What do you get for min weight?

The argument is raging again about building to minimum weight. I am finding out that what you get is like the engine in a dragster. Built for one fast run.

My 2006 Blade is on its third set of rudders. The heads keep splitting. The first time I ever went on a screaming two up jib reach a dagger broke (we weren't even trapping).

Now, I have a deck flexing so bad it has completely let go at the dagger board trunk. This is a boat that has been sailed predominately single handed on a lake by a 180 pounder. Both hulls have 4 foot long cracks between the trunk and the rear beam approximately 4 inches down the sides . Cracked outside, cracked inside, I am sure the foam is cracked too.

I removed the deck and found that the only thing supporting it's span was the trunk. There was a 1 inch gap between the foam laminated into the deck and the hull sides. This left a couple thin layers of glass to deal with the transition from thick to thin. There were no bulkheads in this area of the hull. Only a couple of loose fitting foam blocks between the hull and trunk. Removing the tramp track showed where the glue securing it had failed as there were many screw holes that had seriously elongated

So, an 180 person is able to break down the boat sailing it on a lake from June to September in only 5 years. I am seriously dissapointed in these major mechanical failures. This boat has never been in a collision and has never run aground.

I don't have the heart to try to sell this to someone. I sailed a 1977 Nacra for many years and a club member is still sailing it. I cannot imagine what a Blade will look like in 34 years.

So build to minimum weight. Enjoy your one fast run. Then sell it. Quick.

Sorry to hear about your problems! Really!

Now I would believe there is more to the story? Like you got a boat from the first batch of boats built, or there have been some severe drama? Plenty of evidence of other boats built to min weight holding up.

No problems so far with my '06. I did have a rudder head open but I just drilled a few holes, squirted in some epoxy and it's still good.

I'm 230.

If by drama you mean trauma, I was wanting to lay it out that there has been no extra ordinary stress on the boat. It has never been double trapezed. In fact, it is probably the opposite. I probably spend more time sitting on the boat than trapezing. The jib has been put on the boat about 5 times now.
This boat has never cartwheeled. I have never needed assistance righting. It has been trailered once (by the beams).

This has never been a dry boat. Since day one it has taken water into both hulls while sailing.

When you sail a potato chip I guess you gotta expect a few cracks.

I had de-lamination issues with the original rudders (they were part carbon part fiber/gelcoat) ... they looked really cool ... Matt replaced both under warranty -- to fiber/gelcoat boards. I haven't had a problem with any of the newer foils. I haven't experienced any of the other problems mentioned.

There are 3 - 2007 Blades that get sailed hard April - October every year. Also a 2006 that joined this year. All are still going strong. Also an earlier Taipan from the first batch that came over as F16s that is sailed just as much and is prestine. My 2009 boat is at 112kgs and is built like a rock.

Sounds like you have an outlyer to me.

I sail my 2007 blade pretty hard (or maybe into hard things). I hit a rock on a fast reach that tore open the port daggerboard trunk. On another occasion I hit a sandbar double trapped in 18knots a few seconds after I said "Ready About". The dammage was all my fault and Matt was there for me to send me the parts I needed and to advise on the correct repairs. My Blade had been a solid boat so far.I'm sorry you've had a bad experience with your boat.

I have not had any problems with my boat 2007/2008 Hulls (after one issue which was dealt with under warranty with no problems). I would like to say I sail the boat a lot, but unfortunately I don't.
I am not sure the boat will be around in 34 years either, but I think it is worth it.

I would recommend to contact the builder.
On my boat (2004) cleats and blocks of a well known company start to fail, because we sail hard, but not the boat.

Yeah, I kinda hoping to let the manufacturer know about the lifetime expectations of his product. Attached pic shows the crack running just below the anti-skid. I have one just like this on the other hull too.
Built on a Monday?

First version of a new design, built on a morning on friday the 13th under a ladder with black cats all around?

I would guess your boat is one of the first ones built and what you experience is theeting problems on the building process. Clearly a manufacturer issue if that is the case. Really sorry to hear about your problems! Hopefully there is a good way to implement the improved solutions used on later boats on your boat.

Thanks Rolf. I have contemplated that, wondering if newer decks fit the opening better. But I am afraid that thicker foam and different layups probably won't be very easy to implement.

We got a new deck plate and it fit.

Apparently the structural design of the daggerboard case was not sufficient to handle a submerged duckblind impact at 12 knots.

The structure has withstood many 2-up 18 knot pitchpole tests, but testing is ongoing. Crew have also suffered minor structural damage.

I have one of the Alter Cup boats. Seroiusly,the deck inserts could have been stronger, and now they are. The original ones cracked where the core ended and the flange began. The new one looks much better.

We love the boat. The light weight is greatly appreciated 99% of the time on the water and 100% of the time off the water.

-colin

I too am sorry to hear about your boat.

Sounds indeed like a introduction series warranty issue to me too.

I hope this all gets sorted out.

Regards,

Wouter

Sometimes I feel that my Blade entered the Dead Boat Society when it was about 2 years old.

This arose from VectorWorks dropping the product line and Falcon Marine creating their own boat.

That was a pessimistic view on it in my opinion. Your boat is still very much competitive in the F16 class.

Vectorworks is still in business so any claims should be possible to present for them? My sympathies for being between a rock and a hard place due to business decisions out of your control.
I am not afraid to whip out the skilsaw, epoxy and glass so I would get into fixing any issues myself when/if warranty expired. Perhaps you could do something similar, or have some connections able to teach you?

Allow me some pessimism in my dark moments.

The picture attached above shows the boat with its deck removed. I have already created 4 bulkheads that I am bogging into the boat that will hopefully support the flex deck and carry loads across the flex hull.

Perhaps another pic will be ready by Monday.

On the warranty issue, I really don't know where I stand. There never was a written warranty.

Does your boat have kevlar in the hulls?

Even though it is small comfort.. It is most often easier to repair an existing boat than to build a new one.

I have no clue about customer rights in the USA but I would at least have a chat with Vectorworks. If warranty have expired, you might get insight into the later models and the improvements done there. That would make any improvements easier to implement I think.

I am still hoping to have a chance for that discussion with a Vectorworks representative past or present.

Does anybody have any form of written warranty from Vectorworks that they can copy for me?

I see that Falcon Marine still has the Blade on their website. I wonder if they took the future liabilities when they took the tooling.

What's wrong with emailing Matt?

You know, I may have to. He seems reluctant to contact me.

Did you by chance get anything resembling a warranty? I would like to have an idea were I stand when I talk to him.

I did contact him earlier about the flex deck. He didn't offer up that it was a known issue and had been resolved with later boats.

Attached is a pic of the "bulkheads" being bogged in. I know I could hollow them out but am unsure if I need to really save the 500 grams.

I am kind of wondering about the white stuff around the bottom of the trunk. It has a lot of cracking in it but I don't think this translates to cracking in the structure.

This repair will add some strength. However consider that you now are adding strenght in the upper section of the hull, and not in the lower section. Will this reinforcement be enough to unload the sandwich stringer I can see in the pic sufficiently? A bit late now, but I would have done full bulkheads (hindsight is always 20/20 you know).

Attached is a pic of a ply bulkhead with reinforcements from our Blade project.

I would have taped the half bulkheads to the hull skin to spread the loads a bit more. I would also have cut the holes

Good points Rolf.
To tell the truth, I am constantly revising my repair plan as I go along. It all just started because I had a nice day without wind, so I decided to open her up. Then I glassed the crack. Then I decided that wouldn't work for long. So, I created a bulkhead out of a piece of scrap (which is one reason why it isn't full depth). Then I decided that one wasn't enough. Etc.

As it stands, I just wanted to laminate something across the crack failure in the side of the hull that also supported the crack failure in the deck.

Its not too late to tape the bulkheads in. I would guess that I would have bogged and filleted the bulkheads before taping anywise. It has been a possiblity that the the bulkeheads will "print" through the hull. Perhaps adding the tape will alleviate this.

And I do have the hole saw in my tool bag to create some holes. Thanks for the picture of your bulkheads.

Went ahead and opened up the port hull.
As you can see, I went nuts with the bulkheads, although they still aren't full depth. I just want them across the current failure and supporting the soft decks.

I did swiss cheese them a bit (you don't see this in the picture because i am just test fitting still), and did tape them in with some bog to form a fillet.

I would call those deck beams, not bulkheads

Why plywood?

Good point
"One of the upright partitions dividing a ship into compartments and serving to add structural rigidity and to prevent the spread of leakage or fire."

They are being used for structural rigidity but probably won't do much to prevent the spread of fire.

Why Ply? Probably because I don't know any better. Although, I am in North America, I feel more isolated than you are because I don't have the Euro Tornado campaign experience that you have. Shipping foam, etc still has its complications. It is a marine ply and what was available to me. I glassed it on both sides and sealed the cuts with epoxy. Without spin-cat competition to drive me on, I feel my skills have plateaued and a few grams are moot. Around the cans, I finish 6 minutes ahead of the next competitor, how can I tell when I'm slow?

On the other hand, when I first brought this here, a place frequented by designers, builders and manufacturer's, no one suggested different. You mentioned taping the joints and putting holes into the "beams". I did do both although I admit I didn't go for the full height "beams". Shaping and fitting each was a bit more than I wanted to take on.
Or would they have become bulkheads even if they didn't stop smoke and fire?

Ply is a good material!

Deck beams and beam set from our F16 build.

First time I've read this thread and for the record (though not important) sitting on the boat when flying a hull puts much bigger loads of the windward hull than trapezing where you weight is fed straight into the trap line rather than through the hull into the side stay.

My F16 is made up completely out of ply and issues yet !

It is excellent boatbuilding materiaal when handled right.