D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
No, it was a big Azimut (Jumbo 70?) and it was moored right next to the shore under the restaurant. Maybe it's gone now?
Aqua-Star Watch this Space
- Thread starter glenndraper
- Start date
Gludy
Well-Known Member
Hurricane
Although Glenn and I both had the same 60 footish planing cruiser, i can only answer for me.
If my future time was restricted then a planing cruiser makes sense - I need speed to get to A and then back again in a weekend. However my boating is about to change so that i can spend some serious cruising time.
This change means that I want more comfort underway but still need the occasional use of speed - so the SD hull offers me very economic cruising in comfort at say 9 knots (over 2 mpg) as well as rock steady cruising. In my view stabilisers have changed SD boating for good. I consider them essential.
So with fuel prices increasing and greater range wanted I am looking at a Marlow with a 3000 UK gallon tank and a range of well over 4000 miles. That makes fill ups in the CI's every now and then a real alternative.
If i was still to be limited in time then the faster planing boat makes better sense even though that boat is nowhere near as enjoyable on the journey as the SD boat with stabilisers.
Once you have experienced that comfort and style it is very hard to go back to a planing boat - well it is for me.
All SD boats are wet - they cut through waves and so must be wetter. hence I am looking at a Marlow with an enclosed flybridge pilot house but one that can be opened up. it will have just the one upper helm and that will enable me to see far better in rough conditions.
Although Glenn and I both had the same 60 footish planing cruiser, i can only answer for me.
If my future time was restricted then a planing cruiser makes sense - I need speed to get to A and then back again in a weekend. However my boating is about to change so that i can spend some serious cruising time.
This change means that I want more comfort underway but still need the occasional use of speed - so the SD hull offers me very economic cruising in comfort at say 9 knots (over 2 mpg) as well as rock steady cruising. In my view stabilisers have changed SD boating for good. I consider them essential.
So with fuel prices increasing and greater range wanted I am looking at a Marlow with a 3000 UK gallon tank and a range of well over 4000 miles. That makes fill ups in the CI's every now and then a real alternative.
If i was still to be limited in time then the faster planing boat makes better sense even though that boat is nowhere near as enjoyable on the journey as the SD boat with stabilisers.
Once you have experienced that comfort and style it is very hard to go back to a planing boat - well it is for me.
All SD boats are wet - they cut through waves and so must be wetter. hence I am looking at a Marlow with an enclosed flybridge pilot house but one that can be opened up. it will have just the one upper helm and that will enable me to see far better in rough conditions.
Hurricane
Well-Known Member
Yes Paul
I assumed your answer would be something like that.
Does this mean that we will all be wishing we had taken the course you and Glen seem to be taking.
How much better - or indeed how much more uncomfrotable is a conventional flybridge over and above the style of boat you are considering?
It would be good to hear from other Flybridge owners in the Med for example where the fuel issue is different.
What made me ask this was something Glen said - something about mooring off - I assume he means mooring off outside a Med marina not in a sheltered bay. It seems that he is inferring the the SD hull will ride better at anchor - I'm sure it does but is that enough to sway you to the style of boats you are considering.
Personally, I think a conventional flybridge cruiser looks better but I have changed my mind in the past.
Sorry - I didnt want to hijack this thread but what do you and others think?
Mike
I assumed your answer would be something like that.
Does this mean that we will all be wishing we had taken the course you and Glen seem to be taking.
How much better - or indeed how much more uncomfrotable is a conventional flybridge over and above the style of boat you are considering?
It would be good to hear from other Flybridge owners in the Med for example where the fuel issue is different.
What made me ask this was something Glen said - something about mooring off - I assume he means mooring off outside a Med marina not in a sheltered bay. It seems that he is inferring the the SD hull will ride better at anchor - I'm sure it does but is that enough to sway you to the style of boats you are considering.
Personally, I think a conventional flybridge cruiser looks better but I have changed my mind in the past.
Sorry - I didnt want to hijack this thread but what do you and others think?
Mike
MapisM
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
how much more uncomfrotable is a conventional flybridge over and above the style of boat you are considering?
[/ QUOTE ]
Over long distances, a lot.
Though with planning boats, you don't have the range for really long passages anyway...
[ QUOTE ]
It seems that he is inferring the the SD hull will ride better at anchor
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't think that's what he meant, but is not true, anyway.
SD hulls might roll more "smoothly" at anchor, but they reach higher angles compared to planning hulls of the same size.
Only an effective stabilization can make the difference, and this is true for both types of hulls.
[ QUOTE ]
I think a conventional flybridge cruiser looks better
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. They are in fact designed with elegance in mind, rather than functionality at sea. That's even more extreme with open boats, btw.
Just as an example, the windscreen of ANY boat - strictly from the functional viewpoint - should be vertical, or even better with a negative angle. Any working boat is in fact designed in that way.
BUT, wouldn't a flybridge with such windscreen be awful?!...
how much more uncomfrotable is a conventional flybridge over and above the style of boat you are considering?
[/ QUOTE ]
Over long distances, a lot.
Though with planning boats, you don't have the range for really long passages anyway...
[ QUOTE ]
It seems that he is inferring the the SD hull will ride better at anchor
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't think that's what he meant, but is not true, anyway.
SD hulls might roll more "smoothly" at anchor, but they reach higher angles compared to planning hulls of the same size.
Only an effective stabilization can make the difference, and this is true for both types of hulls.
[ QUOTE ]
I think a conventional flybridge cruiser looks better
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. They are in fact designed with elegance in mind, rather than functionality at sea. That's even more extreme with open boats, btw.
Just as an example, the windscreen of ANY boat - strictly from the functional viewpoint - should be vertical, or even better with a negative angle. Any working boat is in fact designed in that way.
BUT, wouldn't a flybridge with such windscreen be awful?!...
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
I don't understand why a SD boat should necessarily ride better at anchor. In fact, I would expect some types of SD boat to roll like pigs at anchor eg narrow beamed, round bilged Nelson type hulls
IMHO, whether a boat is comfortable at anchor is more about how wide a beam it has and how low it's CoG is. In fact, also IMHO, I would think that planing boats with their hard chined hulls should resist rolling at anchor quite well although nothing like as well as a heavy displacement yacht with a great big lump of keel beneath it
IMHO, whether a boat is comfortable at anchor is more about how wide a beam it has and how low it's CoG is. In fact, also IMHO, I would think that planing boats with their hard chined hulls should resist rolling at anchor quite well although nothing like as well as a heavy displacement yacht with a great big lump of keel beneath it
Gludy
Well-Known Member
I would not calim an SD boat is better at anchor - I think that is a red herring.
I would claim that an SD boat is far more comfortable underway - in particular with stabilisers.
I would also go for the stablisers that work at anchor - these require the gene to run but gene's on these boats are just a whipser in the background.
I would claim that an SD boat is far more comfortable underway - in particular with stabilisers.
I would also go for the stablisers that work at anchor - these require the gene to run but gene's on these boats are just a whipser in the background.
glenndraper
Well-Known Member
If i may be permitted - Inevitably when one pens a diary like this it is impossible to enter into minutia with regard to every point. My views are thus
1. Inactive stabilization as in : TRAC star by Arcturus marine ( www.thrusters.com) they require a small generator to run and make for a smoooooooth ride at anchor!
2. Mooring off: Yes mooring outside the marina ( watch the weather)
3. I would concur it is a matter of Time over cost of fuel and if you have the time why not enjoy the journey?
1. Inactive stabilization as in : TRAC star by Arcturus marine ( www.thrusters.com) they require a small generator to run and make for a smoooooooth ride at anchor!
2. Mooring off: Yes mooring outside the marina ( watch the weather)
3. I would concur it is a matter of Time over cost of fuel and if you have the time why not enjoy the journey?
Gludy
Well-Known Member
Glenn
Have you any idea what power the at rest stabilisers use?
I ask because it would seem sensible to me to have a second gene just for those plus say 3kw rather than have a large gene going all the time.
I would also add the point that on my last SD boat I could choose to go at about 9 knots and have great fuel consumption/range or go at 18 knots and have about the same fuel consumption as a planing boat at say 25 knots but a much better ride, even at these higher speeds.
Have you any idea what power the at rest stabilisers use?
I ask because it would seem sensible to me to have a second gene just for those plus say 3kw rather than have a large gene going all the time.
I would also add the point that on my last SD boat I could choose to go at about 9 knots and have great fuel consumption/range or go at 18 knots and have about the same fuel consumption as a planing boat at say 25 knots but a much better ride, even at these higher speeds.
glenndraper
Well-Known Member
Hi Paul yes it depends upon the size of TRAC star system you use however our idea is just as you say - have a small silent and very frugal generator to run the stabilization at rest and some other small ampage items so that when at rest we can run at minimum noise and max fuel saving!
wakeup
Well-Known Member
Indeed, don't some of the very large Azi's or Ferretti have an option for the gyroscopic stabilisers which work at anchor as well as underway. In which case this is surely the way to go in future???
Gludy
Well-Known Member
Yes - I think that is what I would go for plus say a 4kw inverter - that would mean most of the time underway the inverter would provide all the power needed and whilst at rest the small gene would cope with all but the exception.
What sort of heating will you be going for? I find that diesel heating saves the gene going on for long periods underway and so will have that as well as the reverse aircon on the next boat.
What sort of heating will you be going for? I find that diesel heating saves the gene going on for long periods underway and so will have that as well as the reverse aircon on the next boat.
Gludy
Well-Known Member
The gyroscope ones require major power and major structural design built into the boat from the outset. They are also very expensive.
My guess is that the Trac type system which dampens out the majority of the roll at rest is goinf to be the practical winning solution. I think it adds about £14k to the bill but Gelnn can confirm that.
My guess is that the Trac type system which dampens out the majority of the roll at rest is goinf to be the practical winning solution. I think it adds about £14k to the bill but Gelnn can confirm that.
wakeup
Well-Known Member
Isn't that because these boats are big, surely it would be possible to scale down the gyros for smaller boats lessening the power consumption and strucutural demands?
Gludy
Well-Known Member
IMHO the scaling down still requires a proportionally heavy structure - the whole blinkin boat is being controlled by a very fast spinning gyro - so yes scale down but for any given size of boat it still has to be designed into the structure of the boat.
glenndraper
Well-Known Member
Hi Paul - yes but remember when underway the stabilizer is hydraulic and is run by the engine.
No heating at all - in the med it is just not required - jan-march at night the reverse air works very well if required - this year for instance we have not used ANY heating as it has been an excellent nov,dec,jan,febMarch This April has been quit cold but we have not needed the heating.
No heating at all - in the med it is just not required - jan-march at night the reverse air works very well if required - this year for instance we have not used ANY heating as it has been an excellent nov,dec,jan,febMarch This April has been quit cold but we have not needed the heating.
Elza_Skip
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the report
Sounds a great day out and I am green with envy!
Sounds a great day out and I am green with envy!
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Not sure which part of the Med you're in but in Majorca we've used the aircon on reverse cycle heating plenty of times between Oct and March. If I was specifying a boat for liveaboard cruising in the Med, I would certainly specify diesel heating in case the aircon or gennie broke down and to save on using a noisy gennie or expensive electricity
DougH
Well-Known Member
Glenn,
It looks like you are the new ' Gludy '
Really good report, I'm sure it was spot on.
Doug
It looks like you are the new ' Gludy '
Really good report, I'm sure it was spot on.
Doug
andyball
Well-Known Member
http://www.venturaeurope.com/ARG.pdf
shows them fitted in varying locations, and although smallest is 1m x 600x560 ish & weighs 270Kg , I wd think can be retro'd given the space.
Anyone know how much they are?
shows them fitted in varying locations, and although smallest is 1m x 600x560 ish & weighs 270Kg , I wd think can be retro'd given the space.
Anyone know how much they are?
Gludy
Well-Known Member
Glenn
When underway i realise the stabilisers are driven by the engine power to the hydraulics - its just that if you want any serious heat you need the gene on unless you have diesel heating.
Another thing I would always build in now is a very good demisting system - the alterbatibe is a 1 kw fan heater driven by the inverter but a built in solution plus one of theose circlular windscreen wiper things are musts for my type of boating.
When underway i realise the stabilisers are driven by the engine power to the hydraulics - its just that if you want any serious heat you need the gene on unless you have diesel heating.
Another thing I would always build in now is a very good demisting system - the alterbatibe is a 1 kw fan heater driven by the inverter but a built in solution plus one of theose circlular windscreen wiper things are musts for my type of boating.
