Home

Getting ready for survey
Prepare your boat for survey

Osmosis
The reasons and the implications

Buying & Selling a boat
The process of buying, selling and surveying a boat

MCA Fishing vessels
The process of surveying fishing vessels for the MCA

Timber yacht surveys
Page of information about timber , steel and GRP surveys

Surveys for all vessels
More information on marine surveys

Shipwright
Timber and GRP repairs and common problems found on survey with many types of vessel

Links
Useful links for all sorts of information and advice on DIY yacht repairs

FAQs
A page of questions and answers on surveys, boat maintenance and much more

Contact
Get in touch with me through this form or email

About us
More information about who I am.

Iff you are not the owner of a vessel with teak decks then you can admire them at a distance as they can be quite beautiful and for working on deck they are also exceptionally non slip. if it is a brand new vessel then it can be a beautiful vessel to own and admired by all who see it however, there is a price to pay ......initially the additional cost of a new teak deck when built will run into innumerable thousands of pounds . BUT as the vessel ages and the teak gets worn with use or more often overzealous cleaning and scrubbing the original investment of many thousands of pounds becomes a liability of many many thousands of pounds because teak are relatively thin on most vessels , probably in the region of 10 millimetres Whereas the original teak deck on yachts of the 1950s would have been in the region of 30 millimetres in thickness .

The teak deck on early yachts was also produced in a slightly different way in that the teak was what is known as quarter sawn which means that looking at the end grain of a teak plank , the growth rings were vertical to the surface , Teak cut in this way does not wear as badly as teak cut with the growth rings spanning the width of the timber as there is more soft timber on the surface which wears away under scrubbing and walking leaving the typical ridged effect that can often be seen on a worn teak deck .unfortunately it is also a fact that modern teak is not as high a quality as the original Burma teak which is no longer legal to export
.
The long and short of this is that many vessels in excess of 20 years of age will have noticeable if not excessively worn decks if they have not been replaced by that time . The issues are that as the teak wears , the black sealant lines which are the definitive visual assets of a teak deck become excessively shallow with the sealant unable to remain in position and coming out, this leaves the area open for water penetration which gets under the teak and depending how the teak has been fitted , in other words either glued permanently or screwed down permanently or sometimes a mixture of both , The screws can capillary water into the underlying deck core which most vessels do have now ultimately causing structural issues with the deck at some later stage .

The upshot of this is that a vessel with a worn teak deck can be extremely difficult to sell because the cost of removing the deck and fitting a new deck will run into many tens of thousands of pounds .in many cases now , the cost of replacing the deck is prohibitive and many owners and boatyards advise merely removing the teak deck and making good the original deck. However, removing the teak deck is not a straightforward undertaking as most decks are bonded down and every item has to be removed from the deck which it can be imagined is a long laborious process . So, with regard to buying a modern vessel with a teak deck , do take your time and further investigate the issues first .

Well if you have a GRP vessel with no mains electricity and a simple electrical system with no major electronics and you have an inboard engine with standard stainless shaft and bronze prop and no major metallic underwater installations, then probably not. The seacocks are generally too far apart to have any interaction and iron keels do not generally need protection. This can change if your vessel has circuitry issues with stray currents, so if possible always leave batteries isolated when leaving the boat and if you see signs of stray current damage , investigate. It will often be issues related to electric bilge pumps live all the time, alternator issues on the engine or damp and loose connections within the bilges..

However, if you have more complex electronics then you might want to fit an anode to protect the P bracket and the stern gear. I would definitely advise you NOT to connect seacocks to an anode at any time as, if the anode connections become high resistance then one seacock becomes an "anode" for another seacock if they are wired together. Not all bronze fittings, even from the same manufacturer are exactly the same metallic structure. Fitting shaft anodes can be a standby "just in case"solution in some cases. Remember that if an anode to to protect the shaft, propeller and P bracket, there must be a low resistance , less than 1 ohm, connection to the anode. Bear in mind that anodes are produced in three different metals, Zinc for seawater and aluminium or magnesium for different salinity of fresh water. Zinc will not work in fresh water.

However do not fit anodes to timber vessels as these destroy the timber surrounding the anode and wired and protected items such as the stern deadwood where the shaft passes through. The strong alkali formed when the anode is working destroys the lignin in the timber. Damage caused by anode wired to stern gear on timber yacht.

Most insurance companies do set an arbitrary limit on the age of stainless steel rigging. In truth it is likely that most stainless steel rigging will be perfectly sound for many years beyond that 10 years. The difficulty is that there have been cases where stainless steel rigging has failed close to 10 years of age and, so far as the insurance companies go it is obvious that if they are going to limit the claims and ultimately their profits, they would prefer you to spend money to ensure that they do not have to. Unless there is a fault in the manufacture of rigging then most rigging will fail at the terminations either top or bottom and very seldom between those points. Unseen corrosion where the swages and terminals are located and work hardening just as the rigging comes out of the swage or terminal are usually the biggest factors. Faulty wire construction will usually shows failure well within 10 years and, in most cases within a season or two. Obviously vessels that are raced regularly do tend to give more cause for concern with regard to work hardening and stainless steel is known to work harden far in advance of mild steel.

Just be aware that in the event you are unhappy that you have been advised to replace the rigging because of the age limit then you cannot be enforced to do this but of course, in the event of any failure following that advice then technically you would not be able to make a successful claim. Mast and rigging replacement can run into many thousands of pounds. However, galvanised rigging is not subject to these time related replacements. Provided there is no structurally weakening corrosion on the rigging then the rigging is considered safe for as long as it remains corrosion free. The big advantage galvanised rigging is the cost it is a fraction of the cost of stainless steel however, very few modern masts are suited for galvanised rigging as the specialised connections for aluminium masts are not compatible with the fittings available for galvanised rigging. .

You will notice that stainless steel rigging has either copper talurits or stainless steel swages but galvanised rigging will use aluminium talurits or be hand spliced. If ever you notice stainless steel rigging with aluminium talurits then it must be deemed as totally unsafe for rigging purposes. Aluminium and stainless steel when mixed together will have serious issues with corrosion.

Virtually every grp boat over a certain age will have minor areas of damage to gel coat caused by contact damage, over stressing and deterioration. Naturally not all of these were always require attention and it will be the job of the surveyor to identify the cause and any repair or response needed. Scratches and scars and gel coat would not generally be considered structural, simply cosmetic. Other areas such as hard spot cracks and impact damage star crazing are fairly easy to see and, again it would be up to the professionalism and experience of the surveyor to decide whether they are in need of repair or are of no consequence other than cosmetic.

Hard spot cracks are very easy to dismiss as scratches however, these can be significant as they will always occur over internal hard spots such as bulkheads or internal plywood stiffening such as bunk top construction running fore and aft. They take the form of sometimes a single or sometimes multiple lines in the gel coat running directly on the skin of the hull at the point of the internal support.
This can also occur on deck particularly on cored decks where core failure is occurring. Occasionally the core failure will start and end at a cliff edge point beneath the deck surface. At this point of the cliff edge the deck flexes on one side and is rigid on the other side of the cliff edge and a crack will occur on the deck. When hammer testing a hull or deck it can be easily identified where there is a hard spot. Hard spots beneath the waterline are more serious than a hard spot above waterline but both can be serious long term as they are inclined to deteriorate. There are localized repairs that will eradicate these issues. This is time to speak to a surveyor if uncertain.

It might surprise many that you should not use graphite impregnated grease in stern tubes as graphite grease behaves like a metal in these circumstances with regard to galvanic action. This will quite commonly lead to pitting and damage to the stainless steel shaft so always avoid this type of grease. Either use a specific grease made particularly for stern tubes or simply use a basic multipurpose grease.

However, if it is a PSS type gland or perhaps the alternative design what is known as a deep sea seal , these are not lubricated with grease . When they are new they are probably lubricated with a silicon based compound but never use grease on these . Generally this type of gland should not drip when under way. but t they do have their issues .

The manufacturers of these often give a time related replacement and this time related replacement is not particularly long and on both types they can be expensive but the PSS glands are very expensive to replace . The insurers may ask when this was last replaced if there was an insurance issue or claim related to the stern gland ,and if it is unknown or cannot be proven to be less than the manufacturer's limits which in the case of the Volvo glands I believe it is around seven years They could refuse a claim on this basis .

The conventional stern gland with adjustable packing as shown in that photograph above is ultimately longer lived but it can be messy in absolutely clean boats because there is always a throw out of grease around the area . however, generally it needs no major investment in maintenance issues Other than occasional tightening of the packing gland and in the longer term replacement of the packing material which is very inexpensive .

Well this is so dependent on the person who is asking the question and why they're asking it. If you are buying a vessel and you intend to obtain insurance for her then bear in mind that in some cases depending on the age and the value of the vessel the insurers may request a structural survey.

Obviously, in this event there'll be no point in purchasing the vessel then having a survey to afterwards to find out things you wish you'd known before hand so, get a survey before you purchase. An issue that many people are unaware of is that on the small print of any insurance cover is a requirement to maintain the vessel in good structural condition at all times. This means not relying on the insurance company to repair an on going issue if the vessel has been involved in an incident because of this.

Things such as a sea cock that cannot be closed and is left open on the mooring and pipework fails unseen allowing the vessel to flood or even sink can be an area where a claim on the insurance company, despite you having paid full premium for many years and have never been asked for a survey, will still be seen as null and void and not their responsibility because of their claim that the vessel was not maintained. In those areas where you are slightly uncertain of the implications of any issues on the vessel then do get a professional survey

This is a very understandable question as survey on a vessel of value of say £5000 is exactly the same cost as the vessel the same length that is valued at £30000. It certainly does seem somewhat unfair. In defence of that I should point out that irrespective of the value of the vessel, two vessels of the same length should take the same amount of time and the same amount of report writing as each other and more often than not the older vessel will have the longer report because there will almost certainly be more things that any owner would need to be aware of.

However, although I cannot speak for other surveyors I will always do my best to try and keep costs as low as practical in all cases. I do offer alternative types of survey which many insurance companies will be happy to accept which offer slightly less information but still adequate for most purposes at a much more reduced cost. Safety Inspection which covers the most relevant things on a vessel's structure, Update inspection if a previous survey is available that can be updated with agreement from the insurers. It is always worth speaking to me to see what can be done or achieved..

These are the three basic resins that are used in yacht construction and repair . Originally most fibreglass yachts were constructed from polyester resin which was fine for general purpose construction and longevity but was more prone to osmosis issues as time went on . More recent vessels are constructed with vinylester resin which some say is stronger and is generally less prone to osmosis although not immune from it .

Epoxy resin is generally the strongest of all but also the most expensive of all and will generally be used for structural repairs where the strongest adhesion is required . Generally epoxy resin will be a stronger bond to old polyester resin and long term cured vinylester resin . Vinyester resin is reported as having a stronger bond than polyester resin but not as strong as epoxy resin and generally polyester resin or vinylester resin might not be the best choice for repairing grp hulls in areas where maximum strength is required , , in this particular case I would suggest using epoxy resin for all types of repairs as the bond is so much stronger . When constructing new vessels then epoxy resin would be far too expensive .

One interesting point with reference to constructional resins Is that new fuels including the biodiesel which have limited amounts of ethylene in are inclined to attack the older polyester resin fuel tanks and this is one area which has been nreported in this country for a little while although in America it is becoming more prominent that many owners are reporting the gradual dissolving of polyester resins in new fuels containing ethylene . Epoxy resin appears to be immune from this attack ..

One fact that may not be well known is that general purpose epoxy laminates and cured epoxy resins do soften under high temperatures and if a high temperature is anticipated there are more heat-resistant epoxy resins available
.

Legally you're not required to do anything with regard to any faults found on your vessel. It is your boat and at this time, unless you are using the vessel for commercial purposes where the rules are very different, there are no enforcement rules upon the condition of your vessel other than obviously complying with environmental rules about pumping diesel and petrol and oil overboard and any local enforcement rules etc. However bear in mind that the insurers do have a say in what they will insure and they will often be guided by the surveyors report. In the reports that I carry out then the recommendations are broken up into three categories.

One star * for long term advice, two star ** for do something at some stage , and three star *** these items are important . The ratings are not a rating of cost. The three star *** items are generally significant to the safety and use of the vessel but not necessarily expensive as it can simply be a loose pipe clip on an underwater skin fitting for instance. It could lead to sinking but cost of rectification is zero. Then we get to other areas which in some cases can be a one star * item which will not cause catastrophic failure and be urgent, but can be quite costly in the long-term such as a severely worn teak deck. However, the report will always explain everything in clear English..

The insurers cannot enforce you to undertake improvements but they can (and do) make the insurance invalid if a claim results from an area that they wanted improved to avoid this claim. On major claims the insurers will send their own claims assessor to establish the cause of the claim and the accuracy of any repair or equipment replacement estimate/s. In the event of break in, it is not unknown for the claim to be refused if it is deemed the vessel was not secured or locked at the time of the theft. This is a difficult area because a determined thief can cause hundreds of pounds worth of damage forcing entry on a vessel with strong locks, but an unlocked vessel invites the opportunist thief..

I would always advise the client to be present when the survey is being undertaken irrespective of whether you are buying the vessel or if you own the vessel. The advantages are that when you eventually read the report the areas that have been commented on you will understand immediately because as the survey progresses the owner/client/purchaser will be shown all of the areas of interest at that time. As an owner you would like to make sure that the surveyor does the job properly and it can also be helpful for the owner to be present in the event the surveyor has questions which only the owner could answer.

If you are the purchaser, then again you have the opportunity to ask questions of the surveyor about areas noted. It is not that unusual for both the purchaser and the seller to be present at the same time. It is also helpful when the owner is present in that the owner can be helpful in moving things around in their vessel to make the inspection it easier. All in all it is a good idea generally.

There are so many variables to this particular question. On older vessels, possibly in excess of 20 years of age then high moisture meter readings are almost going to be a certainty but high readings on their own without any other visual or physical issues should not really be seen as abnormal. Physical problems can relate to delamination which would have associated high meter readings but this would be found by hammer testing, and blistering caused by osmosis would also be accompanied by high readings. Blistering can also be caused by gel coat faults which would not be considered as serious as blistering deep within the laminate.
On later vessels vinylester resins superseded polyester resins and are known to be more resistant to osmosis blistering. This is one area where the advice of an experienced surveyor can be helpful and of value in ascertaining the consequences of high moisture meter readings. A vessel can have high readings for almost decades without developing delamination or osmotic blistering.

There are still some ongoing issues with vessels that underwent a major anti osmosis treatment many years ago in that the treatment was premature and ultimately perhaps not needed or, in some cases the treatment only lasted a few years and deteriorated back to a position worse than it was before the treatment was undertaken. These are difficult vessels.. I recently looke at one vessel that has had two sets of treatments including gel coat removal and laminate planing (removing the laminate to get back to sound laminate). This was a Westerly Fulmar and the contractors had never checked the hull thickness and ultimately in a couple of places on the underwater hull, you could flex the hull with a hammer shaft it was that thin.

Hmmm.... Thinking about this, the issue that comes up more often than others is underwater skin fittings and sea cocks, not necessarily corrosion although this does play a significan part, but mainly sea cocks that are seized or beginning to seize up. The other issue with skin fittings and sea cocks is that some are in extremely difficult places to access on a regular basis and as such they are usually left on all of the time which means they also suffer from lack of use and start to seize up meaning that if you needed to access and in an emergency they cannot be turned off.

This is not a scenario that anyone would ever want on their own boat yet it can be so easily avoided. Next on the list would probably be Gas Systems in that the flexible pipework is damaged or deteriorating due to age (it really should be replaced after five years, if you look carefully on the pipework there is a date of supply along with the date of the required standard which will be some years before) the other issue with Gas Systems is the installation of the bottle and drainage overboard, occasionally the Gas Storage unit is also in very poor condition.

Somewhere high on this list will be the engine installation, it is surprising how many engine installations have pipes and wires literally touching and rubbing against part of the engine. I perhaps look at one in three vessels where fuel pipes in particular are rubbing against part of the engine structure and damaging the pipe with extreme cases of nearly rupturing the pipe. This also happens with exhausts. The rubber exhaust passing close to or through plywood bulkheads and rubbing through on the edge of the bulkhead. A fuel pipe that rubs through will be catastrophic. The other area on engines is the engine mountings themselves which overtime grow soft and gradually the metal parts of the mountings come too close together and start vibrating against each other causing a noticeable rattling as well as upsetting the engine alignment. Sail drive installations have their own issues with water ingress into the gear box which, if remains unseen for a long time will destroy the gearbox and corrosion problems both with the sail drive gaiter steel pressing and the sail drive unit itself. The anodes must be carefully monitored and replaced in plenty of time
.

These photos show the keel matrix and a cracked beam as a result of grounding

When any vessel does go aground it can be a harrowing experience. Unfortunately it can also be harrowing for the structure of the vessel as well. So much depends on the circumstances of grounding and the design of the vessel as to whether serious damage could have occurred. The traditional long keel vessels such as the Timber Hillyard design or the 1980's grp Rustler 36 or Nicholsen 32 will fare much better than a modern deep fin keel design swuch as a Sigma 36 for instance. The main issue is the speed of going aground, the type of bottom that was struck and the circumstances getting off.



If a long keel vessel on a gently shelving soft mud bottom then likelihood of damage is quite low, the likelihood of damage to pride is quite high! The other extreme of a deep aspect narrow fin keel vessel going aground on a hard bottom at speed is quite high as what happens is that basically the vessel trips on her keel and tries to pull the keel down from the hull at the front and quite often successfully pushes the hull up at the stern of the keel. The internal supporting matrix will quite often fracture as a result of this stressing. Therefore when fin keel vessel has gone aground at speed and more importantly the boat has come to a dead stop very quickly and then this would be a suitable time to investigate. Firstly one would inspection the internal hull at the forward and aft end of the keel and obviously, be aware of any water ingress at any point which was not there previously. This is also the case with bilge keels particularly iron ballast bilge keels as these also can strain the hull. In extreme cases this can be an event which you will be wise to inform your insurers about as some damage may not be accessible until the vessel is out of the water.

Most fibreglass yachts built up until the 1970s were or what is known as a single skin hull and deck. Simply put that means that the hull is just one thickness of fibreglass. This single skin varies in thickness from the keel to the top of the hull, the thickest part of the hull being at the keel. Majority of vessels had a extremely thick and relatively heavy hull compared to vessels constructed now. They were quite expensive in material and resins. Similarly with the deck and superstructure construction which would have been again, one thickness throughout. In order to resist flexing then this single laminate thickness have to be quite heavy and strong. Gradually builders and designers recognized the fact that they could reduce the weight of the deck and superstructure and keep the rigidity very high by introducing a cored deck structure. This uses a thinner single skin of substantially less weight but bonded to this on the underside of the moulding is an internal moulding of similarly relatively light weight but with an air gap between the two. This air gap was then filled with expanding foam or sometimes a balsa wood core was fitted between the two mouldings and all fully bonded together to make one rigid relatively lightweight moulding.

This was very good at resisting any flexing and had ultimate rigidity without the excess weight that would have been needed handed been a single skin. This type of deck structure is common on virtually every vessel from the the 1900s.

Some builders like Westerly Marine originally used plywood panels bonded to the underside of the deck in areas where there was a risk of deck flexing. The Westerly Centaur had plywood panels bonded to the underside of the foredeck. The downside of this fully cored type of construction is that if water finds it's way between the two skins then it will eventually rot and the balsa wood and cause any foam within to absorb water and deteriorate. Once this deterioration has occurred then the three components of the cored deck become separated and the single outer skin which is the deck that one walks on, starts to flex because it is much lighter than the original stronger single skin. The repair of this can be extremely difficult and, in some cases more expensive than the value of the vessel.

This photo shows an early cored deck structure that has completely failed Builders have been reticent to incorporate the structure into the hull structure however, it is beginning to become evident from some builders now. It is particularly common in parts of the bilge construction where the two mouldings, internal and external are bonded together with a structural foam core further bonding the two skins together. When a vessel is surveyed then hammer testing is undertaken at the beginning to first establish whether the deck and hull are cored as this can be identified by hammer testing and secondly whether there is any obvious core failure which again is easily detected by hammer testing. Finally moisture meter readings would be taken, particularly on deck to isolate the areas of moisture ingress into the core.

Rudder failure is obviously very serious and catastrophic in many instances. There are many reasons for these failures, some of them stem from the original construction and some stem from accident damage.
Fibreglass rudders are predominantly made in one way, the fibreglass blade is moulded in two halves, similar to two trays that are put together rim to rim. The rudder stock is fitted into the void between these two trays and there you have the basis of the rudder. Where the stock enters the rudder mouldings the stock will generally have some form of tang welded on to the stock at 90°, perhaps two of these or more in some cases. These tangs are then bonded to one of the inside of the tray mouldings.

These photos show a bent rudder stock and a damaged rudder at the rudder stock point of entry into the rudder

The other side of the moulding (the tray) is then bonded to the other tray. That basically is your rudder. The difficulty arises with the type of rudder stock and the metal used and the type of tangs welded to the rudder stock. The builders made every attempt to fully waterproof the rudder but it is inevitable that water will enter the rudder after a few years. Once seawater is within the internals of the rudder it can cause corrosion internally and unseen.


One builder many years ago used a mild steel rudder stock with mild steel tangs welded to the rudder stock. Inevitably the water got in and corroded the rudder tangs and the next thing that happened was the rudder stock merely went round within the rudder without moving the rudder and in some cases the rudder actually fell off. For many years most builders used stainless steel for the tangs and for the rudder stock but in recent years some of the European builders have used heavy weight alloy rudder stocks with alloy tangs. Unfortunately these large diameter rudder stocks started showing signs of severe corrosion at the exposed part of the rudder stock between the hull and the top of the rudder. In some cases the corrosion was so significant that the top of the rudder split open because of the corrosion deposits causing expansion. This has resulted in a necessary replacement of the rudder in some much later boats than might be anticipated after I might say, a considerable cost.


The other issue with rudders is those that are not protected with a skeg have been damaged by coming into contact with the bottom or heavy objects thus causing the rudder stock to bend and in some cases, structural damage to the hull at that point. When surveying checks are made on the alignment of the rudder to make sure it has not been bent, further checks are made to make sure that there is no separation of the two halves of the rudder caused by failure at the point where the rudder stock enters the rudder and the top and cheques as best as possible to see if there is any relative movement between the rudder and the rudder stock which might suggest there is internal bonding failure of the rudder tangs or corrosion of the rudder tangs.

Well, by the time that you read this, the initial emergency is over now I hope and the boat is safe and secure. If that is not the case then the initial thing to do is to secure the vessel both in ensuring she is watertight and safe and secure on her mooring or if she is ashore, make sure that no further damage can occur.

If there is a possibility of underwater damage that cannot be seen then initially you must arrange for the vessel to be lifted out of the water as soon as possible. The insurers will pay this cost if it reduces the risk of a higher claim if the vessel was to sink.

If it is accident damage caused by another vessel then take photographs of the other vessel and as much information as is possible with regard to ownership and contact details. Seek out witnesses. You may well find that in busy areas there will be CCTV cameras operating in places such as Yarmouth Harbour and marinas.

If there are no witnesses and you were not present when the incident occurred your choices are somewhat limited that initially contact your insurers just to tell them that your vessel has been damaged. They will ask you the details and almost certainly ask you to get a quote for repairs. Most insurers ask for at least two quotes.

If the location of the vessel is in the Poole, Weymouth or Portland areas then feel free to contact me and I would be very happy to inspect and assess the damage for possible repair/estimate.
Outside of these areas it is generally not practical of me to quote for repairs because of the distance involved however, if the damage is extreme and there are concerns about the cost of the damage vs. the value of the vessel which is quite common on older vessels then the insurers should send their own assessor down however, they are somewhat reluctant to do that initially until they have received estimates.

These unfortunately, tend to take some time and you may find it quicker to contact me directly and see if I can help in any way to hasten things on, perhaps by carrying out a limited inspection to confirm that the damage is severe and bypass all the rigmarole of getting estimates and waiting for them to be compiled which, in the event of a serious injury to the vessel might mean that the repair estimates are not comprehensive enough. The easiest thing is simply to call me and have a conversation about things and I will do my best to advise on the situation at that time.

Generally no, it is not illegal but perhaps not ethical. However if you required some joinery made or something not related to the survey report then there would be no issue. If I have not surveyed the vessel then more than happy to estimate the cost of a repair or improvement.

Generally the area of shipwright work is limited to Poole, Wareham, Weymouth and Portland. To see the extent of repairs and improvements then check this page out. One advantage of being a shipwright is the experience to be able to advise how a repair or improvement noted on an inspection can be undertaken as I have actually done the majority of repairs that might be needed.

On every report where repairs are advised then there is always a detailed overview on how the repair can be done, This is very different to a surveyor simply telling the client a repair is required. The repairs that can be undertaken extend from structural repairs on timber masts to hard spot fractures on GRP hulls where an invisible repair is paramount, to damaged timber rubbing strakes and hull planking repair on timber yachts.

New cockpit nearing completion on timber Wanderer Class

There are a few things that are not covered in most surveys , one of these is the engine . In most cases the engine installation will be checked for faults such as engine mountings or casting corrosion or obvious oil or water leaks . the engine will generally be turned over by hand to see if there is any compression there , this is particularly important in a vessel that has not been started for a considerable time to make sure that the engine has not seized with lack of use .

But unfortunately particularly with a vessel that is ashore , it would not be possible or feasible to start and run the engine and check the gearbox for correct working . In many cases, it is likely there will be some previous information on the engine but occasionally the engine has to be taken on trust unless you get a specialised mechanical inspection where oil analysis and other detailed tests on the engine are undertaken . However, this is not particularly common unless of course it is on a power driven vessel with considerable size engines which ultimately can represent a a significant proportion value wise of the complete vessel in which case you may feel a separate engine engineers survey would be of value . The other area that is not commonly closely inspected is the mast above deck level . This is eyed from the deck for any obvious distortion or wall damage, but areas of corrosion around terminals would be virtually impossible to see . A judgement is made on the condition of the mast based on the areas that can be accessed But this is not a definitive judgement and most vessels are surveyed with the mast in position , there is always paragraph in the report suggesting that the mast is removed from the vessel for later inspection . This would normally be acknowledged by the insurance company as a necessity at some stage . Of course, this can be somewhat modified if the vessel has been subject to new rigging in recent years as there would have been some sort of professional inspection at that time . Electronic equipment is notorious for unpredictably and particularly on vessels that have not been used for some time, electronics can misbehave . Additionally, electronic instrumentation cannot really be checked in real life situations as most vessels will be ashore for inspection so unfortunately it is only possible to switch on the instrumentation and basically see if it appears to be functioning .

For the best advice I am able to give is to never pay a premium for electronics that have no guarantee as electronics nowadays do seem to have a short lifespan and if they do not go wrong in that short life span they certainly become outdated relatively quickly . The main issue with this type of installation is the environment they are operating in and many instruments now have internal memory batteries which can ultimately fail and in some circumstances leak into the circuitry boards and damage the instrument sometimes beyond repair .

By all means, if I encounter something which I know is going to be an expensive area to attend to or I am aware that it is something that you have not realised was there then I will suggest to you whether or not you want to proceed with the survey and if it is an early part of the survey that the fault has been discovered then we will cancel the survey and make a substantial reduction in cost as there is no point in me continuing with the survey when I know that ultimately Irrespective of what we subsequently find you will not purchase the vessel . That is a waste of your money . If you are not present then I will also telephone you to tell you I have found something of importance and did you want me to continue .

The easiest way to describe how many pages are involved in a survey is to go to this Sample GRP survey Bavaria 34 and see for yourself , most surveys will be of this length and sometimes longer . Many people do not realise how many hours it takes to write a report and it will be generally longer to write the report than it is to do the inspection . Based on the standard type of report of a vessel up to around 38 feet for a GRP hull, you will receive a draftt report of the inspection within 24 hours, the purpose of this draft report is so that you can spend some time reading it and absorbing it and in the event that there are areas which you might require further explanation on then this can be amended on the final report and the final report can be with you generally within one or two working days of you noting any areas that would benefit from clearer understanding . Timber vessels may take a shade longer but follows the same process .

GRP and timber hulls do have initially the same method . The use of a small hammer in lightly hammer testing the whole of the hull above and below the waterline can be very indicative of issues , on fibreglass and grp hulls hammer testing can indicate where bulkheads are , it can identify areas of thin laminate and voids in the laminate and soft laminate which is more common than some people may imagine .

On timber the hammer testing identifies areas of deteriorating and softened timber through rot , areas of unusually hard timber where quite often some hard fillers have been applied to possibly cover areas of rot and hammer testing is probably the most important primary tests for timber fibreglass and steel . It is completely non destructive and can start as the basis for further investigation if this is required . This also will be undertaken on the deck of fibreglass boats to establish whether the deck is a single skin or a coerd skin and similarly with timber boats in identifying areas of rotted plywood or rotted or deteriorating structure beneath paintwork and coatings .

Obviously, the visual assessment of any vessel is important in looking for areas of distortion and suspicion of surface finishes . Each type of construction has its own idiosyncrasies and this is when experience comes into play . On fibreglass vessels there are occasional cracks known as hard spot cracks which sometimes do not look particularly significant but seriously structural , I still see some hard spot cracks on vessels that previously have been described as scratches by former surveyor . Again, this is a question of experience combined with hammer testing and the understanding of what the surveyor is looking at and testing.. Hard spot cracks on fibreglass hulls are always located over some internal stiffening such as a bulkhead or a fixed shelf where the hull or laminate flexes either side of this fixed structure and causes a hinge effect fracture

Here is one, but sometimes all you might see is just one vertical line and not necessarily a series of lines as can be seen here . The hard spot cracks can also run horizontally .

Crevice corrosion on stainless steel is a significant problem , without being too technical It occurs when stainless steel fastenings and other attachments are starved of oxygen in a damp atmosphere . The difficulty is that the exposed parts of the stainless steel appear to be in perfect condition but where the stainless steel passes through a deck or some other area where part of the fitting is obscured and subject to damp and lack of oxygen It can seriously degrade in that it looks as if it has been attacked by worms that have eaten into it .

In some cases it can actually be completely wasted away . this is why there will be some reference to stainless steel crevice corrosion in areas such as rigging U bolts and other fittings that have been fitted with stainless steel bolts . it is impossible to ascertain whether a bolt or a fitting has suffered from crevice corrosion on the unseen parts as parts that can be seen are generally in sparkling condition which is extremely deceiving . the biggest risk areas for crevice corrosion aregenerally U bolts for rigging where there has been some obvious long term leakage of the fittings through the deck .

This can often be related to corrosion staining visible on the underside of the deck where the U bolt passes through suggesting that the fitting has been leaking . However, sometimes it is not possible to absolutely see the condition of the fitting until it has been removed .

Crevice corrosion also effects stainless steel prop shafts where they pass through internal stern gland . in some cases the shaft will be extremely pitted at the point where the stern gland seal is rubbing against it . It may be possible to change the position of the seal relative to the shaft which can eradicate the issue for a while . This stainless steel corrosion is very unpredictable and in some instances never seems to affect certain areas, although I have genuinely seen one severely corroded stainless steel bolt that had no remaining strength Holding a rudder fitting on to the transom with the adjacent bolt only a few inches away having exactly the same size and having the same vulnerability but completely intact with no loss of strength .

There are a few issues with sail drive units . The primary one that very few people are aware of is that the diaphragm or the seal is subject to regular replacements , on Yanmarr installations the recommendation is five years and on Volvo installations it is generally seven years . In most cases the recommendation is erring on safety and I have not seen a saildrive diaphragm that is in such poor condition that it needed replacing at the five or 7 year requirement , however, you must bear in mind that the insurers can make a claim null and void if a claim was made due to a failing diaphragm that caused waterlogging or even sinking issues when they have no confirmation that the manufacturer's requirements were adhered to . The difficulty is here that the replacement of these diaphragms runs into many hundreds of pounds and even more importantly a number of owners of this type of installation are unaware of the requirements .

The other issue with this type of installation is that it is not unusual for water ingress into the gearbox through the final drive propeller shaft drive mechanism externally as this seal is quite a vulnerable seal. The gearbox oil starts to emulsify with water which will be seawater which is even more destructive And the effect of this is to increase the level of the gearbox . You might think that the oil would leak out but that is not the case, water leaks in . Therefore it is wise to check the gearbox level and oil condition every now and then if you do have a sail drive installation .

Finally as most people are aware, the sail drive castings are aluminium and are extremely prone to corrosion . On the external casting there will be various anodes to protect it and if these anodes are not replaced before they have completely eroded then the alloy castings will start to corrode quite excessively which will be very expensive .

One final aside into the operation of sail drive units, they are always fitted quite a long way forward of the rudder and as far as manoeuvring goes they offer no prop wash effect on the rudder at all. Vessels with conventional stern gear and the propeller a short distance forward of the rudder are much easier to manoeuvre in tight spaces, the turning circle can be significantly reduced. however, this is more of a horses for courses personal choice .

There are very few vessels that do not have any skin fittings or seacocks whatsoever . on commercial fishing vessels plastic skin fittings are not allowed if they are less than 300 millimetres above the waterline . The reason for this is that first of all they are not particularly robust and secondly possibly more importantly is they can seldom be fitted with any form of seacock..it would only be fair to assume that the risk of a fishing boat sinking is just as high as the risk to a sailing yacht sinking, possibly even more so with the yacht because the yacht will be heeling over and putting that skin fitting underwater quite frequently. so, generally, any skin fitting below 300 millimetres above the water line should be fitted with some form of seacock which also means they will be metallic unless they are of the relatively new breed of robust man material seacocks and skin fittings .

Now we come to the material that skin fittings and seacocks are made of. Many decades ago most fittings and seacocks of bronze which is very long lived indeed . However, over more recent times a material called DZR which stands for DeZincification Resistant brass has been introduced. This is a longer lived alloy of brass but nevertheless it is still a form of brass and will deteriorate. It is a sad fact that some European builders were fitting standard brass skin fittings close to and below the waterline a few years ago and these failed within a few years of their installation.

it can also be found that some manufacturers supply the DZR fittings but then fit a standard brass hose tail which corrodes.

Basically a DZR fitting that has corroded or a brass fitting that has corroded merely breaks if stressed and it is easy to tell generally that it has corroded before breaking by looking at the colour. If one scrapes back past the surface patinato the original bright metal , sound bronze will have a definite gold lustre but deteriorated brass or DRZ has a dull red tinge to it looking more like dull copper. This is a definite sign that severe deterioration has taken place and the fitting is to be condemned.

The other issue with seacocks and associated pipework is that after many years the flexible pipe work becomes hardened with age and loses its flexibility completely . This puts extra strain on the seacock if it is vibrating Plus the fact that if the Seacock pipework develops leaks on the pipe stub they are difficult to cure because the pipe work has hardened and is no longer supple.

These two photographs try to illustrate the colour difference between sound Bronze which is the bottom photograph and the colour of deteriorated bronze, top photo. Although the top photograph has been manipulated in colour to highlight the difference, the bottom photograph is genuine bronze colour when new

Although not as common as once was, the high quality Blakes type seacocks are used and these are bolted into position with 4 bronze bolts . These bronze bolts are a very slightly different material to that of the bronze seacock and because of the mixture of metals and electrolysis it is often found that these boats corrode preferentially with reference to the fitting they are securing and it is wise practise to check these at fairly regular intervals 4 or 5 seasons apart.

You have probably seen that it is always recommended to double clip pipe work but this can have a detrimental effect in some cases as on some skin fittings and seacocks the pipe stub is relatively short and there is not enough length for the fitting of two full clips But nevertheless because double clipping is advised , two clips are often attempted to be fitted, however, it is often found that the clip furthest away from the pipe stub is not actually gripping the pipe stub and is trying to squeeze the pipe beyond the pipe stub which has negative and is in fact trying to pull the pipe off the stub rather than locate it tightly on it . Be sure that this is not occurring .

Sample GRP survey Bavaria 34
Sample GRP Moody 29
Power vessel GRP
Sample large timber yacht (Hillyard)
24ft timber sailing yacht
Free survey template for GRP vessels
Free survey template for Timber vessels
Full list of sample surveys and PDF articles

Quick links to useful information on this website

Local news from the South
Save money on insurance surveys
How to use a moisture meter
Moisture meter alternatives
Osmosis article pdf.
Timber yacht surveying.
Anodes on timber hulls
Steel yacht problems surveying
Buying through a broker
Survey faults commonly found on all boats
Advice on GRP repairs
Advice on timber yacht construction and repair
Advice on selling your boat
Quick contact form
Working with, and uses of wood for all vessels.
Need more help

In this particular case I can only answer for my own business . Basically both surveys should be exactly the same with regard to structure and within reason they should be identical in that sense . The area they do differ will be in the reporting of what might be considered cosmetic issues , as the owner of the vessel, you are probably aware of all the scratches and scars of no significant importance but having a cosmetic effect on the vessel . It is not necessary for me to itemise all of these areas as it is something you already know and, unless the vessel is in extremely poor cosmetic condition to the extent that her value is seriously diminished then there's nothing to be gained by itemising all of these areas.

As the buyer of a vessel then it is incumbent on the surveyor to give the buyer as much information as possible and simply not to assume that they have seen every scratch and scar that I have seen. the report takes much longer to write in these circumstances hence there will be a difference in cost However, there should be no difference in the structural information on either.

There is also a slight difference in the way that the report is compiled with reference to the descriptions and general comments . An insurance survey is generally more focused on important areas but has a much more gentle attitude towards areas where there are no structural issues but comments on areas which the existing owner may not be aware of . The pre-purchase survey has to inform any purchaser as to any issues at any point which might cost money or that they may have been unaware of when they made the offer to buy. Both types of survey look forward several years ahead to advise where issues may occur or early attention would prevent major expense in future. However, these forward looking areas are always highlighted as future events and not present events wherever possible.

Timber vessels are generally more expensive to survey than GRP vessels for the simple reason that they are far more complex, and many surveyors do not feel totally confident in doing, surveys on timber yachts which is understandable given the amount of knowledge that is required and the limited number of timber vessels around nowadays..

I own my own timber yacht and have considerable number of years of experience of surveying timber vessels and in particular understanding how they are constructed . With regard to the cost of surveying a timber vessel, then I would strongly advise you to contact me. and tell me exactly the type of vessel you are contemplating, getting a survey on, . generally the cost of surveys on timber vessel similar to one of those in the sample timber sample survey list below would start off around £21 per foot.. This would be for a structural insurance inspection and probably be in the region of 50 pages or more in length. it is always best to contact me directly, as this could be reduced under certain circumstances. This cost is also subject to where the vessel is laying .

A neglected timber vessel like this, could, have, and probably does have numerous serious issues

GRP vessels are less expensive. because although they have their issues, they are more straightforward. Costs would start from around £16 foot, sometimes less, always worth checking with me, depending upon the location and design. of the vessel. This would be for a standard insurance inspection which would be in the region of 40 pages in length .
Go to the sample survey page and you will see several,. Definitely call for an accurate quote.

However, there are many alternatives as, sometimes an update survey can be done, , this can be a lot less expensive but it does require viewing of a previous survey and an agreement that the insurers are happy to take an update, . in my experience this is not uncommon and can save a considerable sum . I can do update surveys which are still very comprehensive and many insurance companies will accept it . however, the vessel would still have to be out of the water for this inspection .

It is also possible to simply undertake a safety inspection which is still quite comprehensive but if you do not need additional superficial information this would be quite adequate and can save a considerable sum . it would still check the important significant items on the vessel to the same standard in many places, that a full structural inspection would.

Occasionally I do get asked to look at specific parts on a vessel, and obviously, the cost of that is totally dependent on the extent of the inspection required . the best advice I can give would be to simply, give me a call, , tell me about the vessel and what you require and I will give you a quote, which you can then compare to other surveyors .

Also on this list below you can find a free survey template that most people find extremely useful, for doing a preliminary survey on either a boat they are considering purchasing, or indeed their own vessel. Choose timber or GRP. They are both very different .

One thing I would strongly suggest that you obtain a sample survey from any surveyor that you are thinking of employing. as that will give you a good idea of what you might get for your money, and additionally might suggest the experience of the surveyor . it is an unfortunate fact that not all surveys and surveyors are the same.

Sample GRP survey Bavaria 34
Sample GRP Moody 29
Power vessel GRP
Sample large timber yacht (Hillyard)
24ft timber sailing yacht
Free survey template for GRP vessels
Free survey template for Timber vessels
Full list of sample surveys and PDF articles

Then simply email me or phone me direct with your question and I will do my best to answer it and perhaps if it is a question that many people ask, I'll put it up here, if it is survey related and anything to do with marine surveys, timber yacht surveys, fibreglass yacht surveys , steel yacht surveys or fishing vessel surveys or anything to do with structural information on any of the above including, osmosis , electrolytic damage in timber vessels and practically any related subject then I will do my best to help, . if you require further information on the process of, yacht surveys or information on shipwright repairs then ....07963 011390 or email johnlilley@seasurveys.co.uk