Round Britain in a 'Blade'

[Matt]

I'm sure that was just an example used in support of the effort the guys must have put in to keep going, but accepting no matter how hard ya try, somethings are too much with sheer willpower alone. So instead of coming on like burty big bollocks with something to prove after a whole 16 posts, why don't you post something positive - I'm sure lots of us would be interested in the facts, and might even learn something from it.

[Taz]

UT OH!

[Jon Fuller]

The teams own press release said they 'hit an unknown object' which damaged the boat, temporary repaires were made more than once.

My comment re: 'a hole' was a generalisation suggesting that if the boat were damaged in this way, ie, impact damage (possibly a hole) retiring wasn't a question of needing more 'bottle', as suggested by MrRob, rather, that the decision to retire was forced upon them.

confused....mebbe, mis-informed...probably.

Prepared to let you have a free for all against 'Verytricky' for no apparent reason....no! what is your problem?

[John G]

Burty big bollocks - easy now Matt!

Wasn't having a jibe at Mr.Fuller but like Tony Davis I was confused by the hole in the boat comment and took it literally - so was wondering just what he had heard.

As for posting something positive!......that was my gripe with Mr.Tricky;

Quote: "or something simlar WINK"

Suggestive nonsense like that doesn't do anyone any favours.

So does only having 16 posts restrict me from a bit of tit for tat with someone who wants to stir things up? Why doesn't a moderator come down on Mr.Tricky in the same way?

Yes - like Tony Davis said, I know that the tie bar did break - due to hitting something.

[John G]

Mr.Fuller like I said I didn't have a prob with yourself - understand now what you meant - good point well made, if not so well understood!

Can you explain what Mr.Tricky's post was about then?

[Jon Fuller]

I don't know your history, but I think you're reading more into this than is actually there!

If the press release were more detailed, there wouldn't be any of this nonsense!

If you knew the tie bar had failed, why didn't you just post saying this?

It all seems to be talking in fkkn riddles here at the moment!

[Gav]

It was the Colonel in the study with the hammer??

[Jon Fuller]

I do have a question mind you!

In this photo from the team website, there doesn't seem to be a tie bar on 'Broadstone Challenger'. I suspect therefore, it has an internal 'hydraulic tie bar' of the style the class1 cats used back in the Arneson days.

So if it doesn't have an exposed tie bar for something to hit, what did happen?

[John G]

Agree about the riddles Mr.F! - wouldn't life be more simple without em!...but as much fun?!? Appologies - should've levelled with u from the start.

Seems to me from what I've read on these pages that Mr.Tricky ain't always been too complimentary about Bladerunners - without always seeking the correct help (why?).

That post seemed to be a wee jibe along the same lines which ain't really called for when a lot of hard work etc has obviously gone into a project.

You obviously understand the planning, preperation and effort that goes into these things, and therefore the frustration when an uncontrolable event ends it all.

[John G]

Yeh - hydraulic tie bar originally but unlike a cat those propellors could feasibly collide if hydraulic pressure was lost. therefore a mechanical tie bar was added as a safety measure!......oh the irony of it all!

[Jon Fuller]

Re: 'correct help'

Remember, there could well be some extra baggage behind the decision not to ask for help from ICE marine.

[Jon Fuller]

Originally posted by John G
therefore a mechanical tie bar was added as a safety measure!......oh the irony of it all!

Added, or substituted?

You seem very well informed on this project!

[John G]

tie bar - subbed.

As for Mr.Tricky, you can't make a judgement without hearing both sides can you? and to be honest it's not really our business.

Lets just stick to what we love - the boats!

EDITED: jf

[Jon Fuller]

Originally posted by John G
and to be honest it's not really our business.

Very true! infact i'm gonna remove a bit of your last post, as it's not helpful.

[verytricky]

Originally posted by John G
Seems to me from what I've read on these pages that Mr.Tricky ain't always been too complimentary about Bladerunners - without always seeking the correct help (why?).

The 'correct help' ?

That is just another term for blowing a further 10 grand I think.

Aparently I have sucker written accross the front of my forehead. When I have supposedly asked the correct people for the correct help I get charged excessive fees, get charged for work not actually done and/or get the equipment and support that is of a lower quality than I have paid for.


All I want to do what it says on the box.


Then I find that batteries are not included. And they are special batteries, and they have to be imported from Afganistan, and they are gold plated and produced by virgins only once every six years. Or some similar story.


I got more benefit on the boat out of 1 weeks posting on this website than I got blowing £10 000 and 3 months 'work' on the boat.

I bought the Blade Runner because it looks cool, and 'they' said is goes fast. It does not 'go' the speed 'they' say it goes. And it is not just the one I bought, there are other top of the range Blade Runners that dont 'go' like the advert says, and I have first hand experiance of that.

After much work on the boat it is aproaching a boat that lives up to the claims made for the boat. Would that not piss you off just a little?

Or are you one of the vendors who's salary I was paying untill last week?

[Jon Fuller]

Also, it must be quite well protected (the tie bar) as it's pretty short, mounted relatively high, and tucked in the 'dry zone' of the transom when travelling at speed.

Can't quite get my head round it. It shouldn't be possible to damage it in that position, so I wonder what happened exactly??

[Matt]

Is there any damage to the props or skegs from the collision?

[John G]

Matt - I believe that something hit the skeg and the resulting jolting force sheared the tie-bar at one end (max shear force at end of a beam).

The bar then rotated back and got chewed by the prop on the side it was still connected to.

[Jon Fuller]

Originally posted by John G
Matt - I believe that something hit the skeg and the resulting jolting force sheared the tie-bar at one end (max shear force at end of a beam).

The bar then rotated back and got chewed by the prop on the side it was still connected to.

I know the Arneson drive system reasonably well, and am VERY surprised that a tie bar, or it's mount at the base of the trim ram would fail, especially as a result of an impact with the skeg! The load just wouldn't be taken by the tie bar. Unless it hit a very large imovable object, like a container, which was laying in the water, and deflected the drive sideways.........but I think if this were the case, the tie bar would be the least of your worries.

An large impact with the skeg would be more likely to damage the trim ram.

Summat fishy here!

best wait till someone who actually knows a bit about this tells it how it is.

[Jono]

Originally posted by Jon Fuller
I know the Arneson drive reasonably well, and am VERY surprised that a tie bar, or it's mount at the base of the trim ram would fail, ...

Doesn't that depend how it was nailed on? If a monkey fitted it, a collision with a Mackerel would wipe it out......

I generally don't assume a component has failed...just the muppets who put stuff together/designed/used it.... and I ain't confining my harsh critisiscm to the marine trade, oh no......