Reeves, Debbie (Debbie) wrote: > > Exactly what does "built-in floatation" mean. I had always thought that > statement meant that the boat gunnels would be above the surface. It does > not. The boat was floating, but it was submerged. Let me reemphasize, it > did not sink to the bottom, it floated just below the surface. Personally, > I consider that misleading, but I am sure the manufacturer does not. It > boils down to interruptation. One possible (cheap) solution would be to add > 4 tie-downs in the bow and stern to tie in float bags. But how do we (the > user segment) get them (the manufacturers)to do that? > > Debs To my knowledge the term means that the boat won't sink to Davey Jones Locker, i.e. it will float in some retrievable fashion at the surface, more or less. It doesn't mean that it will float with freeboard if the average weight number of paddlers (single or double) are sitting in it. So, while it is a correct statement it is misleading in that people can easily make the assumption that it will float fully flooded with them in it and still be usable or be able to be pumped. It can't. Cockpits will be submerged so part or all of the coaming will be underwater and therefore no amount of pumping could empty it. All you have to do to establish just how effective built-in flotation is is just to look at the boat. If the flotation is just thicker walls on the perimeter of the boat that is filled with something bouyant, you can see that it would not be sufficient to create freeboard were the boat to be filled with water. I have been known to get pretty worked up on this regarding folding kayaks, none of which will float with sufficient freeboard for emptying out if the paddlers rely on the built in sponsons alone. I also clearly stated this in my book, and to underline this, I included a photo of a couple (who were Twiggy and Woody Allen size) in a double Klepper with just the sponsons inflated and no flotation bags (page 104). Their boat had half the cockpit submerged and would have been impossible to empty with them in it. On second thought, perhaps I should have used Jackie Gleason size paddlers as they would have displaced more water and of less weight than the water they replaced; and therefore provide some more bouyancy :-) But that is counter-intuitive and so thinner people looked better to illustrate the point. ralph -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************Received on Tue Mar 07 2000 - 08:11:41 PST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:30:21 PDT