(The Montauk Catamaran Company Chronicles is an ongoing series of posts detailing the construction of Mon Tiki Largo, a James Wharram Designs Pahi 63 MkII. The author’s current boat is the catamaran Mon Tiki, a JWD Tiki 38, which he built in 2012 and currently operates as a day-sailing charter in Montauk NY. You can see all the posts in this series by clicking here.)
It is cold and wet today, but that doesn’t mean there’s not work do be done on Mon Tiki Largo. Thanksgiving morning we got the new lines drawing from James Wharrams Designs, and this morning we receive e-mail from the navel architect who is shepherding the project through the US Coast Guard cerfitication process that he’s already at work making displacement calculations off of the new lines. He also adds a caution about the budget:
I have almost finished the last cert through the USCG. It has taken much longer than anticipated due to additional requirements and intense scrutiny by their engineers. Most of the difficulty with the last boat was concerning the engine room and machinery requirements, which you do not have. But, for more than 49 pax, a damaged stability analysis is required, which is complex and adds time. I still have hopes that we can stay within budget, but the reality is that there is no telling how long it will take. I can assure you that we will get the boat through the process of certification. (Emphasis mine)
The first boat we operated commercially was my sloop S/V INTEMPERANCE, a Catalina 38 that we operated under the Unispected Passenger Vessel provisions of Part 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations. As an uninspected vessel INTEMPERANCE was restricted to a maximum of six passengers. There is also a minimal licensing requirement, but unless there is some sort of mishap, there’s no reason that a 6-pax vessel or its operator would ever have any interaction with the Coast Guard.
When we built Mon Tiki we stepped across the line from Uninspected Passeger Vessel to Small Passenger Vessel, which permitted to carry more than six passengers, but also brought us into a world of greater regulatory oversight. To wit:
Per the CFRs, Mon Tiki had to be built in accordance with a recognized underwriting rule. The CFRs recognize Lloyds of London and ABS. Mon Tiki was built according to the ABS Offshore Racing Yacht Rule. Modifying her scantlings (that’s boat talk for the size stingers, bulkheads, hull plating) to meet the standard fell to our naval architect, who produced a ~20 page engineering calculations document, which was then submitted the USCG Marine Safety Center, where his calculations were confirmed by their engineers. When this work was completed, a set of Mon Tiki’s plans were stamped “approved”. That’s the photo you see above.
While Mon Tiki was being built our US Coast Guard inspector was a regular visitor in the shop. He purpose was two-fold. He was there to ensure that we built Mon Tiki in accordance with the approved plans, and he was also able to answer questions and provide guidance on questions not dealt with explicitly in the the plans or in the CFRs.
Once Mon Tiki was launched her actual displacement had to be calculated by taking measurements witnessed by our Coast Guard inspector. These measurements were reduced to Mon Tiki’s displacement by our naval architect, and maximum safe passenger count for the waters we ply.
With structural and stability approvals in hand our USCG Inspector measured the boat to make sure she met the CFR requirements for safety equipment and passenger accommodations. Mon Tiki received a Certificate of Inspection for 49 passengers and 2 crew in Near Coastal Waters.
Every year we have an inspection safety equipment and general fitness inspection just like the one we had when we started operations, every two years we have an out of the water inspection, and every four years the masts have to come down and be inspected.
So you can see, the SPV category has rather a bit more regulatory oversight than the UPV (6-pax) category.
Now then.
Mon Tiki’s actual stability calculations and deck area were sufficient for a COI for something like 54 passengers, but we elected to take a COI for 49 passengers. Here’s why:
The rules used for passenger accommodation (that’s how much room each person has on the boat) are rules developed with ferry boats in mind. They’re transportation rules.
When I tell people Mon Tiki has a COI for 49 I also tell them that a bus can carry about 49 passengers, but when it has that many people on board it’s packed. We tell them that we are safe and legal to accommodate up to 49 guests, but with that number the experience is going to be that of a crowded cocktail party. For a real sailing outing, 20-25 is about the limit, and that when we run mixed trips, we limit them to 15-16. So adding another 4-6 people to the passenger count doesn’t really increase the capacity of the boat in a meaningful way.
On the other hand, as you can see from the section of our architect’s email I’ve quoted above, going over the 49 passenger number does increase the regulatory overhead. The damaged stability calculation are just one of a number of things the CFRs require addressing. There are also collision bulkhead requirements, increased fire-fighting requirements and the list goes on and on. It doesn’t make sense to take on these encumbrances for a few more seats that you’ll ever actually use. But that’s not what we’re doing with Mon Tiki Largo.
Mon Tiki Largo is going to be 63 feet long and 29 feet wide. Where Mon Tiki has just under 500 square feet of deck space, theMon Tiki Largo has about 1500 square feet of deckspace. As originally drawn the Pahi 63 design has a payload of about 4 tons; the redrawn Pahi 63 MkII has a payload of about 8 tons. We’re anticipating a COI of about 80-100 passengers, which will make comfortable daysailing operations for about 30-40, and we will be able to accommodate private events up to about 80 guests. With those kind of numbers, the regulatory overhead simply becomes a the cost of doing business.
(Above: Mon Tiki’s plans with USCG MSC stamp of approval. Below: Capt. David Ryan and USCG Inspector on the day Mon Tiki’s “ticket” was issued.)
gypsy closet practices
porno Clothes and Outfits For Your Sing
quick weight lossHEM to Rehab a Sprained Ankle
I’m really enjoying these posts, Mr. Ryan.
As a former employee of a sailing operation I can surely attest to the necessity of working closely with the CG. Our company had a boat that could easily carry 40, but was uninspected. The owner flew under the radar for several years, but the inevitable boarding occurred, and we got busted down to 12, which was a huge revenue hit for us. As you say, the costs of doing things right are the cost of doing business.Report
12 is the limit for bareboat charters. An inspected boat can be chartered “as is” to a group, and that group can hire a captain and crew, but the total passenger count including crew on an uninspected bareboat charter is 12.
A key provision is that the crew cannot be specified by the owner. If the crew is specified by the owner, SPV regulations attach. As you can imagine there’s a lot of hanky-panky that goes on around this provision and what “specified by the owner” means. What it really comes down to is what you’re insurance carrier will underwrite, and that really only comes up when there’s a mishap. I’ll get further into this in future posts.Report
Yep, that’s how it worked with our charter company. You got to pick whichever captain you wanted off our list, and he picked the crew. All of our captains were CG licensed.Report
Yes, not the first time I’ve heard of this sort of operation, and according the the Passenger Vessel Safety Act of 1993 it’s illegal, but it’s not a high priority for USCG enforcement either.Report
I always enjoyed working with the Pond Patrol back when I was wearing a Dixie Cup, and later with the CG Aux. When it comes to regulatory enforcement, they always struck me as honestly concerned about safety and not just out to make life difficult for people, taking the time to explain why things are the way they are.
Not sure if your Naval Architect is doing this, but if you want a CFD analysis of the Pahi 63 & have some CAD of the hull, I can do some fun simulations for you.Report
When we were having our first inspection one of the things we got wrong was we didn’t have our lifejackets labeled. So there we were, about 1/2 before that picture above was taken, all sitting on deck, marking each of Mon Tiki’s 57 lifejackets (49 passengers + 2 crew + 10% child’s size jackets) with “Mon Tiki” in broad-tipped permanent marker.
“Well I suppose this makes sense. If there was a catastrophic accident, you’d want some vessel markings in the debris field,” as I said this in my mind I had that shot from an old Hollywood movie were the torpedoed ship’s life ring comes bobbing into frame.
“Well yes, I suppose,” replied our inspector, “but mostly it’s because back in the day when we’d do these inspections we’d notice the same lifejackets showing up on different boats on different inspection days.”Report
See! Clear, logical reason for a given rule.Report
@david-ryan
If the idea of some CFD interests you, you can get my email from Mr. Kelly or Mr. Truman. I like doing Marine simulations, they’re fun. And you don’t just get boring numbers, but slick animations of 6-degree of freedom motion, complete with the water surface visible. Last Marine sim I did was a seakeeping sim of a floating drilling platform in heavy seas. Got some fun animations out of that.Report
This sounds fascinating. You can email me david at sailingmontauk dot comReport
When Mon Tiki Largo is completed, you’ll own and have command of more than one vessel. More than one vessel under the same flag is a “fleet,” as I understand nautical terminology. We’ll have to promote you to Commodore David Ryan then!Report
Are our fellows aware that you are (so far) the only Gentleman who has set foot on Mon Tiki?Report
The US doesn’t officially use Commodore anymore as a rank, it’s Rear Admiral, Lower Half (which is mind-boggling stupid, IMHO – Commodore sounds much cooler).
It is still used as a title, however, for senior captains in command of more than one Naval asset.Report
If I understand correctly, the Brits always thought we were wrong to use it as a permanent rank, rather than indicating a temporary multi-ship command. So maybe we’re just finally getting it right.Report
@james-hanley
Brits use it as a rank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_(Royal_Navy)Report
According to your source, only since 1997, so the Brits have only recently deviated from tradition. That makes me even prouder that we Amurricans are going back to doing it the right way, out-Britishing the British!Report
We stopped using it because people kept getting confused between the title & the rank, which I suppose is understandable.
But Read Admiral, Lower Half is still stupid. Makes the rank sound like the ass end of a Rear Admiral. Hell, Rear Admiral sound stupid…Report
MRS,
I’ll bet the dude getting promoted to senior bootlicker from junior bootlicker was really, really happy…Report
@kimmi
We are talking Admirals here, it’s boot-lickee, not boot-lickerReport
Okay, so you’ve upsized from a Tie Fighter (Intemperance) to a Imperial Shuttle (Mon Tiki) and now you’re in Star Destroyer territory (Largo).
So we all know where this is headed…Report
The lightship weight of INTEMPERANCE was just under 8 tons. Mon Tiki displaces 9500lbs.Report