Blue Moon's keel

[Tales]

My experience with Tales showed me that there was no issue with the Formit hull itself. The hull join, where I exposed it, was well executed and the hull thickness was appropriate wherever I witnessed it (through hull fitting holes). I did need to repair a number of blisters over the years but that is pretty common on polyester resin boats from that era. None of the blisters went very deep.
There is a skill in laying up with a chopper gun and I suspect that Formit used the more experienced operators on the hull itself.
The deck, coach house and cockpit were another story and I found variable thickness and voids in these areas which I needed to repair.
The only area of the hull to deck joint I had any problem with was where the bow fitting is bolted on. It is a very difficult place to lay up the tabbing inside so it is common for voids to be found there. Also the fastening if the bow fitting was through a wooden block (glassed in) and any movement of the fitting can allow moisture in along the fasteners. This can rot the wooden block with obvious consequences. Many MkIIs and MkIIIs have been repaired in this area.
So I advise inspection for blisters and repair them (properly, not just with polyester filler) but don’t loose any sleep about the integrity of your hull below the water line.
Cheers,
Tom

[junkman]

Thanks, Tom, for your reassuring words. Shaun sailed Blue Moon extensively on the ocean so I am sure you are right. It may be just that my previous boat, apart from the endless rust maintenance, was so perfectly built. I find myself wishing I had bought a heavier, more solidly built glass boat, like a Walker H28. But since I am now committed I will just have to refit the boat until it meets my standards. I agree with Shaun that I could just sail it to the Whitsundays as it is, but I'm more anxious than he is. When I cut out Blue Moon's cockpit engine well, the hull itself seemed solid, it was the deck mold and the way it was glassed into the hull that was a problem. Not to mention the discrepancies between the centrelines of the two. I had no blisters in the glass layup of the hull. There has been some pitting of the gelcoat in places, and in others the gelcoat seems to be missing entirely. I have had some experience with osmosis repairs and am good with epoxy so that should be ok. I believe Shaun replaced the bow fitting when he owner Blue Moon. It has a short timber anchor platform, like a stubby little bowsprit. Another problem is that Formit used very poor quality plywood in the bulkheads beneath the cockpit. Like many other Top Hats they built, there is significant rot in these areas. I'm not going to tackle that until later since it is not strictly structural, but it adds to my dismay about the build quality of these boats. I'll fix it eventually. By the end of summer I should have finished the projects I have embarked on and will do a bit of sailing, play with my new self steering gear, see where I go from there. Maybe I'll even come to like this boat eventually!

[Phillip]

Junkman, the process of building needs to be confirmed by Lloyd. Could you try and make a phone call again, to meet him or at least put the build process to bed.

[junkman]

Ok, I'll keep trying with Lloyd. I won't be able to make it down there at the moment but could ask him some questions if I can get him on the phone. In the context of me seeking info about Blue Moon, he might be more willing to talk. I think Lloyd likes to keep a low profile. I am not sure if Formit used the same molds that Baker did, or if Lloyd kept track of what Formit were up to, but I'll see what I can find out.

[Phillip]

Formit brought the moulds from Baker.
As Lloyd didn't work for Formit it may pay to keep the questions on what Baker did, wont be much different from Formit.
We do not need to mention Lloyd by name in any publications, if that helps.

[davet]

All the Top hats were made in two pieces. Once the initial layup had been finished. The two halves were stood up and CSM was laid in ever-increasing widths to complete the construction thickness.

After that, the lead for the keel was installed in ingots and lead shot with resin used to make a homogenous whole.

Whilst this was going on the timber for the bulkheads were also installed as were the stringers for the bunks. Finally, the lead was encased with a top layer of CSM before being painted with epoxy and the heel plate installed and laminated in place. finally, the water tank was filled with water and a heater inserted to fully cure the epoxy so there was no foul taste in the water tank.

Then, the deck was lifted into place and epoxy was used to join the two pieces and then additional laminate was applied to bond both the deck and bulkheads together.

I was Geoff Bakers chief laminator from when we were in Garden St Narrabeen 1964 building Bluebirds until I moved to Wyong in 1973 with just 2 years off for national service.

I assisted Geoff with the installation of only the second chopper gun in Australia in 1967.

I can't talk about the type 3's joining but for Baker it was a rigorous process to ensure the two halves matched AS CLOSELY as possible before a bead of gelcoat was used to fill any gaps between the two halves.

I have mentioned before the process of building the Baker boats but some members thought I was talking B/s. Especially when we used chopper guns and for what part of the build and when we didn't.

I built over 40 Top Hats and more than 10 Currawongs as well as the first 43ft Boomerang the first Australian built composite. As well as 6 Tempests under Lloyds London registry. and if my memory serves about 20 Bluebirds

Lloyd Northam was not a member of the laminating/joining team at any time I was working for Geoff. He arrived some 3 years after I had started. His main job was minor laminating work and the fitting out process. This is not to detract from Lloyds work in anyway.

To finish there were some major differences between Geoff Baker built and Formit built boats. I'm sure the ad's mentioning Baker built or Type 2 Top Hats should be enough to give you some idea.

Also, I was working in Wyong when Formit came to Tuggerah and I had good relations with a number of workers from Formit so I know the processes they were using.

Later as a TAFE teacher of reinforced plastics at both Wyong and Strathfield campuses I trained a number of Formit workers.

[junkman]

Thanks for your response, Davet. Valuable to have confirmation that the hulls were built on a split mould. The Baker-built boats that you were involved with have a good reputation for structural integrity. Formit less so, particularly towards the end, when they started cutting cost. My Mark 111 was moulded in 1984, the last year they were built, I think, and seems rather light to me. The cabin sides are only 4mm thick. Alan Nebauer's Mark 111 was also built in 1984, and he sailed it to Canada and back, but they may have laid up his hull and deck more carefully. I would not want to face a major storm in my boat. The construction standard I consider acceptable is similar to what you will find in a Baker-built Currawong, with its stringers and frames creating a very stiff hull. A friend has one, and it never creaks at sea, no matter how hard he sails it.

[Shaun]

Great information Davet, very valuable,
Cheers

[Democritus]

Curiously the last comments on Deck rot are 4 years old. I wonder who ...and maybe this could become a registry...or a boat name hidden register od the rot condition of our tophats. Who has longevity-repaired...rather than 'tweaked' the rot....what guidance can you give...photos etc. even if exchanged privately by request rather than on the forum.

I'm a bit OCD when it comes to things that I really want to know. This is what I have so far found is that it is rainwater not seawater causing rot. It takes just droplets to start it...could be something you screwed without seriously sycoflexing the hole and threads ..using a technique which excludes water...on every glass or core penetrating, item. Sea water on timber can lead to it becoming like stone and a delight for toredo worms. Rot never gets better.

One of the serious concerns is that the mast may break loose. You may hear cracks and groans in light weather but in strong wind the stays and mast itself may tear out.

It is possible to test areas (by drill or hole saw but it is good fortune if the rot is not extensive All core materials have limited lives, some more than others. I have so far heard prices of $6000 to $10000 to redo the top deck. One must ultimately decide whether the boat is viable or not.

Various builders used various materials I can see elsewhere..
1) what was commonly used core material if (a) foam (b) wood
2) is there a core in Tophat GRP hulls
3) Is there core material inside the vertical 'porthole' section of the top deck...or are hull and deck solid glass?
(4) Is the foredeck GPR using a core material....can water ingress it in anyway via the anchor locker..e.g. a split drain hose
(5) Can rainwater ingress into core (if core material is in that section) through leaky portholes?
6) Can timber block under mast plate shrink, warp or move with sailing motion. I think all rigging will do that and under the force, compress their mounting points....enabling water to run into the core via their threads. Periodic attention to tensions and insulation should be undertaken. I don't know what tension should be applied to rigging bolts....does someone? Of course the nuts are typically hidden under carpet which sees such maintenance unlikely.

As this is an old post-set if you can give me your experience and professional knowledge I will record it in my notes. You could email me on france007@onthenet.com.au There are no doubt other questions

[Democritus]

Hi Philip...just checking...did my email arrive ok with deck rot query. My regards