[frers-list]Fairing keel and rudder

[Bill Thompson]

Courtney,

I went through a lot of these issues when I shortenened my standard keel by 7" from the original 6'3" draft. If you had a wing keel, you would see the the wing. You have a torpedo or bulb as it's called on yours.

Mars Keels, Burlington, ON made the two halves of the bulb we put on mine. You can find details of my project on another thread on this site. They make the keels for j-Boats, Beneteau, and others, and have been doing so for decades. They have also done bulbs for hundreds of boats, and know what they are doing.

They may be willing to make some calculations for you so you can assess effect of the change to your keel on ballast. You need to send them pictures with measurements:
-keel dimensions: length, width, depth and material (it's 4% lead/antimony with a fibreglass cover).
- dimensions of the bulb, and what material it is made of
- a picture of a standard keel, and Art's measurements

Tell them you want to know how much weight was taken off when the draft was reduced, how much they calculate should have been put on to compensate for the weight, and reduction in draft, and how much your bulb weighs. 

This will allow you to see your ballast ratio and assess your situation. 

Good luck.

Bill

William Thompson
Sent from my iPad

> On Dec 10, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Courtney Thomas <courtneycthomas@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> 
> Art,
> 
> Thanks for the data.
> 
> My understanding is that on the Frers33 a wing keel was an option whose draft apparently was  4' 11".  Is that from the keel root, waterline, or what ?
> 
> The keel depth on my boat, measured from the root front to the foot bottom, ... is about 40".
> 
> I don't know if a former owner  modified said keel, or if I have a "wing", though the foot shape is torpedo like and does not have a horizontal wing.
> 
> More importantly, I'm concerned that someone, not a marine architect, has sufficiently altered this keel so that it's ballast is insufficient, the boat's handling is impaired if not dangerous, or that it's performance is significantly reduced.
> 
> Please bear in mind my intended use is coastal cruising, not racing.
> 
> 1-What's your opinion on my boat's circumstance ?
> 
> 2-If of serious consequence, what's your recommendation regarding proper assessment and remedy ?
> 
> Hopefully I'm unnecessarily concerned    :-)    but with a 50' mast and sail capacity on such a small and light boat and it's intended 'below the belt' ballast I'm concerned.
> 
> Most appreciatively,
> 
> Courtney
> 
> PS - Anyone else that will weigh in is welcome, of course.
> 
> 
> 
>