Date: 5/25/2000, 2:05 pm
Doug, You have also illustrated why you want your bulkheads as close as possible--you really want to limit the amount of water that could enter the cockpit in the first place. If you've got nearly 800 lbs. of water in the cockpit, handling is, well, gonna suck!
I was going to consider going with the Rule Mate until Dale pointed out that it will turn on every time I roll. And I like to roll! I think I'll go with a switch!
Peter Carter recommends putting closed cell foam on the sides of the cockpit to further limit volume that could otherwise have been occupied by water.
Shawn
: 22796
: I figured 5 feet between bulkheads in the cockpit and a 22 inch width. If you
: consider a cylinder with these dimensions the volume is (3.14 x 11^2)x 60
: = 22796 cubic inches. There are 231 cubic inches in a gallon (U.S. liquid)
: which yields 98 gallons. I realize the cockpit is not cylindrical but if
: it held say 75% of this it would still have 75 gallons just in the cockpit
: area. It's worst case conditions and with the ends of the kayak filled
: with air this should never happen, but I always figure things could get
: worse and try to plan accordingly.
: Doug
Messages In This Thread
- Bulkheads
Doug Kuik -- 5/22/2000, 10:44 am- Another nonstress riser bulkhead approach
mike allen ---> -- 5/23/2000, 8:28 pm- Re: Another nonstress riser bulkhead approach
Doug Kuik -- 5/24/2000, 5:58 pm
- Re: Bulkheads
Berkeley C. -- 5/23/2000, 1:02 pm- Re: Bulkheads
Jack Martin -- 5/24/2000, 6:14 am- Re: Bulkheads
Doug Kuik -- 5/23/2000, 6:54 pm- Re: Bulkheads
RM Dalton -- 5/23/2000, 1:40 pm - Re: Bulkheads
- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers *Pic*
Shawn B -- 5/22/2000, 12:24 pm- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers
Doug Kuik -- 5/22/2000, 1:17 pm- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers
Shawn B -- 5/22/2000, 5:09 pm- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers
Doug Kuik -- 5/22/2000, 6:36 pm- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers *Pic*
Shawn B -- 5/23/2000, 2:18 pm- An alternative to foot pump.
Dale Frolander -- 5/23/2000, 4:02 pm- Re: Electric pumps *Pic*
Shawn B -- 5/24/2000, 10:03 am- More POWERRRRRRR
Dale Frolander -- 5/24/2000, 1:27 pm- Re: More POWERRRRRRR
Doug Kuik -- 5/24/2000, 4:47 pm- it may be even more efficient
Paul G. Jacobson -- 5/25/2000, 12:35 am- Re: it may be even more efficient
Doug Kuik -- 5/25/2000, 12:22 pm- Re: it may be even more efficient
Spidey -- 5/28/2000, 11:33 pm- Re: that's a lotta weight!
Shawn B -- 5/25/2000, 2:05 pm - Re: that's a lotta weight!
- Re: it may be even more efficient
- Re: More POWERRRRRRR
Dale Frolander -- 5/24/2000, 10:03 pm- Wrong batteries
Dale Frolander -- 5/24/2000, 10:20 pm
- Re: it may be even more efficient
- it may be even more efficient
- Re: More POWERRRRRRR
- More POWERRRRRRR
- Re: Foot pumps
Doug Kuik -- 5/23/2000, 3:15 pm- Re: Foot pumps
David -- 5/24/2000, 9:07 am- Re: Foot pumps
Jack Martin -- 5/24/2000, 8:09 am- Re: Foot pumps
Jack Martin -- 5/24/2000, 6:47 am- Re: Rubber Ball Foot pumps
Shawn B -- 5/23/2000, 4:27 pm - Re: Foot pumps
- Re: Electric pumps *Pic*
- An alternative to foot pump.
- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers *Pic*
- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers
- Re: Bulkheads without Stress Risers
- Re: Bulkheads
Dale Frolander -- 5/22/2000, 11:25 am - Re: Another nonstress riser bulkhead approach
- Another nonstress riser bulkhead approach