How high are your railings?

[markpierce]

On the Coot, they are this high.

-- Edited by markpierce on Tuesday 11th of January 2011 02:07:45 AM

 

[FF]

NO railings , no use for them , hand rails only.

But the 10x15 ft after deck is nice and deep.

 

[Woodsong]

How can one have no use for handrails? They leave them off sportfishing boats all the time too. They are a safety feature.

Mark, ours are at least as tall. The mom has wide decks and good handrails...very nice features for us with our 2 little kids.

 

[RT Firefly]

Hiya,
** Handrails????

 

[Tom.B]

Woodsong wrote:

They leave them off sportfishing boats all the time too.

They leave them off of sprt fishers because they would quickly get torn off in the seas some of those boast will see. Same reason there are no front windows. (sorry if you already knew this)

 

[Moonstruck]

RT Firefly wrote:

Hiya,
** Handrails????

That is the boat with 2 of every kind of animal but scapegoats.* They seemed to take all those they could get.

*

 

[Codger2]

My boat has 30" high rails that are "hell for stout" for a 32 footer. All the hardware seems to be "overkill" but is appreciated.

 

[Conrad]

FF wrote:

NO railings , no use for them , hand rails only.

But the 10x15 ft after deck is nice and deep.

This raises an interesting question. I've noticed on some serious heavy water boats that they have the railings installed INSIDE the areas that are normally walked on, particularly as you go forward. Meaning that you always have handrails at approximately hip height for security, but don't have railings that could trip you into going overboard or get in the way of dock handling activities. I've often thought that that would be the way to go but you seldom see this approach, other than what FF is suggesting, having handrails on the cabin sides & coach house roof.*

*

 

[Phil Fill]

My wife bought our boat because its a wide body, no side decks, with solid high stern rails and Portugese Bridge to keep people protect and confined that are at least 3 ft.* That was a very big point with her as she knew/wanted a lot of *grandchildren, 21 and counting.* The stern and the pilot house also has canvas enclosure which makes addition usable areas even during the 9 months of rain.* The solid hand rails or lack of where a big point with her.* ******

 

[Nomad Willy]

Hand rails are good for safety*** ...no doubt about that. But they almost never make a boat look better. A boat that's heavy on the hand rails is always cluttered in its appearance. In some rather rare cases an ugly boat can benefit from the lines of well designed rails. The fwd sweeping stanchions of Walt's boat help the looks alas most is lost due to their excessive height. They become just too extensive. Almost any boat would look better without rails. Imagine how much better Walt's boat would look if the rails were 6" high?
Would only help keep one aboard if you were on your knees. Also imagine how the boat would look if the stanchions were vertical? Would'nt look good at all. And I think the slant of the stanchions should match the rake of the bow. And if the stanchions don't get very close to the bow vertical seems to work. I see that from many of Walt's posts that his boat turns into a play pen as does Tony's so they don't need railings**** . .. they need
rail fences. Nice picture of Renee Walt.

 

[Carey]

We have railings which are only about 18" high. All they are good for is hanging fenders.

If I were starting from scratch, I would install dedicated fender hangers, and labeled fenders for each one, and have no outboard railings. The stanchions have potential for tripping. I would instead do just what the CG has done on their boats, and that is inboard handrails along the side and top of the house, and two rails about thirty six inches off the deck from the front corners of the house to a place on deck about two feet behind the windlass.

 

[Giggitoni]

Our GB42 has stainless handrails which are 29 inches above the deck. We also have rails attached on the house at head level.

 

[markpierce]

nomadwilly wrote:

Hand rails are good for safety*** ...no doubt about that. But they almost never make a boat look better. A boat that's heavy on the hand rails is always cluttered in its appearance. In some rather rare cases an ugly boat can benefit from the lines of well designed rails. The fwd sweeping stanchions of Walt's boat help the looks alas most is lost due to their excessive height. They become just too extensive. Almost any boat would look better without rails. Imagine how much better Walt's boat would look if the rails were 6" high?

Eric, it seems we place different weights on the safety versus appearance trade-off.* ...* I definitely don't want to be crawling on the deck when I would be walking, and a low rail is best suited for being a tripping hazard.

-- Edited by markpierce on Tuesday 11th of January 2011 01:02:06 PM

 

[Nomad Willy]

Mark,I didn't place any weight anywhere on or of safety. I just made observations.
I have rails on my 19' OB 3" high and they look nice. I'm just saying rails can look nice but they usually don't look good. And the more there is of them they usually look worse.
Look at this boat w it's very nice lines and consider how it would look w lots of rails.

 

[Jay N]

nomadwilly wrote:


Look at this boat w it's very nice lines and consider how it would look w lots of rails.

It would like alot safer with good/high rails.* Function over form.*

*

 

[FF]

"Hand rails are good for safety "

Really ? HOW?

On our lobster boat we mostly go fwd to handle the anchor chores.
Or set up deck chairs in an anchorage to admire a view.
The deck is almost 3 ft wide with hand grabs on the cabin top , and the boat is basically stopped .
In a lock or marina railings get in the way of line handleing , and fender hanging.

A picket fence would make using a stern anchor a real pain .

A sail boat where the sails need to be changed raised or lowered is a different concept.

Good concepts to stay aboard are needed in the areas where folks are, look at any sport fish.

These go out for fun when most TT owners chose to go to the movies ashore.

They work the fish from the protected after deck , not from the bow.

 

[Marin]

Our boat has GB's stock bronze and teak rails. Would the boat look better without them? Dunno. But it's a moot point because we wouldn't want to be without them. They provide security for ourselves and guests, some of whom have had very little boating experience. They provide a place to attach fenders. And probably most important, the handrails on the bow are critical to safety when we have to power off a lee dock. My wife stands in the bow manipulating with one hand a line to the dock and with the other hand a very large fender as I power the stern out away from the dock. This would be a very dangerous thing for her to do without the high bulwark and hand rail on top of it. An inboard rail would be of no value in this instance--- she needs something in front of her.

If one is going to be doing actual work on the bow of a boat--- deploying and retrieving the anchor, rigging a snubber, manipulating lines and fenders as I described above--- a sturdy rail system is a major contributor to the crew's safety no matter what it might do to the appearance of the boat.

Vessels like rescue boats, military boats, etc. may not have handrails or have rails positioned inboard.* Note the rail setup on the RNLI 47' rail-launch lifeboat William Street.* Removable rails amidships and around the stern but no rails on the bow at all.* And the midships and aft rails are rarely set up-- most of the time the boat is operated with no deck rails at all.* Even the boat's cleats can be folded flush with the deck.* This makes sense for the actions of the crew on the missions these boats were designed for. * The PT boats of WWII had no handrails at all, only a toe rail a few inches high around the perimeter of the deck. With torpedo tubes that were cranked out for firing and a variety of machine guns and cannon, rails would have simply gotten in the way. But the vets I've interviewed over the years all told me that the lack of rails posed no danger in their eyes because they all learned or were trained how and where to move about the boat.*

Recreational cruisers are a whole different deal.

(The photo of PT117 is a builder's photo.* The boats were initially supplied with a set of* stanchions and rope rails on the foredeck but the first crew assigned to a new boat promptly threw them away and mounted a 37mm cannon on the foredeck.* Eventually Elco stopped bothering with the foredeck rails altogether.)



-- Edited by Marin on Wednesday 12th of January 2011 11:38:37 AM

 

[markpierce]

Marin wrote:

(The photo of PT117 is a builder's photo.* The boats were initially supplied with a set of* stanchions and rope rails on the foredeck but the first crew assigned to a new boat promptly threw them away and mounted a 37mm cannon on the foredeck.* Eventually Elco stopped bothering with the foredeck rails altogether.)

Where can I get such a cannon, with ammo?* Would settle for a 25 mm, converted to semi-automatic or even single-shot action.***Got a place on the saloon deck for it.* The rails are lower there.*

*

 

[Marin]

The 37mm used by the PT crews were initially "salvaged" (aka stolen) from Army Air Corps supply depots by the boat crews themselves. This cannon was designed specficially for the mid-engine P-39 Airacobra, hence the fuselage-shaped ammo magazine.

Because *this cannon proved ideal for the PT boats--- lightweight with a big punch--- they eventually became standard equipment on later new PTs. They remained unmodified from their airplane configuration and retained the aircraft magazine, which held onto the shells instead of ejecting them so the CG of the plane would not change as the gun was used.

I suspect it would be very difficult to find a working example of this cannon today, let alone the ammo. So I would recommend the modern equivelent, which is the 30mm Avenger Gatling gun which the A-10 Warhog was designed around. This weapon will make short work of clearing out that crowded anchorage.

The WWII photo shows PT557, one of the later Elco 80-footers. Note the 37mm on the foredeck with the "airplane" magazine. The gunner beside him on the port side is manning an Oerlikon 20mm cannon.* Early PTs had a Oerlikon on their aft deck plus the two twin-fifty turrets.* The Oerlikon was later replaced with a huge 40mm Bofors.* Near the end of the war when the PT role had changed from topedo boat to gunboat, many crews added an Oerlikon on the foredeck along*with the 37mm.* You might have better luck finding an Oerlikon as they were continued in production long after the war and may still be in production today.

In my opinion*the Elco PT is one of the best looking boats ever made.* They are a favorite of present day naval architect Tom Fexas who patterned a number of his designs on their hulls including his "Midnight Lace" series (second photo).



-- Edited by Marin on Wednesday 12th of January 2011 05:42:31 PM

 

[Moonstruck]

Well, I guess this thread has already been hijacked.* So here is a little story*I awoke one morning in my slip*at the Morehead City Yacht Basin.* A 31' Uniflite was in the Hatteras Factory slip next to me.* A couple was on it, and soon were moving about.* When we introduced ourselves, I asked how James, the dock master, had put them in the Hatteras slip.* The gentleman said that he was the new president of Hatteras Yachts.* I believe AMF/Brunswick owned them then.* I said that he was on a Uniflite.* He said that it was his personal boat.* That it was the same hull used on the Vietnam river patrol boats.* I asked about a huge round cover on the bow in place of a bow hatch.* He said that was how he came to have the boat.* He had been president of Colt Arms, and they made the twin machine gun mount that fit in the bow.* This boat was their test bed.

Life is sure interesting on the Atlantic ICW.

 

[Moonstruck]

Marin wrote:


In my opinion*the Elco PT is one of the best looking boats ever made.* They are a favorite of present day naval architect Tom Fexas who patterned a number of his designs on their hulls including his "Midnight Lace" series (second photo).



-- Edited by Marin on Wednesday 12th of January 2011 05:42:31 PM

Marin, Tom Fexas also used the Elco commuters and rum runners for inspiration for the Midnight Lace.* One of the reasons the Midnight Lace would have no bow rails was that they had a front cockpit for handling the anchor and bow lines.* He thought that long hull with*narrow beam with flatter runs aft made for greater efficiency.

*

 

[Arctic Traveller]

Marin wrote:

The WWII photo shows PT557, one of the later Elco 80-footers. Note the 37mm on the foredeck with the "airplane" magazine. The gunner beside him on the port side is manning an Oerlikon 20mm cannon.

I always wondered what the difference is between a gun and a cannon.* Seems planes had both..............Arctic Traveller

*

 

[FF]

Was aboard a Huckins version of the Pt boat and it had great performance.

A pair of 6-71 gave 1K per 100 rpm.

1400 rpm 14K 1800 18K , and so on.

Not sure the boat could be marketed today as it was very spartan , even the dining table and chairs were in light weight aluminum!

With todays requirements for "comforts" the boat might gain many tons and the hull construction now would not be much lighter than their fine wood layup.

 

[ARoss]

A quick Google search seems to indicate that guns fire "solid" projectiles (bullets) while cannons fire explosive rounds. Since some "weapons" can fire either, the definition gets blurred.

 

[markpierce]

ARoss wrote:

A quick Google search seems to indicate that guns fire "solid" projectiles (bullets) while cannons fire explosive rounds. Since some "weapons" can fire either, the definition gets blurred.

My impression has been it was the diameter of the projectile.* Half-inch (50 caliber) was the maximum size for a gun and larger was a cannon?

*

 

[Marin]

FF wrote:

Was aboard a Huckins version of the Pt boat and it had great performance.

Huckins built a boat for the PT competition just prior to WWII. It was a beautifully made boat but it*was crap as far as the PT mission was concerned.* Too heavy and too slow.* All the WWII*PTs were powered with the same engine, the Packard Marine 4M-2500.**Like the Elco and Higgins*PT boats, the Huckins had three of them but they were still not enough to let the boat get out of it's own way.* The Navy ordered*40 of them just to spread the*money around but they were never used in combat.* They were mostly used for training or simply not used at all.*

Huckins may have built other successful*craft for the Navy over the years, but their entry into the PT boat competition was a loser.

 

[Marin]

Arctic Traveller wrote:

I always wondered what the difference is between a gun and a cannon.* Seems planes had both..............Arctic Traveller

The explosive vs non-explosive projectile makes some sense. However terms get blurred.* For example, all the primary weapons on a battleship are called guns.* Fifteen inch gun, sixteen inch gun, eighteen inch gun.* I have read a LOT of books about WWI and WWII navies and the term "cannon" is never used in reference to these weapons, which most definitely fired explosive shells.

I have an original copy of the 1943 Bluejackets Manual at home.* I bought it as research material for the book I am currently writing.**The*1943 edition is*the largest Bluejackets Manual ever produced--- over 1,000 pages--- and contains everything from how to navigate your ship to how to retrieve a spotter floatplane to how to sight guns on a target to medical procedures.* If I remember I'll check it to see if it provides any definitions of "gun" and "cannon."

*

 

[Moonstruck]

then on land you have mortors, recoiless rifles, howitzers, etc.* They will all kill you.

 

[BaltimoreLurker]

Are "cannons" muczzle loaders?

 

[Pineapple Girl]

Moonstruck wrote:

Well, I guess this thread has already been hijacked.* So here is a little story*I awoke one morning in my slip*at the Morehead City Yacht Basin.* A 31' Uniflite was in the Hatteras Factory slip next to me.* A couple was on it, and soon were moving about.* When we introduced ourselves, I asked how James, the dock master, had put them in the Hatteras slip.* The gentleman said that he was the new president of Hatteras Yachts.* I believe AMF/Brunswick owned them then.* I said that he was on a Uniflite.* He said that it was his personal boat.* That it was the same hull used on the Vietnam river patrol boats.* I asked about a huge round cover on the bow in place of a bow hatch.* He said that was how he came to have the boat.* He had been president of Colt Arms, and they made the twin machine gun mount that fit in the bow.* This boat was their test bed.

Life is sure interesting on the Atlantic ICW.

THAT. IS. AWESOME.

*