Wxx3
Dauntless Award
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2013
- Messages
- 2,820
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Dauntless
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 - 148
IMO - As long as hull design and shape / superstructure design / interior parcels' locations / bilge-equipment & storage-spaces / engines / tankage / furnishings / as well as "fixed" initial ballast (i.e. what the designers engineered into a boat) are all taken into the "weight account" of a vessel while designing and building... then there should be no need for "added" ballast by the owner to then establish correct trim needs.
Being the thread starter and OP here I've been amused at some of the posts offered. My intended definition of "added" ballast was not what the original boat design engineers had in place as "fixed" ballast (i.e. trim weight in keel or other location)... but rather it means just as the thread title states ADDED ballast... meaning ballast that a boat owner ADDS in guess and by god test sequences because the original boat design was not ample to properly trim or maneuver the boat.
Additionally, it seems that there must be some wayto figure out how to (if it is truly necessary) "add" ballast via placement of new or redistribution of existing features in the boat that can further enhance useful/usable conditions in and about the boat. The placement of lead bars, concrete sacks, bird shot sacks, poured concrete squares just seems soooo non productive regarding usage of such limited space inside a boat.
I can't help but wonder why most if not all of the high quality production boat manufacturers' boats seldom if ever had substantial trim problems wherein "added" ballast was required to properly trim their boats. Could it be high quality engineering procedures as well as ample prototype-boat tests to make sure all weight positioning increments are sufficiently handled before major production numbers of boats came off the line?
I believe boats should be designed with no need for owners to "add" ballast to produce correct trim and handling conditions. Especially with modern computer assist design programs!
Clearly, it's because of the 3 bladed prop.
Though it could also be the anchor.
Wait, maybe it's an issue of needing a stern line, but then that depends on whether the line is flat or braided.
Now, if it's braided flat line, then 2507 pounds of ballast must be added 22.73 feet from the anchor.
But if it's a Rocha, made with Chinese steel, subtract 8.3 lbs of ballast and move the ballast 1.3 feet to starboard.
Unless, you have an off center queen berth, as I do. If that's the case, you must get one of those fuel splatter shield from Hopcar. Then, remember to only fuel on odd numbered days.
Though, if you need fuel on an even numbered day. That's no problem as long as you change all the above numbers by 1.64%.
So, just multiply the above by 1.0164 ,
But if you do that, it's better to get fuel on a Saturday. As there is less bio additives at week end.
Unless you are buying fuel from a location that celebrates the sabbath on Saturday, not sunday.
Then, just move the ballast aft 4.2 feet, and redo all the above.
I hope that helps.