Bow & Stern Thrusters

[Gludy]

In considering my new boat of 46 to 52 foot in length, I have to ensure that just myself and the other half can manage the boat through locks, close berthing etc.

All the boats I am lookinmg at have bow thrusters but my current intention is to fit a stern thruster as well/ This would allow me to eaily hold the boat against the locks sides, and give ease of manouvering that the other half very much wants.

I know I can use the bow thruster to bring the front in and one engine to say help bring the back in but in doing one engine you will still be moving the boat back as well as in. So it must be easier for the crew if the skipper can control these movements from the helm and manage marina movements even in windy conditions without all the hassles.

The above is my theory - has anyone any comments on this? Any experience?


Paul

 

[qsiv]

I always found that I could move the stern around at will (assuming twins on shafts), without a thruster and without moving fore/aft - all you need is touch astern on one engine.

My old Nelson had no thrusters but could easily be walked sideways on engines and rudders, even pushing her upwind - but we were blessed with lowish superstructure and deepish keels.

Having said that a thruster would make life easier!

 

[adrianm]

On my new boat (57ft) I've got a bow thruster and a stern thruster, but then I've only got one engine rather than two.

You don't really need one with two engines but then they're not that expensive and if they make the boat easier to handle (and hence more fun) whynot have one anyway?

 

[DepSol]

You should easily be able to keep the stern in without thrusters just using the engines whilst holding the bow in with the thruster.

Just down to a bit of practice really.

Dom

Merry xmas and a happy new year

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Bow thruster - nigh on essential whatever the luddites say but a I've never seen the point of a stern thruster on a twin engined boat. You still have to be at the helm to operate it so you might as well hold the stern in using the engines. Much better to spend your money on something truly useful like a huge flat screen telly

 

[Tiger Rag]

I would agree with most of the replies already posted, IMO twin engines and a bowthruster should be more than adequate for close quarter control. I would say you would be better served by spending the extra money increasing the horsepower of the bowthruster and/or upgrading/fitting decent capstans to take the hard work out of line handling.

 

[Gludy]

I am used to hnadling an almost 40 foot boat without any thrusters of any kind.

There are times however when I am very near to another boat and the wind catches me, when a thruster would come in very handy.

I realise that I can come syainto the lock and put my bow up, secure bow and then just touch the one engine to swing her around.

Normally I would come in with the stern first because it is much easier for my other half to secure from their first, then touch the outside engine to bring the bow in BUT if you are just touching one engine to bring the bow in, there is also a forward movement from that touch.

It seems much easier to be able to just use bow and stern thusters to hold the whole boat against the lock - that keeps the other half happy - she gets nervous more about that than when she helmed us through a load of 15 foot waves ( I really mean the 15 foot with the whole boat out of the water at times).

With winds I have been caught in very tight spots with very little fore or aft movement allowed and needed to get out - the thought of being able to creep sideays without any fore/aft movement would be very nice.

The cost has to be balanced against the stress suffered by the missus - hence stress onto me. Do not forget, now matter how many times I claim to be the skipper , there is only one person that thinks that only means when she allows me to be - hence orders shouted quickly from the flybridge in a tight situation to secure us now! - are often returned with comments that I should shout in a nicer style rather than actually getting us secure. In fact watching the women doing the crewing in the lock and the marital stress suffered by so many at that point would be highly amusing if it never happned to me.

In any event there is a move afoot to get hera nice new sports car - this move only started after we decided to get another boat. To counter this I am building up a spec that means we will have nowt left for such things as a car. Stern thrusters are all part of a very complex juggling act.

Two thrusters do allow me more control and given the experiences of my first 18 months boating, with crews making all sorts of mooring up mistakes, it seems worth the little it costs to give me the ability to hold the boat firmly against the mooring, even in wind. I am surprised more boats do not have them.



Paul

 

[stefan_r]

I have a bow thruster (fitted about 12 months ago) and would not be without it!!! I totally agree with your comments about stress free - I have found that I hven't used it a lot but when I have it has been worth the cash....bit like a spare tyre - when you need it you need 100% of it.

Thought for you though - what hp are you going to go for at the back - it has a lot of sterngear and cabin windage to move so I suppose it should be x% higher rated than up front??? Or are youjust going to go for as big as possile at both ends and be a bit careful?

Cheers
Stefan

mailto: stefan@athito.com

 

[Guest]

I have a Princess 430 fitted with bow and stern thrusters. Make's live a lot easier when trying to berth in close quarters with a wind going. Was in French canals last year and the stern thruster was a must when moving to the side of the canal to let oncoming barges pass, far less fraught using the thrusters to move to the side than then props, the canal sides slope and its all too easy to damage a prop. I'd certainly have another fitted when I change. Boatings for pleasure.