Fatty Knees Revisited

BCC Forum
1

Hello Again Everyone,
I am trying to determine if the 7’ Fatty Knees fits on the cabin top of Little Wing. I searched “Fatty Knees” in the forum and read the discussion regarding this issue. Unfortunately, there was no conclusion to Rod Bruckdorfer’s query. My specific question is whether the boom height is enough to squeeze the dingy under it. My boom is 43 1/2" from the deck to the underside of the boom. I am using this measurement from the deck, and not the cabin top, specifically because the skylights and sliding hatches are considerably different on many BCC’s.

If anyone has a Fatty Knees mounted on their cabin top, could you please confirm this dimension? I am not interested in any other dingy or any other mounting placement on the boat, but I worry about buying the 7’ Fatty and not having it fit.

Thanks!

Craig Compton
s/v Little Wing

2

Hi Craig,
I have a Cherub which mounts on the cabin top under the boom. Its dimensions are very similar to the Fatty Knees. The boom does not quite clear the keel of the dinghy when resting in the center of the boom gallows so I have to keep it to one side, which I prefer anyway. When the sail is raised the boom is lifted so that it clears the dinghy just fine. I keep two boom vangs/preventers attached just aft of the dinghy keel so that it can pass by without a problem. The dinghy is mounted on chocks designed for the Fatty Kness modified slightly due to it’s wider beam. I have been satisfied with the arrangement. The biggest problem is the restricted visibility forward.
I hope this helps,
Ron Thompson
Ho’okahiko 97

3

Thanks Rob,
Do you know the dimension from the deck to the underside of your boom? I suspect my boom is lower to the deck than other BCCs.

Thanks for your reply!

4

I measured the distance from the boom to the deck just behind the mast. It is 46 inches. Apparantly yours is a bit lower. That could be a problem with the Fatty Kness clearance. Mine is fairly tight as it is with 46 inches. I see it as less of a problem for sailing but more likely trouble when the boom is resting in the gallows.
Ron Thompson
Ho’okahiko 97

5

Yep…that dimension jibes with Puffin’s (hull 83?), thanks Ron. At some point the boom was lowered when they ordered the masts. Little Wing is #107. Does anyone have a BCC later than Ho’okahiko, hull #97, with the lower boom (43 1/2" rather than 46’ to the deck) and with a Fatty Knees stored under the boom?

6

Hi Craig,
I have a Cherub which mounts on the cabin top under the boom. Its dimensions
are very similar to the Fatty Knees. The boom does not quite clear the keel
of the dinghy when place into the center of the boom gallows so I have to
keep it to one side, which I prefer anyway. When the sail is raised the boom
is lifted so that it clears the dinghy just fine. I keep two boom
vang/preventers attached just aft of the dinghy keel so that it can pass by
without a problem. The dinghy is mounted on chocks designed for the Fatty
Knees modified slightly due to is wider beam. I have been satisfied with
keeping the dinghy on the cabin top. The biggest problem is the restricted
visibility forward. You have to keep looking around the dinghy.

I hope this helps
Ron Thompson
Ho’okahiko 97
----- Original Message -----
From: “BCC Forums” bccforums@samlmorse.com
To: bccforum@samlmorse.com
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 7:02 AM
Subject: [BCC Forum Post] LittleWing: Fatty Knees Revisited