out, not an HSL - shows what I know!

  My hull seems pretty strong and the general opinion of people I've asked is that, as long as I'm not going out charging into force ten seas with the throttles wide open, then the hull should be fine and is probably best left undisturbed.  I'm still not convinced about fibreglassing, having taken so much of it off my boat and found nothing but rot underneath...

  In the end, I *did* get a chap to semi-survey my boat (he runs a local restoration company in Penryn where my boat is and agreed to look over her for me) and he was actually pretty complimentary, so I'm a bit happier about the whole thing, now.

  Good luck with yours - have you got much to do?

Paul

Hi Don and Paul

As far as I can make out there were three BPB Co Seaplane Tender variants,the 200 series (Nos 200-324) narrow beam 37'6" LOA 8'8" beam,the 40' narrow beam boats and the later wide beam 300 series(Nos 357-366  and 436-439) which were 41'6" LOA 11'9" beam.The numbers then started with 1500 in July 1942.I'm still looking for more info relating to boats with the dimensions you've mentioned,perhaps this will prompt somebody to enlighten us.From the pics I've seen of both boats,they do look like BPB Co designs.

Hello all,

A good friend of mine has completed a significant amount of work on an 68'x19' beam RTTL replacing in total around 40% of the side planking and structural timbers beneath with a view to returning her to original service condition. His bill for timber is huge. He found that most of the damage had been caused by fresh water ingress from leakage around non-standard hand rails that had been placed around the deck. Also the previous owner had placed fibreglass wool between the inner hull and a new interior skin to insulate the boat from the cold. This soaked up even more water causing more damage. I suspect that any boat of this type with good ventilation around the inner hull will last for years and that by encasing the hull in fibreglass could prevent the natural drying process.

Cheers A76NJK

Hi A76NJK

Same applies to RTTL 2753,she has perfectly sound planking except behind the ply covers below the deck edge,where fresh water has caused some rot(this from a deck shower which had been fitted for the painters during her paint storage depot days).Dad soaks all the boats daily with salt water before the sun hits them and keeps them well ventilated,this I think has been the secret to their current good shape(also they've never been laid up in a river).Which RTTL has your freind got?A guess would be 2748,let's see some pics if he has no objection.

Regards,Christian

Hello Christian,

The boat is RTTL 2751 Phoenix and is in very good condition in pretty much every respect. Quite a bit of the original equipment still remains on board. She was laid-up in the River Hamble for many years just south of the M27 river bridge and used as a live aboard. The water being very tidal was mainly salt which I believe has looked after the lower planking. However she will be removed from the water later in the year to inspect the underside and for repainting back to service colour scheme but from the inside she looks just fine with no significant leakage.

I will get some pictures of the restoration for the forum when I next see the owner. The interior is very 1970's and needs reworking but externally she is very close to her service condition.

Cheers

A76NJK

Christian, the owner has asked me not to give away her location at this time as it is on a private birth and the other boat owners may get a bit twitchy if there were unplanned visits to her. However it is safe to say that she is still on the south coast awaiting further work.

She did deteriorate quite quickly when she was on the Hamble but then most things do when left alone for ten years. When my mate bought her in 1999, he was fully aware of the scale of the project and to his credit he has done a fantastic job, mainly on his days off of work, to bring her back from the brink.

Although there is still plenty to do what with fitting new engines, gear boxes etc. most of the serious structural work is complete and with luck this time next year she will be ready to go.

Cheers, A76NJK

Which engines and boxes will she have?2753 was going to get a pair of turbodiesel 330hp coupled to existing vee-drives but thats on hold for the time being.

Regards,Christian

Christian,

Its a shame that 2753 will have to wait a bit longer for her rebuild but i'm sure it will come. It would be fantastic to see a pair of Mk1b's in action once again.

2751 already has a pair of 215hp Perkins 6 cyl Diesels which I suspect would give displacement speed or slightly more, say 8-10 kts, but the plan is that the new (possibly reconditioned/remanufactured) engines will be equivalent horse power to the original i.e. 1500hp Diesel V12's. This should allow the original performance to be achieved although hopefully having only a fraction of the original Griffons fuel consumption. Safety is a big issue also, so having a couple of thousand gallons of petrol sloshing around would probably give the insurers a heart attack.

There are a number of issues to overcome though, not least financial. This size of Diesel engine weighs in the region of 4.5 tons each plus gearboxes etc. as opposed to the Sea Griffon weighing in at less than half that. However less fuel can be carried as the Diesel does not have the enormous thirst of the Griffon. Stronger barers may be required and a host of other things but I am confident that these problems can be overcome.

This is likely to be a big project and may cause a bit of a stir when she is relaunched in her original colour scheme. Nearer the time of the work beginning I will post more details and anyone who may be interested in having a look will be welcome. 

Cheers

A76NJK

Hi A76NJK

She will provide quite a spectacle if the big diesels go in,although weight as you say will determine whether or not she will "get up on the plane".I would have thought that she'd manage to "labour"with the current powerplants.Here are the links to the pics I mentioned

1999; http://image03.webshots.com/3/6/52/85/3365285WguCtgejli_ph.jpg - http://image03.webshots.com/3/6/52/85/3365285WguCtgejli_ph.j pg

2001; http://www.vk2bv.org/radio/asr2001.jpg - http://www.vk2bv.org/radio/asr2001.jpg

2004;  http://www.vk2bv.org/radio/asr2004.jpg - http://www.vk2bv.org/radio/asr2004.jpg  

Don,

Thanks for that. I've been looking at the Cummins 38 litre V12 which as mentioned tops the scales at 4.2 tons with the heat exchangers.

The new trade price for this sort of sized engine fit as supplied by the manufacturers to a well known Channel Island boat builder is in the region of £200,000 for the pair excluding installation and VAT!

A76NJK

Hello A76NJK

Re powerplants for 2751,an idea may be to charter MGB 81 for a few hours and see how she goes (40 kts apparently) with MAN diesels.

http://www.themilestonepartnership.co.uk/mgb81.html - http://www.themilestonepartnership.co.uk/mgb81.html

Don,

Thanks for that. I have registered with the company and inserted a free advert. Lets see what turns up.

A76NJK

Thanks Don,

We are though seeking around the 1500hp mark so these are a bit on the small side. I does show however that the engines are out there, its just a matter of finding them and negotiating the right price. Also V12s will be the best configuration as the engine sound will match the original. Semi-beggers however cannot be choosers and if the correctly priced V8s or V16s turn up then sobeit.

If the chap in Stockholm has anything bigger though let me know.

Cheers

A76njk

Hello AndyS,

The boat is RTTL 2751. Her military weight loaded was in the 50 ton area. A lot of the military equipment has been removed and a comfortable living area with two cabins and two heads were installed very neatly in the 70's together with a 20ft galley. The actual weight with two adequately sized Diesels will still probably top the 50 ton mark so theoretically the same speed should be achievable as in service, about 38kts, albeit with a more aft trim. She is however a 50 year old lady and unless conditions are perfect there will be a speed limit imposed of 30 kts.

A76NJK

AndyS,

She is currently fitted with a pair of Cummins 215hp Diesels with V-drive tx. The steering gear has been overhauled and reconnected and a recent survey commissioned. She passed the survey with flying colours with obviously some remedial work but essentially she is in a very sound condition. There are some screws used where rivets should have been fitted and some timber work to address. Also the cabin layout below will be redesigned to allow easier access as currently there is only a near vertical ladder step from the cockpit unless entry is gained through the engine room.

New or reconditioned engines are being looked at now. MTU's are looking promising but I really do want the power plants to be contra-rotating to prevent heel under way. The engines may have to be positioned somewhat further forward for weight distribution purposes as they weigh probably four times as much as the original. But there are a whole series of decisions to be made, each one depending on the previous change made. I'll keep posting as developments are made, although she will be moving from her current position under her own power very soon. This I suspect will be the first time in many years that a Mk1b RTTL will move under its own power.

PS She is 68' by 19'.6'' and built by Vosper in 1956.

A76NJK

Don,

Yes! Or rather was.

A76NJK,

The Griffon Engine weighed 2 and a Half tons complete and the "V" Drives were another 2 CWT.  She originally ( as did all the Mk1A's and 2's) 2,220 Gallons of 130 Octane Aviation Spirit which gave the class a 10 Hr range, this figure was using maximum usable.

Just for interest for a little while I was her senior fitter.

Clive

Hello Clive,

Sorry about the late reply. The weight of the Griffons is more than I was told and makes the selection of the Diesels less problematic. Should you have any information or anacdotes to share about 2751 I'm sure everyone on the forum would be very interested to hear.

I know she was based in Bahrain for a period of time. Do you know if she spent any time in Cyprus?

Things are shortly about to happen for 2751 and as soon as developments occur I will post them here. She is about to undergo a full refit and if funds are available will have new power plants fitted ready for next spring and be returned to the late 50's colour scheme.

Regards

A76NJK

Hi Phil

Hear hear, I'm with you on this issue. Epoxy sheathing is OK in cooler climates provided it's done properly and moisture levels in the wood are correct. Wessex Resins and Adhesives are a good company for advice and materials.

Rgds,Christian. 

Hi Guys,

Regarding the sheathing, I'd like your opinions. My little boat has a double diagonal mahogany chine which has had a tough life.

I've repaired any obvious damaged sectionk with new sapele DD and , roved as per original planking.  The rest of the 70 year old DD planking is showing it's age a bit. It's still complete but not nearly as strong as when first made.

My plan was to epoxy sheath to the waterline to give strength to the hull.  I was told that Fiberglass doesn't bond to the timber but epoxy does. The main reasons for this are to restore strength/rigidity to the hull and add resistance to wood borers like the Teredo worm.

I'd appreciate any advice on how to proceed as this seems to be a much more complex subject than I first assumed!!

Thanks

Don

Don

I used to have a wooden canal cruiser which leaked. Discussed F/glass sheath, both to waterline and full with boat yard. Advice was that it was a short term solution BUT one hairline crack below waterline and therefore unoticed would result in a rotton hull very quickly.

I spent a lot of money avoiding fiberglass and personaly wouldn't go near a wood boat that has been glassed. The yard showed me one that had been done. It was bad.

I dont know anything about epoxy sheath though so can't comment on that.

Thanks for the advice. It is as I feared a complex subject.

In my little boat, the bottom DD planking is nowhere hear as strong as the new planking we've applied.  Maybe I'm overcautuious but the 6 mm epoxy/glass sheathing should have made the hull stronger than when new and,as it's below the waterline and antifouled, the boat would look exactly as when new so purists should be content!!

The only options I have are:

1. Caulk and paint and keep speed down to ensure no pounding.
2. Epoxy sheath to waterline and ensure good ventilation in hull.
3. Replace all old timbers below the waterline.  A bit expensive.

Any advice greatly appreciated....

According to Christian MGB81 and HSL1502 are epoxy sheathed. I think that MTB 102 is not sheathed. Pehaps a chat with the appropriate people at the Trust and with Richard from the 102 Trust will help, after all they are actualy running the boats and will presumably have some experiamce of them.

From memory 102 is capable of approx 20/25 kts and planes so that might be your starting point.

 Just a thought and may prove worthless but worth looking into.

 Has anyone enquired into the cost & effectiveness of carbon fibre sheathing below the waterline?

 Its semi flexible but unlike fibreglass would take quite an impact to damage. Also applied with the same method as canvas & dope on planes, ie you fix carbon fibre matting then paint on fixer.

 Its just a thought & have emailed a few companies as to suitability of materials & price. May help with conservation rather than restoration but not promising anything until i know more so dont take my word for it.

 Also looking into wood hardeners but not getting my hopes up as you can well understand.

 Gotta be cheaper than copper sheathing with todays scrap prices (if its viable).

 Any other ideas welcome as the ones i'm looking into saving have no hope of economic salvation at all, glad thats not the reason as there'd be none left.

 Look into it & let me know what you think folks. At worst we preserve them for a few years more, at best we preserve them for future generations then its in the hands of that next generation. Dont want to go off half cocked so any feedback is good and read with an open mind.

Hi Jimmy,

  like your ideas, this is just a thought, but if you're prepared to go to the (probably quite large) expense of carbon-fibre cladding, why not just resign your restoration to taking a long time and start re-planking?

  GRP and epoxy sheathing are great for preserving and lengthening the life of a boat, but if you're considering wood hardner (and I've been there - I found a saw and new wood a far more pleasing solution), then surely it'd be better to put new wood down before you cover it in fibreglass?

  Again, this is just a thought - how far gone is your hull?

Paul

Interesting comments AndyS.

How Do you feel about using the clear penetrating epoxy sealer (CPES) that the yanks seam fond of right now as a method of chemically bonding the epoxy into the planks to provide a better (dare is say it chemical) Bond between the timber and any sheathing process? I know the idea of reinforcing the wood with epoxy has its doubters but perhaps using the CPES as a method of penetrating the surface of the timber and providing a better join may be the way forwards.

This would seem to be a solution to the timber /epoxy join. It would seem that if the main failure point in any sheathing process is the join, then if the join can be ‘blurred’ then it may reduce the instances of failure and even make the process more tolerant of ‘sloppy’ application.

Hi andy and paul,

 Your prob right about cost of carbon fibre. Wondered if the amount needed for a boat would bring it to a reasonable price as you would have to put in a large order & bypass middlemen.

 Was worth a thought

Hi guys,

 Has anyone had any experience or dealings with farrow systems? http://www.farrowsystem.com - www.farrowsystem.com

I am considering this method to remove the paint from the hull of MASB 32. (inside and out) as opposed to a blowtorch or shotblasting.

The Farrow system uses low pressure but uses water in its process which would change the moisture content of the wood prior to epoxy coating which would need drying out.

 I shall be calling West system tomorrow to ask wether this process is advisable but would like to hear if anyone has had any practical experience..

 Cheers,  Clive,,,,..

she will not be in the country until june or thereabouts and any process will not start until late autumn.

The Farrow system uses very low pressure (2-6 bar) with a combination of hot water and media so should not waste at dwell points, It is also said that a good operator can take off a layer of paint at a time, I agree with the hand scraping but if I can find a suitable alternative I will go for it as I don't like bilges! also it is not too messy, have a look at the video on the website..

 '32 is in good shape for a 65 year old boat but does have tho odd 'soft' bit, the reason I have considered removing all the coatings is so that I can 'start again'  new paint will easier to keep clean and clean bilges smell less. paint will also bond to good wood as opposed to flaky paint or soft wood so seeking out and destroying soft wood (or replacing) is better for me as I don't want an ongoing situation with the hull.

I am still open to ideas as I have lots of thinking time.

Andy,

I may be known for doing silly things but I am not loony! A skipper will be doing the trip back, I may join him with a couple of (ship)mates at LaRochelle for the final leg to Lowestoft where we will part company and I will be joined by a train load of 'dudes' for the trip to the northern broads.

 Indeed, the last thing I want is a half fininished boat forgotten about in a shed, or to ruin her quickly with the wrong techniques.

  No problem having a look, I recon I'll have to organise open days!

 Cheers,  Clive.

HI Clive

The Farrow System works well on wood provided the substrate is harder than the coating, which is not always the case on old boats. It will find the soft spots for you though! Have you had an answer from West System by now? Presumably you will be using their epoxies and rovings under the new paint.

Hi Christian,

West say that the Farrow system is ok to use they suggest it is not a good idea to coat the inside with epoxy as this will not let the wood breathe (although this is not what they used to say)  so a suitable decent paint needs to be found, dambeline has been suggested.

The one thing I am debating at the moment is wether to turn her upside down. the superstructure will be coming off anyway so thats ok, as will the engines be out. I will be making a wheeled cradle so if I make this to fit the hull it will be useless if she is upside down. What I am thinking is if I have to get cranes in to turn her, then again to right her am I better off turning the cradle into a rolling cradle. or doing repairs, blasting and epoxying upside down or going halfway laying her over and doing half at a time, this still raises issues over coating round the keel but probably less problems than the other options.

On another note does anyone know why my set of plans show a longer wheelhouse 'quarterlight?' window than what there appears to be on photos of MASB's? I think my plans are by John Pritchard but I may be wrong, I'll check when I get home

Hi Clive,

If you go ahead with this please let us know how it goes. We may have a use for it.

 Trantomanta has it spot on!

 Seal the outside of the hull as normal but make sure the inside can breathe. If its glossed inside then strip it out as she wont take long to rot in the UK climate. Any cheap wood preserver meant for outside use will do , eg cuprinol, B&Q £5 for 10 gallon junk so long as its got fungicidal additives & lets her timbers breath. Mix in used deisel engine oil & you've effectively got creasote but dont think the health & safety lot will be very cheerful & too much would soak right through & compromise outer barrier.

 Seeing the damage the jetwash did to 506 i wish we'd hired a couple of guys to scrape off barnacles then sand her back, may have had a lot less planking to replace(2/3 instead of 100% new chine).

 Good luck with her Clive! Sure you'll keep her the best whaleback in the water!!

Cuprinol makes sense, doubt I'll be mixing diesel with it as I recon that would make her stink forever!

 with regard to the jetwash if it took the wood off then the wood was not worth leaving on, sounds like the barnacles may have been holding her together!

Clive

Hard luck with the voyage. Does she still have self bailers? when motoring these are much faster than using pumps and were standard fit originally.

Just a note on preservatives...

If you want to use adhesives or bonded caulking later then use oil or oily solvent based preservatives with caution. If it soaks in it will take a lot of solvent wipes or flushes to get a bondable surface.

The older white lead and putty based caulkings may work OK but many of the modern products already require a 'primer' to make them stick adequately to wood.

This is all down to horses for courses as there are many ways to do things.  

The reason for leaking is that the original internal waterproof membrane between the planks is now well past it's sell by date and is exposed where dryer planks have shrunk back. If the planks swell as they get wetter then they may stem the flow. Also the movement of the hull when slamming will exacerbate this.

Best regards

AndyS

 AndyS has a point! Many modern materials dont take well to old methods so do lots of research. The substitute creasote way i mentioned is only applicable to non smokers & requires some good ventilation. Best to check what will react with the glue in her frames before charging in! That said most breathable wood preserver should be fine & keep her good for many years.

Hi Andy,

 I don't think she has self bailers, How would theese work with watertight bulkheads also do you not have to be travelling fairly fast for them to work?

 There is a fair bit of daylight coming in through the front, the chine is damaged and there are holes there. she could be patched but realistically it makes sense not to risk the passage home to save a few quid, good job she did not get too far, a blessing in disguise.

 As you say, she may swell a bit but the hull working and slamming in much bigger seas is never going to help the situation and could end very badly.

The self bailers were fitted at the aft of each water tight compartment, or at least the main ones that picked up water.

They had a suction head near to the centreline and then an 'n' shaped tube up the bulkhead and back down again to a hole in the hull. Most of the through hulls had a small local fairing to encourage low pressure (like an aeroplane wing in reverse) and to improve extraction. They also had an anti-siphon valve at the top and a sea cock at the bottom.

I have not actually seen one in operation but I would expext that anything around 10 knots and upwards should work. They would need about 2~3 psi pressure differential to work, which is only 15~20% of atmospheric pressure. Maybe one day when I get my boat a bit closer to launching I will do some calculations and some tests. 

Best regards

AndyS

Not all 71'6" are laminated stems and keels. I am not sure of the fit for 506, but enev if laminated there is a scarf between the stem and the keel as these are made as seperate items.

Your frames should have glued biscuits (joining brackets).

The sandwich forms boxes and which are tougher, lighter and stronger than the 'warren girder' engine bearer structures used in previous boats and allowed the use of more lower grade materials as well as being faster to build on a jig. These are techniques that are now being applied to engineered timbers in modern houses (oh and the Scott-Wood houses of the 1940s!)

There was provision made in the later versions of this boat to use laminated frames if the higher grade graming timbers got too scarce, so lower grade cores would be used, but I have not seen this on an actual boat.  

I am interested in what you find and I will check with phil Simons which batch this boat came out of.

Best regards

AndyS

Fairplay NE!

 i kinda looked at everything else while you got technical with 506. Guess i'm still sussing out whats classed as good timber & whats classed as boat building standard timber! Mea Culpa old pal!!

 Sure we'll discuss the finer points of it in Malta over a joes burger soon enough. Lets get her home though & if i put anyone elses life on the line with my repairs then i'll sail back with them! The Med & Biscay is a different world from a bit of coastal cruising in the UK! Learn fast or die young is the impression i get & when 506 comes home then we'll really understand what these crews went through

Getting interesting on Ambra...

I thought that she would be double diagonal on the sides and triple on the bottom, but interested to find out.

Later boats had raised chine in forward sections, but I do not think that it affects the overall lengths.

Solid bearers could have been for the installation of the Gas turbines when she was 'Southerner'.

I am interested in seeing the plan and finding out what other information 'pushback' has.  

The designs were all developed based on moulded lines, which were then lofted up. The frames were built in jigs taken from the loft floor and built up into the boats skeleton, with planking added onto that.

This allowed for fast and accurate building of subassembly component at any location and less time on the assembly line. 

The earlier boats were generally built as first of class and then the finished dimensions lifted to make jigs for the rest of the series.

Regarding the length, then an additional 3" could easily be taken up by the moulded line at the stem and transom, but may also include any rake of the transom in relation to the baseline, however I have not compared the lines of these boats with a real one. 

Best regards AndyS

506's transom must have been replaced unless they just planked over the jet pipe exhaust holes giving  the boat a bit of extra length.