Click for JetForums Click for Perko Click for Abeking Click for Ocean Alexander Click for Delta

Main Engines on "Classed" vessels

Discussion in 'Technical Discussion' started by Hawk, Aug 8, 2007.

You need to be registered and signed in to view this content.
  1. Hawk, Aug 8, 2007
    #1
    Hawk

    Hawk Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    72
    Location:
    Vancouver BC
    Has anyone had any experience with using "Type approved only" engines on classed and certified vessels.

    At issue is our desire to use MTU 16V2000M93 engines on a ABS classed yacht. These engines are type approved only and are apperently not acceptable for use on a certfied yacht because of their inability to conform to the 10% over load requirement.

    Christensen Yachts use the 12V4000M90 which has similar over load issues but are able to achieve certification

    Is there anyone who has run into a similar issue- regardless of engine type or manufactor- and has been able to get a variance or exemption?
  2. Matthias, Aug 8, 2007
    #2
    Matthias

    Matthias New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Germany
    Hi Hawk,

    Just to correct you, the last couple of Christensen´s have been M60s, not M90s.
  3. Loren Schweizer, Aug 9, 2007
    #3
    Loren Schweizer

    Loren Schweizer YF Associate Writer

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,352
    Location:
    Coral Gables/Ft. Laud., FL
    Is your ABS application putting a finer point on a generalized Maltese Cross A1 Yachting Service AMS ?
  4. Hawk, Aug 9, 2007
    #4
    Hawk

    Hawk Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    72
    Location:
    Vancouver BC
    Loren,

    No, nothing out of the ordinary that we are aware of other than we have a relatively inexperienced surveyor that is running "by the book". I have the surveyor investigating the Christensen scenario to see if there is anything different between our application and theirs.

    This is our first ABS vessel in over 15 years as we have been working with Bureau Veritas out of France on our previous classed builds. On those vessels there was no issue with the 10% over load factor on the engines as the iron we were using was certifiable.

    Thanks

    Jim
  5. MacMcL, Aug 9, 2007
    #5
    MacMcL

    MacMcL Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Dania Beach
    Get MTU involved, I think you will find that it is not the problem you anticipate.
  6. Jorge Lang, Aug 10, 2007
    #6
    Jorge Lang

    Jorge Lang Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    We are in the final design stage of an exhaust system for a builder using the same MTU engines for an ABS vessel. We have sent drawings of the system to the builder for the surveyor. I would expect other suppliers of components that require ABS approval to do the same including the engine distributor.
  7. CaptPKilbride, Aug 10, 2007
    #7
    CaptPKilbride

    CaptPKilbride Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    587
    Location:
    On the water
    Classifiable Ratings

    MTU Engines for yachts


    Their online data says all ratings classifiable except for 2000 M93
  8. Hawk, Aug 10, 2007
    #8
    Hawk

    Hawk Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    72
    Location:
    Vancouver BC
    Unfortunately for us the 2000M93 was the engine of choice. We where aware that this engine was not classifable but it was "type approved" and we have been back and forth with both ABS and MTU on this matter to see if we could squeeze it though, but, because this particular engine is wound right out to achieve it's stated horsepower there is no 10% over load factor, therefore unclassifiable as you mentioned.

    We have now changed gears and have decided to move forward with the 12V4000, A little more horsepower but a substainial weight penalty, this now requires us to rerun our hydrostatics. In the long run the 12V4000's are a better investment , our next challenge is to mitigate that weight penalty.

    Thanks for all your input