[C320-list] C320-list Digest, Vol 3908, Issue 1
Scott Westwood
scottwestwood at bellsouth.net
Wed Dec 16 04:03:22 PST 2020
FWIW,
We recently looked at moving up from our C320. As you all know, everything has a price. We looked at the C350. It has almost twice the tankage (for long term cruising) and also has a separate shower "room" in the head (In the south we mostly shower on the stern landing). Also the berths are slightly larger. It comes at the cost of 3 inches of additional draft. That is important enough here in Eastern NC to consider. Not so much in the lakes (I assume). NOTE: There are fewer of the C350s since they only made them for a few years (as best I can find out)
Also the 36 ft Catalina has more room for the same additional 3 inches of draft. We did not (yet) look into tankage, head/shower, and berth space but we have to assume it is more comfortable than C320.
We like our 320 though. It is easy to handle with minimal crew. All lines led to cockpit so almost no going forward. We have dutchman flaking system so we do have to go forward to tie up the main. If you had a roller main then there would be almost no going forward except to anchor. Also note that marinas charge per foot.
As many have said before, it all depends on how you plan to use the boat. Very subjective decision.
Good luck in your research.
Thanks,
Scott Westwood scottwestwood at bellsouth.net C (919)- 819-9794
On Tuesday, December 15, 2020, 01:21:35 PM EST, <c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com> wrote:
Send C320-list mailing list submissions to
c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web browser, visit
http://lists.catalina320.com/listinfo.cgi/c320-list-catalina320.com
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
c320-list-owner at lists.catalina320.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of C320-list digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Lightning (Tom Grass)
2. 320 vs. something just a little bigger (David Veeneman)
3. Re: Lightning (Charles Martin)
4. Lightning Strike Dissipater (Jeffrey Kapec)
5. Re: Lightning (Jack Brennan)
6. Re: 320 vs. something just a little bigger (John Morrison)
7. Re: 320 vs. something just a little bigger (John Morrison)
8. Re: Lightning (Rick Smith)
9. Fuel tank replacement (Doug Treff)
10. Re: 320 vs. something just a little bigger (Chris White)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 15:30:03 -0600
From: Tom Grass <tgrass462 at gmail.com>
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
Message-ID:
<CAGdN-uVF-HiqeZaSNT15OJ6gjqrPb2q_0h+sccu-D0kmoUsfjw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Thanks Chip - just to confirm - you ARE saying that such a device on the
top of the mast MIGHT be beneficial? Is this correct?
Tom Grass
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:21 PM Charles Martin <chiprmartin at gmail.com>
wrote:
> In a past life, I studied EMP and related E/M phenomena. The point of
> dissipaters at the top of the mast is to reduce the build-up of static
> charge and retard the formation of ion ?streamers? which can link to and
> complete the path for a lightning strike. The local balance of charge
> between surface and sky will determine where strikes will actually occur
> (they can and do strike the surface of the water); however, you may
> significantly reduce the likelihood of a strike to your boat by ensuring a
> good, low impedance connection with minimum bend between mast and sea and
> continuously dissipating any excess charge at the masthead. You may have
> noticed similar dissipaters on aircraft wings.
>
> Best,
> Chip Martin
> S/V Bonaventure, Sail # 767
> (410) 231-0199
> chiprmartin at gmail.com
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:42 PM Jack Brennan <jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>
> > The consensus I?ve read from lightning experts is that the dissipators
> > probably don?t do any good, although there?s no definitive proof either
> > way. A lightning bolt is just too powerful to be diffused by a small
> metal
> > brush on the top of the mast.
> >
> > But, frankly, their guess and your guess is as good as my guess. If it
> > makes you feel better, it may be worth the price.
> >
> > Jack Brennan
> > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> >
> >
> > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> >
> > From: Tom Grass
> > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 12:23 PM
> > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
> >
> > Thanks for all of the replies regarding lightning. What are your
> opinions
> > regarding a lightning dissipator mounted to the top of the mast?
> >
> > Tom Grass
> > Bucket List
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:20 AM John morrison <
> sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I read something awhile ago that Catalina made a deliberate decision
> not
> > > to electrically bond all of the metal components. It basically said
> that
> > > lightning in the order of a Brazilian V will do whatever it bloody well
> > > pleased. Bonding is expensive producing no benefits. This came up
> during
> > my
> > > recent survey whereas the surveyor stated that all metal components
> > needed
> > > to be bonded. I discussed the issue with him and he withdrew the
> > > requirement. I have two heavy jumper cables which I attach to the
> shrouds
> > > and then dangle in the water. Evidently it doesn?t help but it gives me
> > > peace of mind??..sort of.
> > > JohnM
> > > 1999#574
> > > > On Dec 13, 2020, at 11:39 AM, Jack Brennan <
> jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tom:
> > > >
> > > > My 1998 320 has a thick cable bolted to the mast support and
> connected
> > > to a keel bolt. In theory, the mast is the lightning rod and the
> massive
> > > keel is the ground stake. However ?
> > > >
> > > > Lightning is kazillion volts and basically does what it wants to. It
> > > might run straight down through the keel, or maybe it does a side flash
> > to
> > > other metal such as the oven. We are lucky to have Marelon through
> hulls
> > > because they won?t attract side flashes and melt, the way bronze could.
> > > >
> > > > I live in Florida, the lightning capital of the world, and I have had
> > > two close brushes with lightning in 40 years of off and on sailing.
> That
> > > should tell you something about where it should be on your list of
> > worries.
> > > >
> > > > In the first, I was in my 19-foot sailboat about three miles off Fort
> > > Lauderdale, making a late return at night from the Keys. I pulled down
> > the
> > > sails and lit a cigarette (I smoked back then) while lightning bolts
> > struck
> > > all around me for about 30 minutes. I could see them hitting the water,
> > but
> > > none hit me. Scared the hell out of me.
> > > >
> > > > The second was about seven years ago. My wife and I were scrambling
> in
> > > as a summer thunderstorm arrived in Hillsboro Inlet from the
> Everglades.
> > I
> > > was dropping the anchor in 30-knot gusts when a bolt struck about 40
> > yards
> > > from us in the harbor. It knocked out random electronics in my Bristol
> > 30,
> > > but I didn?t feel anything.
> > > >
> > > > So my rules are take down the sails, anchor if you are in restricted
> > > waters, lock the wheel to protect the rudder, go below and stay away
> from
> > > metal. I also shut off the electricity and put all cellphones,
> computers,
> > > portable GPS?s, handheld radios, etc., in the oven.
> > > >
> > > > The reason for that is something called the Faraday Cage. Anything
> > > enclosed in metal won?t be affected by lightning. It?s why the 747
> > doesn?t
> > > go down when it is struck by lightning. If it does get bad, you have
> the
> > > ability to call for help.
> > > >
> > > > Hope this helps.
> > > >
> > > > Jack Brennan
> > > > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > > > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> > > > Dolphin Cruising Club of Tampa Bay
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > > >
> > > > From: Tom Grass
> > > > Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:12 AM
> > > > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > > > Cc: Tracy Grass
> > > > Subject: [C320-list] Lightning
> > > >
> > > > Wondering about lightning protection on Catalina 320 boats? I don't
> > > > believe they come grounded (mast to keel) from the factory -
> wondering
> > > what
> > > > the members of this forum have done in an attempt to minimize the
> > impact
> > > of
> > > > a possible lightning strike?
> > > >
> > > > Also what is the collective opinion of installing a Forespar
> > Performance
> > > > Products Forespar Lightning Master? - Static Dissipater
> > > > on your mast? We're planning on sailing down to the Chesapeake Bay
> and
> > > > perhaps to the Bahamas in 2021 - just preparing in advance.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Tom and Tracy Grass
> > > > Bucket List
> > > > 2008 Catalina 320 MK II
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:51:35 -0800
From: David Veeneman <davidv at veeneman.com>
To: C320 Assn Forum <c320-list at lists.catalina320.com>
Subject: [C320-list] 320 vs. something just a little bigger
Message-ID: <32B5EB7F-0ADC-420E-A090-99E128691A9F at veeneman.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
For my wife and I, something just a little bit larger would have been a Catalina 34 or 36, and we looked at both. The main difference between the 320 and the slightly-larger boats was in the size of the saloon. 34 and 36 had slightly larger saloons. Aft berth on all three boats was comparable, as was the forepeak berth. Cockpit size was fairly close.
What moved us toward the 320 was its easier handling?not a lot, but noticeable, since my wife and I two-hand most of the time. Plus, in our harbor, the waiting list for a thirty-foot slip was two years shorter than the wait for a thirty-five-foot slip.
Hope that helps!
--
David Veeneman
SV Adelante, C320 #131
Dana Point, CA
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:02:40 -0500
From: Charles Martin <chiprmartin at gmail.com>
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
Message-ID:
<CAHQFa8EnkV-eaGUVoDhs4mwOhnVVQEE5k+G4mO8gHg8zOztZsA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Tom:
I think it would be; however, I don't live in an area that sees unusually
high lightning (Chesapeake Bay), and I don't go out if it looks likely (if
I can help it). So I have not spent the money myself to mount a charge
diffuser. But I would if I felt I needed it. My wife and I are
considering snowbird like travel to the keys and Bahamas, and if so I will
spend the money. Meanwhile, I simply use a chain clipped to a stay and
dragging in the water if I get caught in a storm.
Best,
Chip Martin
S/V Bonaventure (Sail # 767)
(410) 231-0199
chiprmartin at gmail.com
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 4:30 PM Tom Grass <tgrass462 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Chip - just to confirm - you ARE saying that such a device on the
> top of the mast MIGHT be beneficial? Is this correct?
>
> Tom Grass
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:21 PM Charles Martin <chiprmartin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > In a past life, I studied EMP and related E/M phenomena. The point of
> > dissipaters at the top of the mast is to reduce the build-up of static
> > charge and retard the formation of ion ?streamers? which can link to and
> > complete the path for a lightning strike. The local balance of charge
> > between surface and sky will determine where strikes will actually occur
> > (they can and do strike the surface of the water); however, you may
> > significantly reduce the likelihood of a strike to your boat by ensuring
> a
> > good, low impedance connection with minimum bend between mast and sea and
> > continuously dissipating any excess charge at the masthead. You may have
> > noticed similar dissipaters on aircraft wings.
> >
> > Best,
> > Chip Martin
> > S/V Bonaventure, Sail # 767
> > (410) 231-0199
> > chiprmartin at gmail.com
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:42 PM Jack Brennan <jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The consensus I?ve read from lightning experts is that the dissipators
> > > probably don?t do any good, although there?s no definitive proof either
> > > way. A lightning bolt is just too powerful to be diffused by a small
> > metal
> > > brush on the top of the mast.
> > >
> > > But, frankly, their guess and your guess is as good as my guess. If it
> > > makes you feel better, it may be worth the price.
> > >
> > > Jack Brennan
> > > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > >
> > > From: Tom Grass
> > > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 12:23 PM
> > > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > > Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
> > >
> > > Thanks for all of the replies regarding lightning. What are your
> > opinions
> > > regarding a lightning dissipator mounted to the top of the mast?
> > >
> > > Tom Grass
> > > Bucket List
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:20 AM John morrison <
> > sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I read something awhile ago that Catalina made a deliberate decision
> > not
> > > > to electrically bond all of the metal components. It basically said
> > that
> > > > lightning in the order of a Brazilian V will do whatever it bloody
> well
> > > > pleased. Bonding is expensive producing no benefits. This came up
> > during
> > > my
> > > > recent survey whereas the surveyor stated that all metal components
> > > needed
> > > > to be bonded. I discussed the issue with him and he withdrew the
> > > > requirement. I have two heavy jumper cables which I attach to the
> > shrouds
> > > > and then dangle in the water. Evidently it doesn?t help but it gives
> me
> > > > peace of mind??..sort of.
> > > > JohnM
> > > > 1999#574
> > > > > On Dec 13, 2020, at 11:39 AM, Jack Brennan <
> > jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Tom:
> > > > >
> > > > > My 1998 320 has a thick cable bolted to the mast support and
> > connected
> > > > to a keel bolt. In theory, the mast is the lightning rod and the
> > massive
> > > > keel is the ground stake. However ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Lightning is kazillion volts and basically does what it wants to.
> It
> > > > might run straight down through the keel, or maybe it does a side
> flash
> > > to
> > > > other metal such as the oven. We are lucky to have Marelon through
> > hulls
> > > > because they won?t attract side flashes and melt, the way bronze
> could.
> > > > >
> > > > > I live in Florida, the lightning capital of the world, and I have
> had
> > > > two close brushes with lightning in 40 years of off and on sailing.
> > That
> > > > should tell you something about where it should be on your list of
> > > worries.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the first, I was in my 19-foot sailboat about three miles off
> Fort
> > > > Lauderdale, making a late return at night from the Keys. I pulled
> down
> > > the
> > > > sails and lit a cigarette (I smoked back then) while lightning bolts
> > > struck
> > > > all around me for about 30 minutes. I could see them hitting the
> water,
> > > but
> > > > none hit me. Scared the hell out of me.
> > > > >
> > > > > The second was about seven years ago. My wife and I were scrambling
> > in
> > > > as a summer thunderstorm arrived in Hillsboro Inlet from the
> > Everglades.
> > > I
> > > > was dropping the anchor in 30-knot gusts when a bolt struck about 40
> > > yards
> > > > from us in the harbor. It knocked out random electronics in my
> Bristol
> > > 30,
> > > > but I didn?t feel anything.
> > > > >
> > > > > So my rules are take down the sails, anchor if you are in
> restricted
> > > > waters, lock the wheel to protect the rudder, go below and stay away
> > from
> > > > metal. I also shut off the electricity and put all cellphones,
> > computers,
> > > > portable GPS?s, handheld radios, etc., in the oven.
> > > > >
> > > > > The reason for that is something called the Faraday Cage. Anything
> > > > enclosed in metal won?t be affected by lightning. It?s why the 747
> > > doesn?t
> > > > go down when it is struck by lightning. If it does get bad, you have
> > the
> > > > ability to call for help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope this helps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jack Brennan
> > > > > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > > > > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> > > > > Dolphin Cruising Club of Tampa Bay
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Tom Grass
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:12 AM
> > > > > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > > > > Cc: Tracy Grass
> > > > > Subject: [C320-list] Lightning
> > > > >
> > > > > Wondering about lightning protection on Catalina 320 boats? I
> don't
> > > > > believe they come grounded (mast to keel) from the factory -
> > wondering
> > > > what
> > > > > the members of this forum have done in an attempt to minimize the
> > > impact
> > > > of
> > > > > a possible lightning strike?
> > > > >
> > > > > Also what is the collective opinion of installing a Forespar
> > > Performance
> > > > > Products Forespar Lightning Master? - Static Dissipater
> > > > > on your mast? We're planning on sailing down to the Chesapeake Bay
> > and
> > > > > perhaps to the Bahamas in 2021 - just preparing in advance.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom and Tracy Grass
> > > > > Bucket List
> > > > > 2008 Catalina 320 MK II
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:05:53 -0500
From: "Jeffrey Kapec" <jkapec at tkdg.com>
To: <c320-list at lists.catalina320.com>
Subject: [C320-list] Lightning Strike Dissipater
Message-ID: <044e01d6d265$4c742be0$e55c83a0$@tkdg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello To All:
My 320 was hit at a mooring in MA. Boat was owned by first owner. It was
not a direct hit , I guess it was a plasma discharge, but the charge did
well enough damage. Killed the Windex, radio which was charred along with
the antenna connection inside, fridge electronics burned to a crisp and the
wiring in the mast destroyed, but no structural damage to the hull which is
why I believe it was just an intense plasma cloud that was not part of the
direct charge dissipation. All of that stuff was replaced. I installed one
of the dissipaters at mast head. The explanation for this device and the
physics related to the tendrils that form to make contact before a strike
occurs makes sense. Not much invested for some possible protection.
Petite Suite hull 718
Jeffrey Kapec
Tanaka Kapec Design Group
11 Brookfield St. Norwalk, CT 06851
203.846.3666
www.tkdg.com
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:11:20 -0500
From: Jack Brennan <jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
Message-ID:
<mailman.36141.1608056484.3539.c320-list-catalina320.com at lists.catalina320.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Here?s what BoatUS says. The article does a pretty good job of covering all of the bases:
https://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2016/january/lightning-protection.asp
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Charles Martin
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 5:03 PM
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
Tom:
I think it would be; however, I don't live in an area that sees unusually
high lightning (Chesapeake Bay), and I don't go out if it looks likely (if
I can help it). So I have not spent the money myself to mount a charge
diffuser. But I would if I felt I needed it. My wife and I are
considering snowbird like travel to the keys and Bahamas, and if so I will
spend the money. Meanwhile, I simply use a chain clipped to a stay and
dragging in the water if I get caught in a storm.
Best,
Chip Martin
S/V Bonaventure (Sail # 767)
(410) 231-0199
chiprmartin at gmail.com
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 4:30 PM Tom Grass <tgrass462 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Chip - just to confirm - you ARE saying that such a device on the
> top of the mast MIGHT be beneficial? Is this correct?
>
> Tom Grass
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:21 PM Charles Martin <chiprmartin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > In a past life, I studied EMP and related E/M phenomena. The point of
> > dissipaters at the top of the mast is to reduce the build-up of static
> > charge and retard the formation of ion ?streamers? which can link to and
> > complete the path for a lightning strike. The local balance of charge
> > between surface and sky will determine where strikes will actually occur
> > (they can and do strike the surface of the water); however, you may
> > significantly reduce the likelihood of a strike to your boat by ensuring
> a
> > good, low impedance connection with minimum bend between mast and sea and
> > continuously dissipating any excess charge at the masthead. You may have
> > noticed similar dissipaters on aircraft wings.
> >
> > Best,
> > Chip Martin
> > S/V Bonaventure, Sail # 767
> > (410) 231-0199
> > chiprmartin at gmail.com
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:42 PM Jack Brennan <jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The consensus I?ve read from lightning experts is that the dissipators
> > > probably don?t do any good, although there?s no definitive proof either
> > > way. A lightning bolt is just too powerful to be diffused by a small
> > metal
> > > brush on the top of the mast.
> > >
> > > But, frankly, their guess and your guess is as good as my guess. If it
> > > makes you feel better, it may be worth the price.
> > >
> > > Jack Brennan
> > > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > >
> > > From: Tom Grass
> > > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 12:23 PM
> > > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > > Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
> > >
> > > Thanks for all of the replies regarding lightning. What are your
> > opinions
> > > regarding a lightning dissipator mounted to the top of the mast?
> > >
> > > Tom Grass
> > > Bucket List
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:20 AM John morrison <
> > sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I read something awhile ago that Catalina made a deliberate decision
> > not
> > > > to electrically bond all of the metal components. It basically said
> > that
> > > > lightning in the order of a Brazilian V will do whatever it bloody
> well
> > > > pleased. Bonding is expensive producing no benefits. This came up
> > during
> > > my
> > > > recent survey whereas the surveyor stated that all metal components
> > > needed
> > > > to be bonded. I discussed the issue with him and he withdrew the
> > > > requirement. I have two heavy jumper cables which I attach to the
> > shrouds
> > > > and then dangle in the water. Evidently it doesn?t help but it gives
> me
> > > > peace of mind??..sort of.
> > > > JohnM
> > > > 1999#574
> > > > > On Dec 13, 2020, at 11:39 AM, Jack Brennan <
> > jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Tom:
> > > > >
> > > > > My 1998 320 has a thick cable bolted to the mast support and
> > connected
> > > > to a keel bolt. In theory, the mast is the lightning rod and the
> > massive
> > > > keel is the ground stake. However ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Lightning is kazillion volts and basically does what it wants to.
> It
> > > > might run straight down through the keel, or maybe it does a side
> flash
> > > to
> > > > other metal such as the oven. We are lucky to have Marelon through
> > hulls
> > > > because they won?t attract side flashes and melt, the way bronze
> could.
> > > > >
> > > > > I live in Florida, the lightning capital of the world, and I have
> had
> > > > two close brushes with lightning in 40 years of off and on sailing.
> > That
> > > > should tell you something about where it should be on your list of
> > > worries.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the first, I was in my 19-foot sailboat about three miles off
> Fort
> > > > Lauderdale, making a late return at night from the Keys. I pulled
> down
> > > the
> > > > sails and lit a cigarette (I smoked back then) while lightning bolts
> > > struck
> > > > all around me for about 30 minutes. I could see them hitting the
> water,
> > > but
> > > > none hit me. Scared the hell out of me.
> > > > >
> > > > > The second was about seven years ago. My wife and I were scrambling
> > in
> > > > as a summer thunderstorm arrived in Hillsboro Inlet from the
> > Everglades.
> > > I
> > > > was dropping the anchor in 30-knot gusts when a bolt struck about 40
> > > yards
> > > > from us in the harbor. It knocked out random electronics in my
> Bristol
> > > 30,
> > > > but I didn?t feel anything.
> > > > >
> > > > > So my rules are take down the sails, anchor if you are in
> restricted
> > > > waters, lock the wheel to protect the rudder, go below and stay away
> > from
> > > > metal. I also shut off the electricity and put all cellphones,
> > computers,
> > > > portable GPS?s, handheld radios, etc., in the oven.
> > > > >
> > > > > The reason for that is something called the Faraday Cage. Anything
> > > > enclosed in metal won?t be affected by lightning. It?s why the 747
> > > doesn?t
> > > > go down when it is struck by lightning. If it does get bad, you have
> > the
> > > > ability to call for help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope this helps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jack Brennan
> > > > > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > > > > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> > > > > Dolphin Cruising Club of Tampa Bay
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Tom Grass
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:12 AM
> > > > > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > > > > Cc: Tracy Grass
> > > > > Subject: [C320-list] Lightning
> > > > >
> > > > > Wondering about lightning protection on Catalina 320 boats? I
> don't
> > > > > believe they come grounded (mast to keel) from the factory -
> > wondering
> > > > what
> > > > > the members of this forum have done in an attempt to minimize the
> > > impact
> > > > of
> > > > > a possible lightning strike?
> > > > >
> > > > > Also what is the collective opinion of installing a Forespar
> > > Performance
> > > > > Products Forespar Lightning Master? - Static Dissipater
> > > > > on your mast? We're planning on sailing down to the Chesapeake Bay
> > and
> > > > > perhaps to the Bahamas in 2021 - just preparing in advance.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom and Tracy Grass
> > > > > Bucket List
> > > > > 2008 Catalina 320 MK II
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:12:12 -0500
From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Cc: C320 Assn Forum <c320-list at lists.catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] 320 vs. something just a little bigger
Message-ID: <9417CE48-37ED-4E6F-93C7-3EF9E4E3B467 at sympatico.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Bigger is not always Better!! Bigger usually means heavier, with boats it means costlier, for mooring and fuel and gear and booze( more visitors)! If you?re planning on doing a lot of cruising with guests, the 320 is a bit tight. If just the 2 of you then it?s just about ideal; at least IMHO. We?ve owned LuffinLife for 11 years now and couldn?t be more satisfied.
Of course this is quite subjective. As they say ?one man?s junk........?
JohnM
1999#574
Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 14, 2020, at 4:51 PM, David Veeneman <davidv at veeneman.com> wrote:
>
> ?For my wife and I, something just a little bit larger would have been a Catalina 34 or 36, and we looked at both. The main difference between the 320 and the slightly-larger boats was in the size of the saloon. 34 and 36 had slightly larger saloons. Aft berth on all three boats was comparable, as was the forepeak berth. Cockpit size was fairly close.
>
> What moved us toward the 320 was its easier handling?not a lot, but noticeable, since my wife and I two-hand most of the time. Plus, in our harbor, the waiting list for a thirty-foot slip was two years shorter than the wait for a thirty-five-foot slip.
>
> Hope that helps!
>
> --
> David Veeneman
> SV Adelante, C320 #131
> Dana Point, CA
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:12:12 -0500
From: John Morrison <sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Cc: C320 Assn Forum <c320-list at lists.catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] 320 vs. something just a little bigger
Message-ID: <9417CE48-37ED-4E6F-93C7-3EF9E4E3B467 at sympatico.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Bigger is not always Better!! Bigger usually means heavier, with boats it means costlier, for mooring and fuel and gear and booze( more visitors)! If you?re planning on doing a lot of cruising with guests, the 320 is a bit tight. If just the 2 of you then it?s just about ideal; at least IMHO. We?ve owned LuffinLife for 11 years now and couldn?t be more satisfied.
Of course this is quite subjective. As they say ?one man?s junk........?
JohnM
1999#574
Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 14, 2020, at 4:51 PM, David Veeneman <davidv at veeneman.com> wrote:
>
> ?For my wife and I, something just a little bit larger would have been a Catalina 34 or 36, and we looked at both. The main difference between the 320 and the slightly-larger boats was in the size of the saloon. 34 and 36 had slightly larger saloons. Aft berth on all three boats was comparable, as was the forepeak berth. Cockpit size was fairly close.
>
> What moved us toward the 320 was its easier handling?not a lot, but noticeable, since my wife and I two-hand most of the time. Plus, in our harbor, the waiting list for a thirty-foot slip was two years shorter than the wait for a thirty-five-foot slip.
>
> Hope that helps!
>
> --
> David Veeneman
> SV Adelante, C320 #131
> Dana Point, CA
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:16:59 -0500
From: "Rick Smith" <ricksmith4333 at gmail.com>
To: <C320-List at catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
Message-ID: <DEA940D204CA45A8B58116888B427190 at RickSmithPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=original
I won't claim to know a single thing about the science of this -- BUT -- I
did install one of the fuzzy wire devices on Layla soon after we bought her
new in 1994. Why? Because my wife was quite afraid of lightning and I
showed her an ad in a sailing magazine that said "If you install this device
and you EVER get hit by lightning, we will cover ALL costs of restoring or
replacing your boat" and I said "it must work, or they would not make such a
promise." Of course we both knew that was a bit of slight of hand, right?
I mean -- the company can play the odds too, right? But, we installed
anyway. And some 25+ years later we've not been hit by lightning -- either
out on the water (survived several pop-up storms -- you know how it is in
the south!) or at the dock. Other boats in the vicinity HAVE been hit while
we were spared. Was it just our good fortune/luck/odds or did the device
work? I don't know -- but, I have no regrets having installed it.
Rick Smith
Layla #136
Lake Lanier, GA
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Grass
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 4:30 PM
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
Thanks Chip - just to confirm - you ARE saying that such a device on the
top of the mast MIGHT be beneficial? Is this correct?
Tom Grass
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:21 PM Charles Martin <chiprmartin at gmail.com>
wrote:
> In a past life, I studied EMP and related E/M phenomena. The point of
> dissipaters at the top of the mast is to reduce the build-up of static
> charge and retard the formation of ion ?streamers? which can link to and
> complete the path for a lightning strike. The local balance of charge
> between surface and sky will determine where strikes will actually occur
> (they can and do strike the surface of the water); however, you may
> significantly reduce the likelihood of a strike to your boat by ensuring a
> good, low impedance connection with minimum bend between mast and sea and
> continuously dissipating any excess charge at the masthead. You may have
> noticed similar dissipaters on aircraft wings.
>
> Best,
> Chip Martin
> S/V Bonaventure, Sail # 767
> (410) 231-0199
> chiprmartin at gmail.com
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:42 PM Jack Brennan <jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>
> > The consensus I?ve read from lightning experts is that the dissipators
> > probably don?t do any good, although there?s no definitive proof either
> > way. A lightning bolt is just too powerful to be diffused by a small
> metal
> > brush on the top of the mast.
> >
> > But, frankly, their guess and your guess is as good as my guess. If it
> > makes you feel better, it may be worth the price.
> >
> > Jack Brennan
> > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> >
> >
> > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> >
> > From: Tom Grass
> > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 12:23 PM
> > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > Subject: Re: [C320-list] Lightning
> >
> > Thanks for all of the replies regarding lightning. What are your
> opinions
> > regarding a lightning dissipator mounted to the top of the mast?
> >
> > Tom Grass
> > Bucket List
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:20 AM John morrison <
> sail-ability at sympatico.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I read something awhile ago that Catalina made a deliberate decision
> not
> > > to electrically bond all of the metal components. It basically said
> that
> > > lightning in the order of a Brazilian V will do whatever it bloody
> > > well
> > > pleased. Bonding is expensive producing no benefits. This came up
> during
> > my
> > > recent survey whereas the surveyor stated that all metal components
> > needed
> > > to be bonded. I discussed the issue with him and he withdrew the
> > > requirement. I have two heavy jumper cables which I attach to the
> shrouds
> > > and then dangle in the water. Evidently it doesn?t help but it gives
> > > me
> > > peace of mind??..sort of.
> > > JohnM
> > > 1999#574
> > > > On Dec 13, 2020, at 11:39 AM, Jack Brennan <
> jackbrennan at bellsouth.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tom:
> > > >
> > > > My 1998 320 has a thick cable bolted to the mast support and
> connected
> > > to a keel bolt. In theory, the mast is the lightning rod and the
> massive
> > > keel is the ground stake. However ?
> > > >
> > > > Lightning is kazillion volts and basically does what it wants to. It
> > > might run straight down through the keel, or maybe it does a side
> > > flash
> > to
> > > other metal such as the oven. We are lucky to have Marelon through
> hulls
> > > because they won?t attract side flashes and melt, the way bronze
> > > could.
> > > >
> > > > I live in Florida, the lightning capital of the world, and I have
> > > > had
> > > two close brushes with lightning in 40 years of off and on sailing.
> That
> > > should tell you something about where it should be on your list of
> > worries.
> > > >
> > > > In the first, I was in my 19-foot sailboat about three miles off
> > > > Fort
> > > Lauderdale, making a late return at night from the Keys. I pulled down
> > the
> > > sails and lit a cigarette (I smoked back then) while lightning bolts
> > struck
> > > all around me for about 30 minutes. I could see them hitting the
> > > water,
> > but
> > > none hit me. Scared the hell out of me.
> > > >
> > > > The second was about seven years ago. My wife and I were scrambling
> in
> > > as a summer thunderstorm arrived in Hillsboro Inlet from the
> Everglades.
> > I
> > > was dropping the anchor in 30-knot gusts when a bolt struck about 40
> > yards
> > > from us in the harbor. It knocked out random electronics in my Bristol
> > 30,
> > > but I didn?t feel anything.
> > > >
> > > > So my rules are take down the sails, anchor if you are in restricted
> > > waters, lock the wheel to protect the rudder, go below and stay away
> from
> > > metal. I also shut off the electricity and put all cellphones,
> computers,
> > > portable GPS?s, handheld radios, etc., in the oven.
> > > >
> > > > The reason for that is something called the Faraday Cage. Anything
> > > enclosed in metal won?t be affected by lightning. It?s why the 747
> > doesn?t
> > > go down when it is struck by lightning. If it does get bad, you have
> the
> > > ability to call for help.
> > > >
> > > > Hope this helps.
> > > >
> > > > Jack Brennan
> > > > Sonas, 1998 Catalina 320
> > > > Tierra Verde, Fl.
> > > > Dolphin Cruising Club of Tampa Bay
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > > >
> > > > From: Tom Grass
> > > > Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2020 10:12 AM
> > > > To: C320-List at catalina320.com
> > > > Cc: Tracy Grass
> > > > Subject: [C320-list] Lightning
> > > >
> > > > Wondering about lightning protection on Catalina 320 boats? I don't
> > > > believe they come grounded (mast to keel) from the factory -
> wondering
> > > what
> > > > the members of this forum have done in an attempt to minimize the
> > impact
> > > of
> > > > a possible lightning strike?
> > > >
> > > > Also what is the collective opinion of installing a Forespar
> > Performance
> > > > Products Forespar Lightning Master? - Static Dissipater
> > > > on your mast? We're planning on sailing down to the Chesapeake Bay
> and
> > > > perhaps to the Bahamas in 2021 - just preparing in advance.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Tom and Tracy Grass
> > > > Bucket List
> > > > 2008 Catalina 320 MK II
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 12:58:50 -0500
From: "Doug Treff" <doug at treff.us>
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: [C320-list] Fuel tank replacement
Message-ID: <3e74eb87-f6ac-47b0-a901-027db356f5ba at www.fastmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
All,
I've got a bunch of work to be done in my aft compartment this off-season. Need to remove the air conditioner to make some repairs. Also need to replace my dead refrigerator. Gonna be spending lots of quality time in there...
My boat is 24 years old. After reading a lot about others whose tanks failed at around the 20 year mark, it seems reasonable to do this job now while I have the opportunity. My concern is that if I skip it, I'll have diesel in my bilge immediately after I bolt all the other stuff back in there. I really don't want to address that rear compartment again if I can get all the difficult jobs done at once. I can't think of a better time to replace the fuel tank than when all the obstacles are removed already.
When I bought the boat, we dealt with a diesel leak that turned out to be a leaking sender unit. The problem was easy to fix but the diesel odor that resulted from the leak was difficult to clean up. The entire time I was dealing with that, I feared that the tank itself was leaking. Luckily it wasn't but I don't want to revisit that environmental mess and odor again.
What I haven't seen explained, is how does the tank fit past the rudder shaft and quadrant to come out through the access hole on the port side? Do you need to do anything to the quadrant temporarily in order to slide the tank through there? I'm guessing it may slide under the sugar scoop area of the transom to pass by the rudder shaft, but I'd rather not guess.
Thanks in advance from others who may have done this. I'm also interested in any other preventative jobs that you suggest while I'm in there. I'm apparently a glutton for punishment. ;-)
--
Doug Treff
doug at treff.us
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 18:21:01 +0000 (UTC)
From: Chris White <chriswhite252000 at yahoo.co.uk>
To: "C320-List at Catalina320.com" <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] 320 vs. something just a little bigger
Message-ID: <193735030.1538334.1608056462002 at mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi Paul
Definately go bigger, the Catalina 36 is ideal.I have owned my 320 for over 20 years, but the reality is that the forecabin is basically only suitable for storage.Those extra 3 feet would be such a benefit.Having said that, the 320 is a great boat, good design and fine build quality.It also sails very well.
Chris WhiteYacht Dandy#449UK?
On Monday, 14 December 2020, 00:27:39 GMT, Paul Ducham <paul at ducham.com> wrote:
? Seeking opinions from those who downsized to a 320 or anyone who has a
? 320 and finds themselves wishing they had spent the extra dollars for
? something a little bigger.
? I?ve always subscribed to the boat philosophy that you should own the
? smallest one you or your spouse can tolerate. And I?m mostly convinced
? that the 320 should be our next/last boat. But I wonder if I?m going to
? find myself wishing I had spent the extra money on something with 2-3
? more feet of LOA for the extra storage, motion comfort, and additional
? space.
? For context, I?m 55 and trying to pick a boat that will suite me for
? the next twenty years, assuming I?m not going to get stronger, smarter,
? or more coordinated with age. I solo sail mostly (even when my wife or
? friends are along, I?m pretty much solo sailing) out of Chicago on Lake
? Michigan. For the next couple of years, the boat will be used mostly
? for day sailing and weekending with my wife and dog, with a 2-4 week
? cruise each summer, mostly staying in marinas. But the longer-term plan
? is to spend more of each summer cruising the great lakes.
? All thoughts and opinions welcome.
? Cheers!
? Paul
End of C320-list Digest, Vol 3908, Issue 1
******************************************
More information about the C320-list
mailing list