Ligthning Protection

[sailorvela]

Posted by sailorvela (sailorvela@…>)

I have been worried every time a thunderstorm rolls through. I am in
the southeast in fresh water. What do you guys do for lightning
protection? Those tall CF mast on the F-40 Ck look soo vulnerable (and
expensive) in the case of a strike. All I could see was a green ground
wire when we took the sticks off for transport.

After reading some articles on the web I even considered a lager cable
(4 AWG) with a rod on the top of the mast connected to a large copper
plate or sheet on the transom or bottom. I still need to find out
more. I want to make my boat safe from lightning not to attract it!

Any ideas? Anybody has been hit (I assume total mast loss in CF)?
Anybody as some sort of protection system or device? I am Georgia, I
understand Fl is even worse for lightning. How common are hits really?
Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Alex.

[lance_ryley]

Posted by lance_ryley (lance_ryley@…>)

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

As I understand it, you have two choices. You can either create a
ground path through the mast and the bottom of the boat, or don’t.
There is some speculation that a lightning ground increases the
chance of being hit; however, even if it were to double the
likelihood, that’s still a statistically insignificant increase
compared to the number of lightning strikes there are each year.

While a lightning strike most likely will cause significant damage to
a carbon mast, one of the bright sides of an unstayed system is that
there’s less chance of sideflash, since there’s little to sideflash
to.

— In FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com, “sailorvela”
<sailorvela@…> wrote:

I have been worried every time a thunderstorm rolls through. I am
in
the southeast in fresh water. What do you guys do for lightning
protection? Those tall CF mast on the F-40 Ck look soo vulnerable
(and
expensive) in the case of a strike. All I could see was a green
ground
wire when we took the sticks off for transport.

After reading some articles on the web I even considered a lager
cable
(4 AWG) with a rod on the top of the mast connected to a large
copper
plate or sheet on the transom or bottom. I still need to find out
more. I want to make my boat safe from lightning not to attract it!

Any ideas? Anybody has been hit (I assume total mast loss in
CF)?
Anybody as some sort of protection system or device? I am Georgia,
I
understand Fl is even worse for lightning. How common are hits
really?
Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Alex.

[Alan_Kusinitz]

Posted by Alan Kusinitz (akusinitz@…>)


For what its worth I use lightning
dissipators on both masts. I figure a lightning rod and ground wire are likely
to be insufficient if struck. A dissipater is grounded but theoretically makes
the strike less likely in the vicinity of the dissipater so the size of the
ground cable is not critical.
It’s a gamble no matter what we do.
Alan F-33 Hull #51 SEAPR

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of lance_ryley
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008
11:37 AM
To:
FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re:
Ligthning Protection

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

As I understand it, you have two choices. You can either create a
ground path through the mast and the bottom of the boat, or don’t.
There is some speculation that a lightning ground increases the
chance of being hit; however, even if it were to double the
likelihood, that’s still a statistically insignificant increase
compared to the number of lightning strikes there are each year.

While a lightning strike most likely will cause significant damage to
a carbon mast, one of the bright sides of an unstayed system is that
there’s less chance of sideflash, since there’s little to sideflash
to.

— In FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com,
“sailorvela”
<sailorvela@…> wrote:

I have been worried every time a thunderstorm rolls through. I am
in
the southeast in fresh water. What do you guys do for lightning
protection? Those tall CF mast on the F-40 Ck look soo vulnerable
(and
expensive) in the case of a strike. All I could see was a green
ground
wire when we took the sticks off for transport.

After reading some articles on the web I even considered a lager
cable
(4 AWG) with a rod on the top of the mast connected to a large
copper
plate or sheet on the transom or bottom. I still need to find out
more. I want to make my boat safe from lightning not to attract it!

Any ideas? Anybody has been hit (I assume total mast loss in
CF)?
Anybody as some sort of protection system or device? I am Georgia,
I
understand Fl is even worse for lightning. How common are hits
really?
Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Alex.

\

[Bob1]

Posted by Bob (rweeks6508@…>)
On the lighter side…as Lee Trevino once said “use a 1 iron not not even God can hit it!” so a 1 iron tied to the top of the mast would either become the meeting point of all lightning things or you would never get hit! {:>) as you can see I am having a light day at work!BobOn Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Alan Kusinitz wrote:For what its worth I use lightning dissipators on both masts. I figure a lightning rod and ground wire are likely to be insufficient if struck. A dissipater is grounded but theoretically makes the strike less likely in the vicinity of the dissipater so the size of the ground cable is not critical. It’s a gamble no matter what we do. Alan F-33 Hull #51 SEAPR ___________________________________From: FreedomOwnersGroup@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:FreedomOwne rsGroup@yahoogro ups.com] On Behalf Of lance_ryley Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:37 AM To: FreedomOwnersGroup@ yahoogroups. com Subject: [FreedomOwnersGroup ] Re: Ligthning Protection Alex, I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town As I understand it, you have two choices. You can either create a ground path through the mast and the bottom of the boat, or don’t. There is some speculation that a lightning ground increases the chance of being hit; however, even if it were to double the likelihood, that’s still a statistically insignificant increase compared to the number of lightning strikes there are each year. While a lightning strike most likely will cause significant damage to a carbon mast, one of the bright sides of an unstayed system is that there’s less chance of sideflash, since there’s little to sideflash to. — In FreedomOwnersGroup@ yahoogroups. com, “sailorvela” <sailorvela@ …> wrote: > > I have been worried every time a thunderstorm rolls through. I am in > the southeast in fresh water. What do you guys do for lightning > protection? Those tall CF mast on the F-40 Ck look soo vulnerable (and > expensive) in the case of a strike. All I could see was a green ground > wire when we took the sticks off for transport. > > After reading some articles on the web I even considered a lager cable > (4 AWG) with a rod on the top of the mast connected to a large copper > plate or sheet on the transom or bottom. I still need to find out > more. I want to make my boat safe from lightning not to attract it! > > Any ideas? Anybody has been hit (I assume total mast loss in CF)? > Anybody as some sort of protection system or device? I am Georgia , I > understand Fl is even worse for lightning. How common are hits really? > Any info would be greatly appreciated. > > Cheers, > > Alex. >

[sailorvela]

Posted by sailorvela (sailorvela@…>)

— In FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com, “lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.


The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

[Herman_and_Gail_Schi]

Posted by Herman and Gail Schiller (hschiller2@…>)

All lightning protection appears to be aimed at preventing a
lightning strike by continuously “leaking” the static charge in an
effort keep the charge below the voltage required to ionize the air
between the cloud and the ground. The land version of this is a
series of very pointed copper rods affixed to the peak of a roof
connected by a very heavy braided conductor eventually leading to a
ground rod or two next to the house. These conductors are formed so
that all radii are gradual (lightning tends to be unable to make
sharp turns). Likewise, there are the gadgets, with multiple fine
wires projecting, that are intended to discharge voltages to prevent
them from building up by mounting them at the mast-head and running a
wire (no sharp bends) to an immersed ground plate. These do the same
thing as the land-based systems. They are NOT guaranteed, but they
sure improve the odds. Herm

At 12:45 PM 6/26/2008, you wrote:

— In
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.comFreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
,
“lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.

The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

[Al_Lorman1]

Posted by Al Lorman (ajl@…>)


I
had side flash (or electromagnetic pulse) damage to my former F30 (yes, I told Doug
in advance). Luckily, it caused no damage to the mast. It did
arbitrarily wipe out a fair amount of electronic gear. I did some research
thereafter and concluded that the best defense against lightning damage is a really
good insurance policy. There is no expert consensus on any system.

Al
Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Herman and Gail
Schiller
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:55 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

\

All lightning protection appears to be aimed at
preventing a
lightning strike by continuously “leaking” the static charge in an
effort keep the charge below the voltage required to ionize the air
between the cloud and the ground. The land version of this is a
series of very pointed copper rods affixed to the peak of a roof
connected by a very heavy braided conductor eventually leading to a
ground rod or two next to the house. These conductors are formed so
that all radii are gradual (lightning tends to be unable to make
sharp turns). Likewise, there are the gadgets, with multiple fine
wires projecting, that are intended to discharge voltages to prevent
them from building up by mounting them at the mast-head and running a
wire (no sharp bends) to an immersed ground plate. These do the same
thing as the land-based systems. They are NOT guaranteed, but they
sure improve the odds. Herm

At 12:45 PM 6/26/2008, you wrote:

— In
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.comFreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com,

“lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.

The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani
joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

\

[sgaber]

Posted by sgaber@…> (sgaber@…>)

My Columbia (with aluminum mast and SS rigging) was st ruck by lightning in her
slip on Cleareater Beach, FL. When I arived at the boat the guy in the slip
next door asked if the anchor light he found on his deck was mine. I looked upo
and saw that now only was the anchor light gone, but so was the VHF antenna, the
steaming light and Windex. Down beli\ow I found that the VHF, DS, KM and all 6
of the new interior lights I had just installed werre fried. Toast, crispy
critters.

No other damage was apparent. My insurance is with BoatUS. The deductible is
$600. They sent an adjuster ofver, he looked at the boat and said the damage was
$824. They sent me qa check for $224, which didn’t pay for any of the
instruments. Maybe it paid for the interipr lights.

Up till that time I had been paying BoatUS $680 per year for 15 years, amounting
to more than $10,000. I had not had a claim against them before (or since).
You think they would cut me a break give me a little more to help pay the
damage? Certainly not.

Unfortunately, BoatUS is the only company I could find that would insure my
42-year-old boat.
Insurance conmpanies are among the most hated institutions in the world. Wonder
why?

Steve Gaber
Sanderling, 1967 C-31 #77
Oldsmar, FL


---- Al Lorman <ajl@…> wrote:

I had side flash (or electromagnetic pulse) damage to my former F30 (yes, I
told Doug in advance). Luckily, it caused no damage to the mast. It did
arbitrarily wipe out a fair amount of electronic gear. I did some research
thereafter and concluded that the best defense against lightning damage is a
really good insurance policy. There is no expert consensus on any system.

Al Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Herman and Gail
Schiller
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:55 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

All lightning protection appears to be aimed at preventing a
lightning strike by continuously “leaking” the static charge in an
effort keep the charge below the voltage required to ionize the air
between the cloud and the ground. The land version of this is a
series of very pointed copper rods affixed to the peak of a roof
connected by a very heavy braided conductor eventually leading to a
ground rod or two next to the house. These conductors are formed so
that all radii are gradual (lightning tends to be unable to make
sharp turns). Likewise, there are the gadgets, with multiple fine
wires projecting, that are intended to discharge voltages to prevent
them from building up by mounting them at the mast-head and running a
wire (no sharp bends) to an immersed ground plate. These do the same
thing as the land-based systems. They are NOT guaranteed, but they
sure improve the odds. Herm

At 12:45 PM 6/26/2008, you wrote:

— In
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.comFreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups
.com mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com ,
“lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.

The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

[Al_Lorman1]

Posted by Al Lorman (ajl@…>)


My
experience could not have been more different. My insurer, Markel, told me to have
an marine electrician look at the boat and write up a repair estimate
(including installation), which they paid in full minus my deductible (of
course, all of the destroyed electronics were new). They also paid to have a
rigger examine the mast.

Since
I have switched to BoatUS for my current boat, your tale makes me very nervous.

Al
Lorman

From:
FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of sgaber@…
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:17 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Al Lorman
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

\

My Columbia (with aluminum mast and SS rigging)
was st ruck by lightning in her slip on Cleareater Beach, FL. When I arived at
the boat the guy in the slip next door asked if the anchor light he found on
his deck was mine. I looked upo and saw that now only was the anchor light
gone, but so was the VHF antenna, the steaming light and Windex. Down beli\ow I
found that the VHF, DS, KM and all 6 of the new interior lights I had just
installed werre fried. Toast, crispy critters.

No other damage was apparent. My insurance is with BoatUS. The deductible is
$600. They sent an adjuster ofver, he looked at the boat and said the damage
was $824. They sent me qa check for $224, which didn’t pay for any of the
instruments. Maybe it paid for the interipr lights.

Up till that time I had been paying BoatUS $680 per year for 15 years,
amounting to more than $10,000. I had not had a claim against them before (or
since). You think they would cut me a break give me a little more to help pay
the damage? Certainly not.

Unfortunately, BoatUS is the only company I could find that would insure my
42-year-old boat.
Insurance conmpanies are among the most hated institutions in the world. Wonder
why?

Steve Gaber
Sanderling, 1967 C-31 #77
Oldsmar, FL

---- Al Lorman <ajl@…>
wrote:

I had side flash (or electromagnetic pulse) damage to my former F30 (yes,
I
told Doug in advance). Luckily, it caused no damage to the mast. It did
arbitrarily wipe out a fair amount of electronic gear. I did some research
thereafter and concluded that the best defense against lightning damage is
a
really good insurance policy. There is no expert consensus on any system.

Al Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Herman and Gail
Schiller
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:55 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

All lightning protection appears to be aimed at preventing a
lightning strike by continuously “leaking” the static charge in
an
effort keep the charge below the voltage required to ionize the air
between the cloud and the ground. The land version of this is a
series of very pointed copper rods affixed to the peak of a roof
connected by a very heavy braided conductor eventually leading to a
ground rod or two next to the house. These conductors are formed so
that all radii are gradual (lightning tends to be unable to make
sharp turns). Likewise, there are the gadgets, with multiple fine
wires projecting, that are intended to discharge voltages to prevent
them from building up by mounting them at the mast-head and running a
wire (no sharp bends) to an immersed ground plate. These do the same
thing as the land-based systems. They are NOT guaranteed, but they
sure improve the odds. Herm

At 12:45 PM 6/26/2008, you wrote:

— In
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.comFreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups
.com mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com ,
“lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.

The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft
copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani
joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

\

[William_A_Cormack]

Posted by William A Cormack (wacormack@…>)


My experience, WITH BOTA/US, was also very different. It was
not lightning it was a grounding but they were very fast and cooperative. They
did deduct the deductible you have to expect that.Â

Bill

From:
FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Al Lorman
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:00 AM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

\

My experience could not have been more different.
My insurer, Markel, told me to have an marine electrician look at the boat and
write up a repair estimate (including installation), which they paid in full
minus my deductible (of course, all of the destroyed electronics were
new). They also paid to have a rigger examine the mast.

Since I have switched to BoatUS for my current boat, your
tale makes me very nervous.

Al Lorman

From:
FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of sgaber@…
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:17 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Al Lorman
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

\

My Columbia (with aluminum mast and SS rigging) was st ruck by lightning in
her slip on Cleareater Beach, FL. When I arived at the boat the guy in the slip
next door asked if the anchor light he found on his deck was mine. I looked upo
and saw that now only was the anchor light gone, but so was the VHF antenna,
the steaming light and Windex. Down beli\ow I found that the VHF, DS, KM and
all 6 of the new interior lights I had just installed werre fried. Toast,
crispy critters.

No other damage was apparent. My insurance is with BoatUS. The deductible is
$600. They sent an adjuster ofver, he looked at the boat and said the damage
was $824. They sent me qa check for $224, which didn’t pay for any of the
instruments. Maybe it paid for the interipr lights.

Up till that time I had been paying BoatUS $680 per year for 15 years,
amounting to more than $10,000. I had not had a claim against them before (or
since). You think they would cut me a break give me a little more to help pay
the damage? Certainly not.

Unfortunately, BoatUS is the only company I could find that would insure my
42-year-old boat.
Insurance conmpanies are among the most hated institutions in the world. Wonder
why?

Steve Gaber
Sanderling, 1967 C-31 #77
Oldsmar, FL

---- Al Lorman <ajl@…>
wrote:

I had side flash (or electromagnetic pulse) damage to my former F30 (yes,
I
told Doug in advance). Luckily, it caused no damage to the mast. It did
arbitrarily wipe out a fair amount of electronic gear. I did some research
thereafter and concluded that the best defense against lightning damage is
a
really good insurance policy. There is no expert consensus on any system.

Al Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Herman and Gail
Schiller
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:55 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

All lightning protection appears to be aimed at preventing a
lightning strike by continuously “leaking” the static charge in
an
effort keep the charge below the voltage required to ionize the air
between the cloud and the ground. The land version of this is a
series of very pointed copper rods affixed to the peak of a roof
connected by a very heavy braided conductor eventually leading to a
ground rod or two next to the house. These conductors are formed so
that all radii are gradual (lightning tends to be unable to make
sharp turns). Likewise, there are the gadgets, with multiple fine
wires projecting, that are intended to discharge voltages to prevent
them from building up by mounting them at the mast-head and running a
wire (no sharp bends) to an immersed ground plate. These do the same
thing as the land-based systems. They are NOT guaranteed, but they
sure improve the odds. Herm

At 12:45 PM 6/26/2008, you wrote:

— In
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.comFreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups
.com mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com ,
“lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.

The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft
copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani
joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

Attachment: (image/jpeg) image001.jpg [not stored]
Attachment: (image/jpeg) image002.jpg [not stored]

[sgaber]

Posted by sgaber@…> (sgaber@…>)

I would not have minded paying the deductible if they assessed the damage at a
reasonable amount. There was a Humminbird waterproof VHF, a Signet 272 knotmeter
and 267 depth sounder, a Forespar steaming/foredeck light, a Foreapar anchor
lght, an Aqua Signal Series 40 combination runnig light, an Aqua Signal Series
25 stern light, six Guest interior lights and a JVC am-fm stereo. You think
that only cost $824? The VHF was almost $200, KM and DS alone were $600. The
Guest interior lights were $30 each. The running light was about $80, the stern
light as about $40. The Forespar combo light was $65. I forget what the anchor
light cost. If course, I had to replace all the wiring, including the mast
wiring and the breaker panel as well. And I did it all myself. If I had to pay
somebody to do it, the bill would have been in the thousands. That guy was a
Bozo.

On the other hand, they did pay my measly claim quickly. It paid for replacing
the VHF and one Guest interior light.

What pissed me off was the miniscule amount they gave me in return for the
$12,000 I paid them in premiums over the past 18 years without a claim and their
refusal to budge on the amount.

Steve Gaber
Sanderling, 1967 C-31 #77
Oldsmar, FL

---- William A Cormack <wacormack@…> wrote:

My experience, WITH BOTA/US, was also very different. It was not lightning it
was a grounding but they were very fast and cooperative. They did deduct the
deductible you have to expect that.

Bill

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Al Lorman
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:00 AM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

My experience could not have been more different. My insurer, Markel, told me
to have an marine electrician look at the boat and write up a repair estimate
(including installation), which they paid in full minus my deductible (of
course, all of the destroyed electronics were new). They also paid to have a
rigger examine the mast.

Since I have switched to BoatUS for my current boat, your tale makes me very
nervous.

Al Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sgaber@…
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:17 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Al Lorman
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

My Columbia (with aluminum mast and SS rigging) was st ruck by lightning in
her slip on Cleareater Beach, FL. When I arived at the boat the guy in the slip
next door asked if the anchor light he found on his deck was mine. I looked upo
and saw that now only was the anchor light gone, but so was the VHF antenna, the
steaming light and Windex. Down beli\ow I found that the VHF, DS, KM and all 6
of the new interior lights I had just installed werre fried. Toast, crispy
critters.

No other damage was apparent. My insurance is with BoatUS. The deductible is
$600. They sent an adjuster ofver, he looked at the boat and said the damage was
$824. They sent me qa check for $224, which didn’t pay for any of the
instruments. Maybe it paid for the interipr lights.

Up till that time I had been paying BoatUS $680 per year for 15 years,
amounting to more than $10,000. I had not had a claim against them before (or
since). You think they would cut me a break give me a little more to help pay
the damage? Certainly not.

Unfortunately, BoatUS is the only company I could find that would insure my
42-year-old boat.
Insurance conmpanies are among the most hated institutions in the world.
Wonder why?

Steve Gaber
Sanderling, 1967 C-31 #77
Oldsmar, FL

---- Al Lorman <ajl@… mailto:ajl%40lormanlawdc.com > wrote:

I had side flash (or electromagnetic pulse) damage to my former F30 (yes, I
told Doug in advance). Luckily, it caused no damage to the mast. It did
arbitrarily wipe out a fair amount of electronic gear. I did some research
thereafter and concluded that the best defense against lightning damage is a
really good insurance policy. There is no expert consensus on any system.

Al Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Herman and Gail
Schiller
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:55 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

All lightning protection appears to be aimed at preventing a
lightning strike by continuously “leaking” the static charge in an
effort keep the charge below the voltage required to ionize the air
between the cloud and the ground. The land version of this is a
series of very pointed copper rods affixed to the peak of a roof
connected by a very heavy braided conductor eventually leading to a
ground rod or two next to the house. These conductors are formed so
that all radii are gradual (lightning tends to be unable to make
sharp turns). Likewise, there are the gadgets, with multiple fine
wires projecting, that are intended to discharge voltages to prevent
them from building up by mounting them at the mast-head and running a
wire (no sharp bends) to an immersed ground plate. These do the same
thing as the land-based systems. They are NOT guaranteed, but they
sure improve the odds. Herm

At 12:45 PM 6/26/2008, you wrote:

— In
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.comFreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups
.com mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com ,
“lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.

The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

–

[michel.capel]

Posted by michel.capel (michel.capel@…>)

My boat lived in Mobile, AL a long time. The CF main mast was
replaced in 2000. The original was hit by lighning; I don’t know what
the damage was, but it was bad enough to replace that mast. On the
new mast, there is a 4’ soft aluminum (I think it is) pointed spike
to conduct static electricity, not to conduct a lightning strike. I
have the green wires running in the masts, connecting spike and
masthead with mastbase and keel.

Read the document I uploaded just now about corrosion and bonding and
lightning and you’ll see that the point is to lower the static charge
in the area over and around the boat. That is the best you can do to
protect against lightning. A direct hit will always result in damage,
but the chance on a close or direct hit is smaller if you prevent
build-up of an electric potential difference between the air layer
around the masthead and the water surface. In that case lightning
will not find a statically loaded airway to guide the strike to
earth. That is what the wire connected to the masthead does. The wire
does not have to be as thick as a welding wire because it’s meant to
just conduct static electricity, not a lightning strike.

If you want to know more about lightning, I believe the NOAA keeps
lightning strike statistics. I think the danger is real; the problem
is there is not very much more you can do about it than hope and
pray. And make sure the electric potential is equal at the masthead
and the water surface.

Best,

Michel

I’m in north west Europe and we don’t have as much lightning strikes
here.


— In FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com, “sailorvela”
<sailorvela@…> wrote:

I have been worried every time a thunderstorm rolls through. I am
in
the southeast in fresh water. What do you guys do for lightning
protection? Those tall CF mast on the F-40 Ck look soo vulnerable
(and
expensive) in the case of a strike. All I could see was a green
ground
wire when we took the sticks off for transport.

After reading some articles on the web I even considered a lager
cable
(4 AWG) with a rod on the top of the mast connected to a large
copper
plate or sheet on the transom or bottom. I still need to find out
more. I want to make my boat safe from lightning not to attract it!

Any ideas? Anybody has been hit (I assume total mast loss in
CF)?
Anybody as some sort of protection system or device? I am Georgia,
I
understand Fl is even worse for lightning. How common are hits
really?
Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Alex.

[sailorvela]

Posted by sailorvela (sailorvela@…>)

Good information. Thanks (again) for all the replies.

Cheers,

Alex

[William_A_Cormack]

Posted by William A Cormack (wacormack@…>)

Steve:
It sure sounds like they screwed you. I thought that the policy would replace
with new materials/parts. Have you spoken to the claims people at Boat/US about
this? I may have included professional contract prices in my claim and then
done the work myself to try to work off the deductible.

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: sgaber@… [mailto:sgaber@…]
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 2:16 AM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Cc: William A Cormack
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

I would not have minded paying the deductible if they assessed the damage at a
reasonable amount. There was a Humminbird waterproof VHF, a Signet 272 knotmeter
and 267 depth sounder, a Forespar steaming/foredeck light, a Foreapar anchor
lght, an Aqua Signal Series 40 combination runnig light, an Aqua Signal Series
25 stern light, six Guest interior lights and a JVC am-fm stereo. You think
that only cost $824? The VHF was almost $200, KM and DS alone were $600. The
Guest interior lights were $30 each. The running light was about $80, the stern
light as about $40. The Forespar combo light was $65. I forget what the anchor
light cost. If course, I had to replace all the wiring, including the mast
wiring and the breaker panel as well. And I did it all myself. If I had to pay
somebody to do it, the bill would have been in the thousands. That guy was a
Bozo.

On the other hand, they did pay my measly claim quickly. It paid for replacing
the VHF and one Guest interior light.

What pissed me off was the miniscule amount they gave me in return for the
$12,000 I paid them in premiums over the past 18 years without a claim and their
refusal to budge on the amount.

Steve Gaber
Sanderling, 1967 C-31 #77
Oldsmar, FL

---- William A Cormack <wacormack@…> wrote:

My experience, WITH BOTA/US, was also very different. It was not lightning it
was a grounding but they were very fast and cooperative. They did deduct the
deductible you have to expect that.

Bill

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Al Lorman
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:00 AM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

My experience could not have been more different. My insurer, Markel, told me
to have an marine electrician look at the boat and write up a repair estimate
(including installation), which they paid in full minus my deductible (of
course, all of the destroyed electronics were new). They also paid to have a
rigger examine the mast.

Since I have switched to BoatUS for my current boat, your tale makes me very
nervous.

Al Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sgaber@…
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:17 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Al Lorman
Subject: RE: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

My Columbia (with aluminum mast and SS rigging) was st ruck by lightning in
her slip on Cleareater Beach, FL. When I arived at the boat the guy in the slip
next door asked if the anchor light he found on his deck was mine. I looked upo
and saw that now only was the anchor light gone, but so was the VHF antenna, the
steaming light and Windex. Down beli\ow I found that the VHF, DS, KM and all 6
of the new interior lights I had just installed werre fried. Toast, crispy
critters.

No other damage was apparent. My insurance is with BoatUS. The deductible is
$600. They sent an adjuster ofver, he looked at the boat and said the damage was
$824. They sent me qa check for $224, which didn’t pay for any of the
instruments. Maybe it paid for the interipr lights.

Up till that time I had been paying BoatUS $680 per year for 15 years,
amounting to more than $10,000. I had not had a claim against them before (or
since). You think they would cut me a break give me a little more to help pay
the damage? Certainly not.

Unfortunately, BoatUS is the only company I could find that would insure my
42-year-old boat.
Insurance conmpanies are among the most hated institutions in the world.
Wonder why?

Steve Gaber
Sanderling, 1967 C-31 #77
Oldsmar, FL

---- Al Lorman <ajl@… mailto:ajl%40lormanlawdc.com > wrote:

I had side flash (or electromagnetic pulse) damage to my former F30 (yes, I
told Doug in advance). Luckily, it caused no damage to the mast. It did
arbitrarily wipe out a fair amount of electronic gear. I did some research
thereafter and concluded that the best defense against lightning damage is a
really good insurance policy. There is no expert consensus on any system.

Al Lorman

From: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com
[mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Herman and Gail
Schiller
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:55 PM
To: FreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups.com
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FreedomOwnersGroup] Re: Ligthning Protection

All lightning protection appears to be aimed at preventing a
lightning strike by continuously “leaking” the static charge in an
effort keep the charge below the voltage required to ionize the air
between the cloud and the ground. The land version of this is a
series of very pointed copper rods affixed to the peak of a roof
connected by a very heavy braided conductor eventually leading to a
ground rod or two next to the house. These conductors are formed so
that all radii are gradual (lightning tends to be unable to make
sharp turns). Likewise, there are the gadgets, with multiple fine
wires projecting, that are intended to discharge voltages to prevent
them from building up by mounting them at the mast-head and running a
wire (no sharp bends) to an immersed ground plate. These do the same
thing as the land-based systems. They are NOT guaranteed, but they
sure improve the odds. Herm

At 12:45 PM 6/26/2008, you wrote:

— In
mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.comFreedomOwnersGroup@yahoogroups
.com mailto:FreedomOwnersGroup%40yahoogroups.com ,
“lance_ryley”
<lance_ryley@…> wrote:

Alex,
I think that the trick is to not be the tallest mast in town

Uh oh. I am in trouble…

Thanks for the responses guys.

The US standards call for at “least” 4 AWG, and 1 sqr. ft copper
plate. The plate is OK in salt water but insufficient for fresh. I
think the wire would be probably OK for “most” strikes. Ani joints
or bends are of more concern there. It would heat up substatially so
it probably needs to be held a short distance away from the mast (not
practical with whisbones, but I have booms). Still the tought of all
that weight aloft and the chance of attracting a hit bothers me.
On the other hand I see no restrictions for the mast in my insurance
policy and I added an option to repair or replace damaged equipment
(with Allstate, the price wasn’t bad at all either. Being landlocked
in a fresh water lake has some advantages ;))

Anybody with first hadn knowledge of a strike on carbon fiber?

Cheers,

Alex

–