Re: life cycle > Victory


Jove Lachman-Curl
 

I absolutely agree.
A failed generator is the type of excuse they give the public. and most people say "Oh, i guess it WAS at the end of it's life".
And maybe there are good reasons for it, and maybe there are bad reasons for it. But I agree with Rodger that someone changed a maintenance schedule somehow.
Perhaps the generator was not stand alone... maybe it was a large alternator on the main engine, I don't know much about the layout of this type of boat.

That 52 might make a someone good liveaboard when they sell the hull off at some point. :)
-Jove


On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 8:03 AM Roger Padvorac <roger@...> wrote:
George,
That's the whole point. The generator was past the end of its life cycle, it would be far easier and less expensive to replace a generator than an engine, and they still didn't replace it.
 
It gives me the heebie jeebies to think of being involved in a scenario like rescuing a boat drifting towards rocks, at night, in the rain, in heavy seas, and then suddenly loosing navigation, radar, and search lights.
 
When I said: Why don't they just replace the engines and steering gear?
 
I was meaning the critical equipment in those boats is fairly straightforward, and doesn't need to be custom manufactured like the exotic stuff in a cannery ship, destroyer, or oil tanker. You order the replacement equipment, remove the equipment past the end of its life cycle, and install the new equipment.
 
* * * *
All equipment used, where there are life safety issues, has a defined life cycle, and defined ways of checking to see if the equipment is past the end of its life cycle. The whole goal of those federal standards is to help people make plans and then replace the equipment BEFORE it fails.
 
Everything I've heard about the coast guard indicates the crews would be right on top of this, if given half a chance.
 
That means some grand poobah made a policy decision to not do required maintenance on these boats, and not decommission them.
 
Issues:
- That decision was a criminal disregard for human life.
- Shipping companies and cruise lines keep track of issues like this, and tend to avoid places with issues like this, which hurts our economy.
 
Does somebody know an investigative reporter, who might be interested in looking into this, and write up who made that decision, and who influenced them to do that?
 
Sincerely,
Roger
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2021 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [oregoncoots] Victory

Roger,

The article that John linked in his original post gave the example of a failed generator resulting in losing the radar and navigation system during a rescue. Anyways, I'm sure there are much more systems on this boat then just the engine and steering.

George

On Tuesday, February 2, 2021, 8:00:46 PM PST, Roger Padvorac <roger@...> wrote:



I'm ignoring most email for the time being, but wondered at the size 
and subject of this one.

Previously I hadn't paid attention to the difference between the 52' 
and 47' boats.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/47-foot_Motor_Lifeboat
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/52-foot_Motor_Lifeboat

In short, the 47' boat is a wimp compared to the 52' boat.

You are right, they are amazing - the pictures in those Wikipedia 
articles says it all.

I'd be very surprised if this country builds a useful replacement for 
the 52' boats. The navy has a pretty poor track record for the last 
decade.

Every day I take a look at RT.com because its a reliable source of bad 
news that will affect my life (like efforts to cut Social Security). 
There are a surprising number of WA/OR articles there. I also read 
some of the compare and contrast opinion essays there.

Our culture has lost the competence of the mid 20th century - too many 
people stopped doing the hard thankless work of cultural stewardship 
and we've lost a lot of our cultural capital.

* * * *
The 47' boats started coming into service in 1997, and there are 227 
of them, so they will be around for a while.

You say the 52' boats are saved for the really difficult situations.

How often do the 47' boats turn out to be inadequate, and a 52' boat 
is used, and in what kinds of circumstances?

I've survived my adventures by paying attention to the fallback 
options, which is why I put some thought into this subject, once I 
took a look at it.

* * * *
After I thought a bit, I wondered, what do you mean by old?

Engines and steering gear can be rebuilt or replaced, and on a boat 
like this there isn't much else that is essential, expensive, and 
takes a lot of work to maintain.

Why don't they just replace the engines and steering gear?

Sincerely,
Roger

Quoting John Kohnen <jkohnen@...>:

> Victory's my favorite CG boat too, with the other steel 52-footers 
> close behind. But they're Old. It's getting so it's hard to keep 
> them going, so Victory sits idle, waiting to be used only when her 
> capabilities are _really_ needed. I'll miss the 52s when they're 
> gone, but their replacements should have been ready years ago. 
> <sigh> I hope when the replacements for the 52-footers are finally 
> developed and built that they perform as well in the really awful 
> stuff as Victory, but I'll bet they won't have as much class as she 
> has.
>
> On 2/1/2021 1:25 PM, Case wrote:
>> My favorite CG boat ever. Pretty amazing boat.
>>
>> I got to go for a short cruise on her across the bay once.
>>
>>> https://newportnewstimes.com/article/victory-the-queen-of-the-fleet
>
> --
> John <jkohnen@...>
> Laws are like cobwebs which may catch small flies, but let wasps and 
> hornets break through. (Jonathan Swift)
>
>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
>







Join oregoncoots@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.