They weren’t suppose to go under the bridge at all, I believe they lost power and the current took them into the bridge. It’s a newer tall ship and pretty large, built in the early 1980’s. I’m pretty sure it would have a pretty substantial engine.
They weren’t suppose to go under the bridge at all, I believe they lost power and the current took them into the bridge. It’s a newer tall ship and pretty large, built in the early 1980’s. I’m pretty sure it would have a pretty substantial engine.
That number may look big to those who don’t know boats, but as I said previously, that’s a tiny engine for a vessel of that size. A non-sailing boat of that tonnage would have more than 5000 hp.
Where does Studebaker 259 fit in that engine series? Long ago I had one in a Willys Wagon, apparently a popular conversion since it matched up to Jeep transmission.Years ago a fellow called me because he heard I have AMC cars. I know nothing about boats but he had what I assume was a small older yacht that had a Rambler 327 V8, no relationship with Chevy 327. Rambler mid-block 287 & 327 debuted in 1957.
It doesn't. Studebaker & AMC two different manufacturers.Where does Studebaker 259 fit in that engine series? Long ago I had one in a Willys Wagon, apparently a popular conversion since it matched up to Jeep transmission.
With 4.27 differentials, it shrieked at highway speed.
Lost power, therefore lost steering control.The ship hitting the bridge would have been a little more humorous except a couple of people died. I read something broke or malfunctioned on the ship.
With the exception of outboard motors that can be rotated, some nozzles, and bow thrusters, most vessels' steering forces come from the force of water flowing past the rudder. With the vessel moving with the water and little relative flow, there would be little steering force available regardless of whether the "power steering" was working.Lost power, therefore lost steering control.