Boat in build pics (2013 Fairline Squadron 78)

[jfm]

• For starters the pillar (which I fully agree with MM should finish straight on the f/b ending!) to step support is NOT taking the forces as elegantly as it could
• I don't particularly like the ss bottom of each step (sorry I know it's good and clean but not imho structurally necessary!)
• the short bit of pillar sized section supporting each step is... I don't know how to describe it! (er, structurally necessary but otoh visually bulky)

Regarding the main cabin windows, do they really really need the 50mm strip of grp between them??? Why don't they scrap these bits and you get a nice massive window whatever shape you wish (moreorless!) and you get some nice thin/much stronger than GRP steel/alloy frame supports painted black or whatever so that they don't visually interfere that much? I guess again they'll be happier to do that come M3

the 30mm ducts are they blocked on the ends if not used to avoid fumes passing from e/r to cabins fe?

The stairs are mostly my design so all these things are just choices - each to their own.

Ref "elegantly" I dont know what alternative you propose? I guess you mean the short RHS should be more vertical? I chose the design deliberately; it is way stronger/stiffer than is needed to take the cantilevered forces so it's all about aesthetics. I wanted the intersection between the two RHS parts to be 90deg; I dont think an acute angle would look good. The cantilevered RHS is smaller size: 100x50 compared with 120 x 60 for the main spine, to make the interface between the 2 RHS sections nicer (imho)

Ref the full size s/s plate underneath. You can't have no plate, and a half sized plate would look bad imho. Hence the full sized plate. The edge of the s/s plate is hidden by the teak nosing on the steps being made 3mm higher to form a short skirt aound the edge of the s/s plate. Each plate is laser cut to make cut out for the LED down lighting.

I also like the simple/minimalist design of the short bits of RHS I thought about bits of bent round tube and laser cut plate but it was all too fussy and I prefer the simplicity of RHS laid the "wrong" way round. I'd be v interested to hear of alternatives that you'd prefer though. My #2 choice btw was two short parallel and close together lengths of 25 dia round tube

Finally the 50mm of GRP showing outside the boat between the big windows is just an aesthetic choice by Fairline. It could be deleted or painted black but i think it looks ok. The inside 120mm or so mullion is an engineering necessity for these windows. The next big thing will be mullionless big windows which Princess have just started using. This is ambitious engineering and I hope they work well for Princesss then catch on with other builders

The flow rate of fumes (the e/r actually has/should have virtually no fumes) through a long 30mm duct is tiny but yes it is taped up both ends

 

[jfm]

Christ, they've made good progress this week!

If it doesn't have triple front cabin windows Petem it aint Match2

 

[Elessar]

If it doesn't have triple front cabin windows Petem it aint Match2

I suppose the square corners of the windows aren't a weakness because they are bonded in?

 

[jfm]

Here's a bit of an update on hardware installed/about to be installed.

The three pics below show a stabiliser unit close up, then being craned into its final position, and the guy underneath holding the bolt heads. These are again Sleipner stabilisers which are beautifully made equipment and a great choice imho, with underway and zero speed functionality. They will have 1m sq fins made in one piece, with winglets. I might not get the top Garfield sticker from MM - we can agree to differ

Next is the lower dash. Not finished, obviously. Front view, back view, then a close up of the N2k backbone

This next shot is the isol transformer. It's a double unit, with 100Amps total current per transformer ie 200A total. Bit of a monster bit of kit but makes the boat not attached electrically to the dock, ie that 200Amps sort of passes through air. This is a very nice bit of gear and is standard spec on sq78

Below are the two gensets. Cummins Onan. 22.5kva each ie about 100Amps; 3.3litre engine, 1500rpm. In this size category much nicer than the equiv models from Kohler and Northern lights imho)

Pic below are of the Sleipner hydraulic pack that runs the bow and stern thrusters plus stabs

Finally, the three pics below show the custom 3rd fuel tank, 1300 litres, that will go under the master cabin bed

 

[jfm]

I suppose the square corners of the windows aren't a weakness because they are bonded in?

Yep. The only thing that would be weakened is the hull not the actual window panels, but the hull has a (small) hidden radius on the inside plus huge reinforcement by virtue of the return/rebate that is something like 20mm deep and made of thick GRP, and then after the rebate you have the flange onto which the glue/window go. No real chance of a corner crack a la Comet airplanes.

 

[jfm]

Below are two factory pics from Friday, of the flybridge deck now lifted onto the superstructure

 

[burgundyben]

Finally, the three pics below show the custom 3rd fuel tank, 1300 litres, that will go under the master cabin bed

Will you use that tank to replenish others? Or run the engines from that one? Is there a fuel cooler on the returns? Or not an issue?

 

[kashurst]

absolutely stunning - especially the windows
thanks for posting

 

[jfm]

Will you use that tank to replenish others? Or run the engines from that one? Is there a fuel cooler on the returns? Or not an issue?

It has a million valves plus a diagram so any of the 4 engines can draw from any tank and return to any tank. My default is to draw from 1200litre tank (which is central and lower), leave the 3 balance pipes open, and return port /stbd gen/engine fuel to port/starboard main tanks respectively. But that is down to choice

The Cat C32 engines have integral seawater return fuel coolers which are handy. 6 tonnes of hot fuel would be a PITA and the seawater coolers (27deg seawater) probably get it down to say 35-40 deg (at a guess). Remember, the specific heat capacity of fuel is double that of cast iron so 6 tonnes of hot fuel is much more of a nuisance than 6 tonnes of hot cast iron (though that is bad enough!)

 

[rafiki_]

JFM, so there is a very long run of hydraulic piping to the Bow? How long? Does the thruster require high pressure or lot of mass flow? What does the FMECA say?

 

[ash12]

Are these all remote shut off valves?

 

[jfm]

Are these all remote shut off valves?

yup, one for each engine and genset

 

[jfm]

JFM, so there is a very long run of hydraulic piping to the Bow? How long? Does the thruster require high pressure or lot of mass flow? What does the FMECA say?

About 18m to the bowthruster (25hp) and anchor winch (maybe 2hp). From memory (of Match1's dash displays) the thruster runs at about 190 bar; the sleipner digital screens on both fly and lower helm give a read out. I don't know the flow rate. 18m feels kinda nowt, compared with say a crane jib etc or the hydraulic pipe runs in ships.

I don't think the 18m run per se adds anything to the fmeca. As regards fmeca generally (a) the human injury side of a fail seems low risk as hoses are mostly the other side of a thick panel from a human and (b) the navigational consequences are mere inconvenience. As regards criticality, none of the hydraulics is properly critical (even the anchor can be hauled up electrically), so again we're in the realms of mere inconvenience

Sleipner's hydraulics have:
1. full diagnostics - oil level, oil pressure, oil temp all on both dash displays;
2. various alarms at dashes with memory log of alarm events with full text display on touchscreen;
3. hierarchy algorithms in the event of say pressure weakness (thrusters take precedence over fins);
4. ability to operate any or all hydraulic valves manually by valve levers in e/room if the contol circuity fails;
5. ability to isolate one fin and use the other;
6. restriction gauges on the hydraulic oil filters;
7. Three prime power sources any one of which can keep the party going singlehanded (2x engine PTOs plus 1 x electric pump fed by either of 2 gensets);
8. fins made in one piece so no centreline joint like others.
9. Sight gauge oil level meter as well as electronic

I know MapisM says that Sleipners can't be as good as the other brands but that is one helluva hydraulic spec for a leisure boat

 

[Wandering Star]

I'm impressed enough by this boat that me and my grandson have drawn up rough plans lifted off all the pix you've posted over the last few weeks. We're just about ready to start building an almost identical boat in my garage. How long do you think we should allow for the build bearing in mind i can only spend weekends on it? Also, in your opinion do you think it will affect the seaworthiness if we give the underwater lighting a miss?

Cheers, Brian.

 

[MapisM]

Also the traffic lights system is good - being Italian I suppose that means you can go on red?

LOL, yeah, but! I'm afraid that the fat cat, not being Italian, has rather strict principles, you know...

With a perfectly straight spine the bottom step would eat up more deck space (for the same angle, which is a non negotiable number in my book becuase they are horrible if too steep).

Understood/agreed, but... wasn't that another good reason for keeping the same spine structure of the internal stair?
Not only the last step would have been fully consistent with the rest of the stair, but you could have got rid of the separate RHS for each step.

Hull windows: each to their own - they look good from outside imho, pic below I take your point on the interior view but with respect you are missing the point: with massive hull windows you're looking at the sea (100X better than thru small windows) not the window frames

Naah, there's just no way that a hull like the Sq78, with all those square holes, can look good. They shout "afterthought" from any distance.
And even if of course it's hard to argue against the "each to their own" principle, I honestly doubt that even at FL they aren't aware that their flagship would deserve something more consistent and carefully designed - though I understand that this would probably require (even more) expensive and radical mould modifications.
Re. the interior, I perfectly see the point, but what I'm saying is that when you want to look at the sea, you're actually seeing the (train-reminding) window frames, no matter what you look at...

I know MapisM scoffs that Sleipners can't be as good as Naiad but fact is the new kids on the block in this case are better than the old guys. I'm sure you'll agree that the foregoing is one helluva spec for a leisure boat

Actually, for zero stabs, nowadays I'd go for ABT rather than Naiad, whilst I'd be happy with both for non-zero speed stabs.
Anyway, I never argued against Sleipner specs. Even without any first hand experience, I have no reason to think that they aren't as effective as their competitors, based also on your reports.
In fact, coming to think of it, I've yet to find ANY fin stabs which don't do their job satisfactorily.
What I said is that stabs are a very critical bit of kit, with their flappy parts spending the whole life in saltwater, big shafts perpendicularly going through holes in the boat bottom (which is the opposite of what anyone would desire on a hull, based on common sense alone), very high pressure hoses and hot oil running around the boat, etc.
This means that effectiveness is the second parameter, in my priorities.
The first is proven reliability. And by proven, I mean measured neither in months nor years, but decades.
And no "new kids on the block", by definition, can offer that - no matter which products you're talking about.
Therefore, typically the NKOTB, in a market where the existing players already offer good products, must either bring:
1) breakthrough innovations (e.g. Dyson), or
2) lower prices.
I'm not sure if (2) is true with Sleipner stabs, but I don't think it can be a helluva difference anyway, so probably not enough to become more relevant than the first priority as above.
And re. (1), aside from the fact that I'd rather be a guinea pig with a vacuum cleaner than with a critical boat equipment, I don't see any major improvement really worth calling home about.
The dynamic centerline? The supposedly more hydrodinamic winglets? Or the (future, as I understand) rudders integration?
We already discussed all that, and IIRC we agreed that actual improvements - if any - would hardly be above measurable limits...

 

[Nick_H]

I'm impressed enough by this boat that me and my grandson have drawn up rough plans lifted off all the pix you've posted over the last few weeks. We're just about ready to start building an almost identical boat in my garage. How long do you think we should allow for the build bearing in mind i can only spend weekends on it? Also, in your opinion do you think it will affect the seaworthiness if we give the underwater lighting a miss?

Cheers, Brian.

Given your proposed build method, I think underwater lighting is essential, as your boat will be spending most of its time there

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I don't think the 18m run per se adds anything to the fmeca. As regards fmeca generally (a) the human injury side of a fail seems low risk as hoses are mostly the other side of a thick panel from a human

Yes you're right. The pressure loss over 18m is not significant but safety is a consideration. Hot hydraulic oil at 190bar can be very hazardous. I don't know who's doing the hydraulic installation but you might want to ask some questions about the spec of the hydraulic hoses and couplings. Also ensure that the hoses are properly secured and where they run through bulkheads, that they cannot chafe due to movement of the boat or when they are in use

 

[jfm]

Hi MapisM
I did think hard about using the same zig zag stairs outside as inside but ultimately I prefered the straight spine look outside. It is more minimal. Also, the inside stiars are intrinsically less stiff which is ok inside because you sort of move down them more slowly plus the height span is about 6 or 7 steps compared with 2 or 3 more outside

As mentioned above there is one other s78 (now in USA W Coast) built with this type of stair, last year. Pics below. I think this was a fine job but the owners made different choices from me: they used square not rectangular section; about 80 not 90 deg joint twixt main spine and short cantilevers which has its pros and cons; straight spine with same bottom landing point as normal stairs therefore too steep for me (I have walked up and down them) but their owners chose this because they wanted the furniture rack underneath (pics2+3 below) which i would never have; handrail should be round not rectangle section imho; handrail lands on bottom step too far aft imho; no downlighting. In the 3rd pic below, the 2nd step from top, ie the one above the fire extinguisher, will be around 200mm further forward on my boat hence making them significantly less steep (bottom of stairs is in same position)

But moving away from the details the first pic below shows the general look that mine will have, which I like. It will also look good at night with LED down lighting (I'm using the Osram LED fittings made in Denmark by Cabin that shoot 4 pencil streaks of light downwards; same as interior stairs). 4th pic below is mine, for easy comparison

Happy to disagree on hull windows . I like them. Much we prefer trains to boats, fact is trains have better viewing windows than boats (if only the view were as nice as the sea...). BTW it is not expensive in mould tooling to change windows - they are just blocks on the inside of the main mould and can be changed any time for € peanuts

And happy to disagree a bit on stabiliser NKOTB stuff. To be fair most of the components are catalogue items made by the big manufacturers (hydraulics by Rexroth; bearings by SKF, hoses in my case by Phoenix; and so on) hence the absence of years and years of testing isn't the issue you say, imho. The floating centreline is however an improvement worth calling home about, at least on a P boat - the fuel/range benefits are definitely worth having

 

[jfm]

Yes you're right. The pressure loss over 18m is not significant but safety is a consideration. Hot hydraulic oil at 190bar can be very hazardous. I don't know who's doing the hydraulic installation but you might want to ask some questions about the spec of the hydraulic hoses and couplings. Also ensure that the hoses are properly secured and where they run through bulkheads, that they cannot chafe due to movement of the boat or when they are in use

Yup, all agreed. Scuse my ignorance Deleted User, but what temp will the oil typically be at when the thing is running in steady state? There is a seawater oil cooler in the system, pic below

 

[rafiki_]

LOL, yeah, but! I'm afraid that the fat cat, not being Italian, has rather strict principles, you know...


Understood/agreed, but... wasn't that another good reason for keeping the same spine structure of the internal stair?
Not only the last step would have been fully consistent with the rest of the stair, but you could have got rid of the separate RHS for each step.


Naah, there's just no way that a hull like the Sq78, with all those square holes, can look good. They shout "afterthought" from any distance.
And even if of course it's hard to argue against the "each to their own" principle, I honestly doubt that even at FL they aren't aware that their flagship would deserve something more consistent and carefully designed - though I understand that this would probably require (even more) expensive and radical mould modifications.
Re. the interior, I perfectly see the point, but what I'm saying is that when you want to look at the sea, you're actually seeing the (train-reminding) window frames, no matter what you look at...


Actually, for zero stabs, nowadays I'd go for ABT rather than Naiad, whilst I'd be happy with both for non-zero speed stabs.
Anyway, I never argued against Sleipner specs. Even without any first hand experience, I have no reason to think that they aren't as effective as their competitors, based also on your reports.
In fact, coming to think of it, I've yet to find ANY fin stabs which don't do their job satisfactorily.
What I said is that stabs are a very critical bit of kit, with their flappy parts spending the whole life in saltwater, big shafts perpendicularly going through holes in the boat bottom (which is the opposite of what anyone would desire on a hull, based on common sense alone), very high pressure hoses and hot oil running around the boat, etc.
This means that effectiveness is the second parameter, in my priorities.
The first is proven reliability. And by proven, I mean measured neither in months nor years, but decades.
And no "new kids on the block", by definition, can offer that - no matter which products you're talking about.
Therefore, typically the NKOTB, in a market where the existing players already offer good products, must either bring:
1) breakthrough innovations (e.g. Dyson), or
2) lower prices.
I'm not sure if (2) is true with Sleipner stabs, but I don't think it can be a helluva difference anyway, so probably not enough to become more relevant than the first priority as above.
And re. (1), aside from the fact that I'd rather be a guinea pig with a vacuum cleaner than with a critical boat equipment, I don't see any major improvement really worth calling home about.
The dynamic centerline? The supposedly more hydrodinamic winglets? Or the (future, as I understand) rudders integration?
We already discussed all that, and IIRC we agreed that actual improvements - if any - would hardly be above measurable limits...

JFM! My FMECA would focus more on the connectors, hose clippings, noise paths, etc, so in the event of failure, your less likely to have a massive problem. I recognise that failure of the system itself is not mission critical, unless a stab fin clocks something spectacular, and the rod sealing fails.