Mangusta 108 Experience

"... and not even the entire sentence or post."

It's a literary device often used for and by those with reading comprehension skills adequate to link the fragment to the orginal idea or statement. Notice that with the rare exception, I use an ellipsis (...) to indicate there are portions of the original sentence missing. It is a method of reducing the number of words, it permits "... omission of a word or phrase necessary for a complete syntactical construction but not necessary for understanding."

"... yet none would put it in writing."

Well, that says quite a lot about the validity of the process doesn't it? If the dealer won't substantiate it, and putting it in writing is substantiation, then it is an unapproved action and will probably void any warranty.

I agree with K1W1, if the dealer won't put it in writing and the manufacturer does not approve, then the claim is bogus. Do what you wish with your own engines but to suggest to others that using a technique or material not approved by the manufacturer on a new engine is not really acceptable. Unless of course you are offering to honor the manufacturer's warranty yourself - in writing of course.



(CaptJ - Please note the ellipsis. It is being used to indicate the entire post is not required for most readers to understand the concept under discussion. Let me know if you need the rest of the sentence.)

That seems to happen a lot. After the new year, with an apparent attempt on the part of some members to be less combative, I saw several new names (and several who hadn't come above ground in a long time) contributing. A few brought good answers, some just brought questions that spurred debate and some had misconceptions that got corrected. I don't remember any who came on saying 'please ridicule me'.

Is that really the purpose of a forum? What about all the others who have a similar question and are lurking, hoping to learn, but are afraid to ask their exact question for fear of being "driven to ground"?

If you're not into blabla (like Marmot ), please skip the part in italic.

I can answer one which hasn't been done yet:

2. At maximum speed, the main engines will burn 685 l/hour each. So that's 1370 l/h in total.
With a tank of 12.000 liter, it'll take less than 9 hours to drain it, and you'll have covered about 330 miles.

That's on a rare dead-flat sea. Often your speed is restricted not by the amount of horsepower in your engine room, but by the amount of pounding you, your guests and your glassware are willing to sustain.

PS I love the Mangusta 108's, Pershing 115's and Sunseeker Predators of this world, and can perfectly understand someone wanting to own one.

Bruno

Water jets here on the great lakes that I'm familar with, Macinaw island ferrys catamarans 200 plus feet, and a smaller 55 ft corp of engineers survey boat used different steering methodology[sp] the ferrys drag the buckets to steer at speed where as the the 55 foot survey vessel swiveled the jets at all speeds. Which method would the Mangusta use?

"... skip the part in italic."

That's the best part! Bruno, keep posting the good stuff.

Hi,

Movable nozzles outside the discharge port are what they use, this is from the manufacturers website.

Kamewa S3 jets to debut on superyacht

Deliveries of the first Kamewa S3-series waterjets from Rolls-Royce are due in December this year, the twin steerable and reversible 63S3 models specified to power 33m-long Mangusta 108 superyachts from the Italian yard Overmarine. Each will be driven by a 2,400kW MTU Series 4000 engine to achieve an anticipated speed of 37 knots. Under development to progressively supersede Kamewa’s successful SII-series from 2006 – whose references include 17 earlier Mangusta 108 series yachts – the full range of S3-series waterjets will be available on the market during 2008. A platform design approach will provide a range of standard units with various options to suit customer requirements.

Advantage has been taken of advances in design techniques and production methods to reduce the number of components and streamline manufacture. Customers will benefit from lighter weights, shorter leadtimes, higher reliability and lower life-cycle costs, says Rolls-Royce.

A new pump design makes the efficiency less dependent on hull stiffness, and the risk of mechanical contact between blade tips and impeller chamber is reportedly eliminated. The S3’s steering and reversing unit follows the same general layout as the SII, but with inboard hydraulic actuators offered as an option. Hydraulic oil is fed to the steering and reversing cylinders by the power pack under instructions from the control system.

Substantial design changes have been made to optimise steering performance over the whole speed range while reducing the weight of the system and cutting the size of the hydraulic pumps and the torque requirement of the PTO. Fewer pumps will be needed for the larger jets in the series. An updated control system – some elements already being applied to the current SII series – benefits from the HelmsMan lever unit, which has improved ergonomics with a lower price.

Here is a pic of a unit: http://www.marinelog.com/IMAGESMMVII/kamewajet.jpg

From now on, I'll post ONLY in italic

That makes it sound backing a canoe.

The buckets are folded neatly out of the way in full ahead position and the pump discharge goes straight out the back for minimal drag or interference.

To steer, the whole bucket assembly is swiveled from side to side, it doesn't take much angle, about 30 degrees is max for maneuvering* and at speed only a very few degrees are normal to maintain heading. You can see the control inputs making tiny corrections to the steering angle underway. Typically only one unit is steered at speed.

* Just enough to ventilate the other unit when maneuvering with a heavy hand alongside and to fill the opposite engine and pump with sand and muck in shallow water.

What you see sometimes on large jet-propelled ferries is that they use interceptor-like blades (I believe they are on the skeg) for steering (course keeping) at high speeds and just leave the jets straight.
Steering the jets can be "over-sensitive" in those conditions.

Hi,

I have shown you in links you posted where it clearly says on the CAT website that they use normal DEO for initial fill.

I have just delivered a project to a client with 6 CAT Engines ( 2 x 3516, 3 x C 18 and a C 9).

None had any oil used in them other than 15W 40 CAT Diesel Engine Oil. I was also at the FAT's and asked particularly what went in them prior to attending. I was shown the empty drums that had been used to fill them.

Someone who sold you on this Break In Oil has been blowing smoke up your ~~~. You might wanna check if he has any cheap real estate at the moment, he might do you a deal on something in the Everglades.

When we were debating this before I sent an e mail I received from a high ranking CAT Guy saying that this whole story about break in oil was an old wives tale to Carl. I didn't post it here because I didn't want to reveal my contacts name in CAT. He works for CAT itself not a dealer.

This is what CAT says is used to fill the engines at the factory.

http://www.cat.com/cda/files/199221/7/pehj0059-02.pdf

Thanks for letting us know about your trip.
Good luck and have fun!

What kind of jet ski do you guys reccomend I go out and rent so I can start teaching myself how to drive these big kamewa jobbies?

"A full year of video game sea time ..."

Does the MCA require that much time now!?