As some of you may know, BCC Vagabundo survived the Cabo San Lucas storm of December 1982. Joshua, Moitessier’s steel boat was severely damaged in that storm.
I have a copy of the Pardey’s The Capable Cruiser and wonder if anyone might have additional information on this BCC.
The reason I ask is that I have a strong suspicion that my BCC is Vagabundo.
The Yanmar manual contains handwritten notes mentioning Vagabundo. A picture from Cabo of the broken bowsprit in the Pardey book shows non-standard hardware installed on deck that are identically positioned to Voyager’s-- a small fairlead forward of the starboard hawse pipe/bulwark, eyebolts on deck at the two visible corners of the scuttle hatch. and prior to my recent refit, an identically L-bracket-mounted bowsprit. When I bought Voyager, I stripped the hull down to gelcoat for an epoxy job and discovered a portside repair job at the turn of the bilge, which coincides with the crack in Vagabundo’s hull as described in the book. The evidence is mounting, but it would be nice to confirm.
There are three numbers carved into the wood at the forward hatch. They are O.N.800152, R.T.747, and N.O.917347. I have no idea what the letter prefixes refer to. Any help would be appreciated.
O.N. is likely Official Number. It indicates that the number string that follows it is the vessel documentation number with a ships registry. I would guess that R.T. and N.O. are similar registry prefixes, from different national and/or state jurisdictions.
So your next tasks are to guess at the likeliest jurisdictions and then search the ships registries. Did not the vendor from whom you bought Voyager give you a full set of ship’s papers?
Most registries are set up to be searched by name, not number. For example http://www.amsa.gov.au/Shipping_Registration/List_of_Registered_Ships/Page_69.asp shows the final page of the Australian Registry of Ships. Note the heading of the second column from the left: O.N.
And note also that Zygote has the minor distinction of being the ultimate (in alphabetical order) ship in the Australian registry!
Cheers
Bil
Warren:
I agree with Bil - those are official registation numbers applicable to documented boats. My BCC is documented with the Vancouver Registry and its O.N. is 820914. I’m not sure what the R.T. represents. I was required to post the Net Tonnage (N.T.), which for my BCC is 6.58 tonnes (as determined by a marine surveyor). I am also not sure what N.O. represents.
I figured those were registration numbers, and last night went to Transport Canada’s site and lo and behold, Voyager of Yokohama is indeed Vagabundo.
When I was considering the purchase of VofY, I read about BCCs rapaciously and the fact a BCC survived the Cabo storm while so many others were damaged beyond recognition spoke volumes to me about the BCCs/Vagabundos toughness, and had a very big part in my final decision. So it’s more than a little ironic that I have ended up with her.
As for ship’s papers, there were none. Japan often doesn’t consider itself beholden to the rules and conventions of other countries. To be legal here requires only insurance and an operators license. I figure the previous owner considered them irrelevant and chucked them.
Now to get the lowdown on the R.T. and N.O. numbers…
Warren: Hi!
I suggest bothering the previous owner, just in case they do have the ship’s papers.
In many Western jurisdictions, you need to establish the full chain of ownership - starting with the builder’s certificate - to register and document a hull. Your researches through other registries, to track down the RT and NO entries (NO sounds like a registration prefix from a jurisdiction using a Romance language, such as Spanish, French etc, which puts adjectives after nouns), may be adequate. But paperwork is always reassuring when proving ownership.
Cheers
Bil
Dioscouri Wrote:
those are official registation
numbers applicable to documented boats. My BCC is
documented with the Vancouver Registry and its
O.N. is 820914. I’m not sure what the R.T.
represents. I was required to post the Net
Tonnage (N.T.), which for my BCC is 6.58 tonnes
(as determined by a marine surveyor). I am also
not sure what N.O. represents.
From the back of my Certificate of Registry (Transport Canada):
“Both the official number and register tonnage shown
on the Certificate of Registry, must be marked in block-
type Arabic numerals at least 4 cm high on some clearly
visible interior structural part of the hull. The
register tonnage must be preceded by the abbreviation
“N.R.T.” and the official number by the abbreviation
“O.N.”. These numbers must be permanently affixed so
that alteration, removal, or replacement would be
obvious and cause some scarring or damage to the
surrounding hull area.”
From the front of my Certificate of Registry:
Official Number: 807759
Gross tonnage: 6.25
Net/Register tonnage: 4.99
In many Western jurisdictions, you need to establish the full chain of ownership - starting with the builder’s certificate - to register and document a hull
True in Canada.
The Canadian Registry of Ships is here:
http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/4/vrqs-srib/m.aspx?lang=e
Searching for Vagabundo gives this:
“O.N. 800152”
“This vessel is no longer registered in Canada. For further information contact the nearest vessel registry office.”
“Date of closing: June 26, 1987.”
- NorrisBil, Gary, Norris,
Thanks for the comments and information. Having determined that Voyager was once Vagabundo has got me going in determining the history of the boat. I am trying to get a hold of the PO and will have a sit-down with him to discuss what he knows. As I am hoping to sail out of Japan in a few years, I’ll need all the information about the hull I can get.
What is the difference between gross tonnage and register tonnage? The numbers from Norris are 1.26 tonnes different. If RT means Registered Tonnage, and the number on Voyager is 747, doesn’t that make Voyager a very heavy BCC?
Warren
The Cosmic Dancer’s Offical Number is 802208. The Register Tonnage is 709.
Incase you were wondering…
Bryon
Tonnage is measured by an old system: this is (((length - beam) x beam x
beam2) /94)
The system was originally developed to determine the taxable value of
cargos: the system was, at one time, refined by making allowance for a head
and a galley.
John Cole
Coledata, Inc
419D Concord St
Havre de Grace, MD 21078, USA
Tel: 410 939 1653
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bccforum@coledata.com [mailto:owner-bccforum@coledata.com] On
Behalf Of BCC Forums
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 6:25 PM
To: bccforum@samlmorse.com
Subject: [BCC Forum Post] wfraser: Re: Canadian BCC Vagabundo
Author: wfraser
Username: wfraser
Subject: Re: Canadian BCC Vagabundo
Forum: BCC Forum
Link: http://www.samlmorse.com/forum/read.php?5,8209,8234#msg-8234
Bil, Gary, Norris,
Thanks for the comments and information. Having determined that Voyager was
once Vagabundo has got me going in determining the history of the boat. I am
trying to get a hold of the PO and will have a sit-down with him to discuss
what he knows. As I am hoping to sail out of Japan in a few years, I’ll need
all the information about the hull I can get.
What is the difference between gross tonnage and register tonnage? The
numbers from Norris are 1.26 tonnes different. If RT means Registered
Tonnage, and the number on Voyager is 747, doesn’t that make Voyager a very
heavy BCC?
I think you are missing a decimal point!
Gross tonnage is determined by this formula:
(((length - beam) x beam x beam2) /94)
The system was originally developed to determine the taxable value of cargos: the system was, at one time, refined by making allowance for a head and a galley.
My vessel, 35’ x 13;6" has a Thames measurement of 12.06 tons.
The registered weight, I believe, is the displacement weight.
John,
Thanks for that. I figured on 7.47 tonnes. Even so, it seems heavy compared to Norris’ boat and other BCC weights I’ve read, although Cosmic Dancer comes in at 7.06 and was also built in Canada.
I figured on 7.47 tonnes. Even
so, it seems heavy compared to Norris’ boat and
other BCC weights I’ve read, although Cosmic
Dancer comes in at 7.06 and was also built in
Canada.
Hi Warren -
My first guess is that the numbers are different not
the boats. Blame it on whoever did the calculations.
As for what (if anything) it all means:
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f57/gross-tons-and-net-tons-2520.html
or Google it for more. As John says, the history is interesting.