Do you think that Fair Prin Seeker will start making slower boats

[paul salliss]

Having recently spent over 500 quid on fuel going from Hamble to Weymouth and back it made me think about whether it is likely that the above named manufacturers will start to make slower more economical boats, this is not a moan about cost of fuel, I love my boat and happy to pay for the running costs, but I was just thinking that I wander how sustainable it is for the industry to keep selling vessels that burn so much jungle juice. I know there are many other manufacturers out there and a wide choice but will we ever see a slower heavier Princess for example..........

 

[Nick_H]

Having recently spent over 500 quid on fuel going from Hamble to Weymouth and back it made me think about whether it is likely that the above named manufacturers will start to make slower more economical boats, this is not a moan about cost of fuel, I love my boat and happy to pay for the running costs, but I was just thinking that I wander how sustainable it is for the industry to keep selling vessels that burn so much jungle juice. I know there are many other manufacturers out there and a wide choice but will we ever see a slower heavier Princess for example..........

I think the most immediate change will be more boats fitted with stabilisers, so owners can vary their speed depending on how much time they have, and conditions at sea. Our gyro has transformed our cruising, and we now spend hours at displacement speed using the boat as if it were at anchor, rather than sitting at the helm the whole time.

Medium term, I think hull forms will change to be efficient and effective at a range of different speeds, rather than moving to low speed only. Azimut, who are a mainstream direct competitor to FairPrinSeeker, have already done this with the Magellano range, which is supposedly a hybrid between a round bilge displacement and a V hull, though i've never looked at it in any detail. I think the Brit builders will eventually do the same, and further down the line we'll see electric propulsion with the ability to run only the generator capacity you need at any given speed.

 

[henryf]

Having recently spent over 500 quid on fuel going from Hamble to Weymouth and back it made me think about whether it is likely that the above named manufacturers will start to make slower more economical boats, this is not a moan about cost of fuel, I love my boat and happy to pay for the running costs, but I was just thinking that I wander how sustainable it is for the industry to keep selling vessels that burn so much jungle juice. I know there are many other manufacturers out there and a wide choice but will we ever see a slower heavier Princess for example..........

They already do.

To engage frugal mode turn off one of your engines and place the other one in forward tickover position. In our 50 foot Princess that results in approximately 1.4 litres of fuel per nautical mile. You can keep both engines running if you want and have them both in forward tickover. On our boat that results in approximately 2.1 litres of fuel per nautical mile.

The problem is do you want to travel at 7 knots? With a favourable tide we've managed a little under 10 knots travelling like this which is realistic when time permits.

I'm not convinced that a displacement hull makes so much difference to how you feel when travelling at slower speeds in less than perfect conditions. A beam sea is still a beam sea. Slamming isn't the problem, rolling is and that's where stabilisation does offer a possible solution.

I agree that stabilisers are the way forward, particularly zero speed stabilisers. I don't have experience with them other than on a privateer steel boat at last years boat show when I'm not sure they were as effective as some others I've seen videos of. Ironically the displacement hull and construction might actually hinder stabiliser effectiveness.

Henry

 

[MapisM]

A beam sea is still a beam sea. Slamming isn't the problem, rolling is

Are you for real?
Slamming might not be such a huge issue in a beam sea, but in a head sea, slamming can even damage ships!
I could understand if you would argue that with a pleasure boat you don't go out in an F8 head sea anyway.
In fact, I also wouldn't, if given the choice.
But if that should happen, I know in which boat I'd rather be out there.

 

[henryf]

With planing boats you should hopefully not get caught out. You wont be at sea for 12 hours on a run to Cherbourg.

I'm talking normally experienced conditions.

If you want to set off across the Atlantic then it might be different.

Henry

 

[benjenbav]

If you want to set off across the Atlantic then it might be different.

I'd run out of fuel...

 

[Geoffs]

Having recently spent over 500 quid on fuel going from Hamble to Weymouth and back it made me think about whether it is likely that the above named manufacturers will start to make slower more economical boats, this is not a moan about cost of fuel, I love my boat and happy to pay for the running costs, but I was just thinking that I wander how sustainable it is for the industry to keep selling vessels that burn so much jungle juice. I know there are many other manufacturers out there and a wide choice but will we ever see a slower heavier Princess for example..........

Or go back to building smaller, I can do Hamble to Weymouth return for about £150 of fuel.

Maybe a Mexico 24, Princess 32, or Fairline 19?

OTOH, maybe Fairprinseeker customers not too worried about the cost of fuel.

 

[MapisM]

With planing boats you should hopefully not get caught out.

That was my point exactly, I agree with that. But not with the statement that slamming ain't a problem.
Slamming (lack of it, that is) remains THE reason why D boat ARE more comfy than P boats at any given size, even if stabilized.
And it doesn't take an ocean crossing to experience that.
I'm sure that anyone who had to return from Corsica to SoF with a bit of Mistral knows perfectly what I mean.
And even if I don't have any first hand experience, I very much doubt that you don't have plenty of similar conditions, if not worse, all around the Old Blighty...

 

[henryf]

Smaller boats may be more economic but they aren't as safe in open seas and only provide limited accommodation. There are lots of people building smaller boats and making a fine job of it so I don't see the sense in the big 3 trying to muscle in.

Back to this slamming. If I travel at displacement speed with my sharp pointy hull which cuts nicely into the water softening the impact how will the displacement hull help?

The economy (which was the initial point raised) is already there if you want it. The issue is how often you choose to use it.

Henry

 

[sarabande]

has anyone tried to make a hull which changes shape ? Lots of cars and aircraft do it with stabilisers and wings.

Just a thought...

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I do think that all the Brit builders with the exception of possibly Hardy and Aquastar are missing out on what you might call the trawler yacht market. Its no so much boats that are capable of displacement speeds, as has been pointed out by other posters planing boats are perfectly capable of displacement speeds with stabilisers, its just that IMHO an increasing number of motor boaters are looking for a different style of boating, less in your face planing gin palaces and more practical bluewater style boats. As has already been pointed out, Azimut recognised this market with their Magellano range and so have Beneteau with their highly successful ST trawler yacht range and Jeanneau are getting in on the act now. There are established players in this market too like Grand Banks and Fleming but their stratospheric pricing puts their boats out of range for many. IMHO there are many 50-60 something baby boomers out there who've had planing boats but are now reaching a time in their lives when they can afford to spend extended periods on their boats and are looking for a more practical style of boating. That's not to say they want an out and out displacement boat, but they do want a boat thats comfortable at displacement speeds and most planing boats don't deliver in terms of easy movement around the boat, useable galleys, good engine access and general storage space. So, come on FairPrinSeeker, maybe there's a market for boats other than planing gin palaces

 

[vas]

has anyone tried to make a hull which changes shape ? Lots of cars and aircraft do it with stabilisers and wings.

Just a thought...

doubt in this backdoor garage industry, but would be interesting to know!

and slightly offtopic (not too much so wont apologise ):

Which part of the hull defines hull speed?
We know it's waterline length, but what if I could slide/secure/whatever "material" on either side from transom backwards for another couple of meters??? Would that be sufficient to pump up the hull speed??? or do I need a full sealed tub of an extension aft?
What if a retractable barel thingy wotsit appears in the front altering the bow layout and as described in a thread a couple of weeks ago, would improve waterflow and add a few knots on the hull speed???
Latter could be done with an unfolding bow section so a planning hull aquires a tanker shaped bow.

probably talking bull...

V.

 

[Portofino]

The OP,s original Q -no I think the direction in a global market is onwards and upwards for SS and Prin.
Fairline are landlocked ( stuck @ 80ft ) so for them to stay solvent then maybe cos they have no alternative reinvigorate the sub 45 ft market with seeming fuel efficient planners .

This brings me round to outdrives and IPS ( which basically is the same idea reversed arround - beefed up to carry more HP )
I have been carping on about fuel burn for ages , but nobodies listening - there are loads of " fuel cripples " on shafts in every marina , or if out going at D speed .
Prin do a V 45 on outdrives 370 hp D6 .To me that's the way to go or IPS for larger stuff .
As the OP has found - -why burn more than you have to?
I think all this talk about D speed in a Boat designed for P ( with stabs to cross compensate for a stable ride ) tells me people are literary being crucified at the pumps

 

[paul salliss]

Deleted User, I 100 percent aggree with you!

 

[stelican]

I believe bayliner hulls change shape in a seaway

 

[MapisM]

Back to this slamming. If I travel at displacement speed with my sharp pointy hull which cuts nicely into the water softening the impact how will the displacement hull help?

LOL, U must be joking!?!
Because your pointy hull is NOT sharp at all, and does NOT cut into the water.
It's actually designed to achieve an exactly opposite objective, i.e. LIFTING the boat above the liquid stuff, rather than cutting through it.
If and when you'll have the opportunity to look carefully at the bow of some proper trawler, you'll see that the difference is so obvious that it's not even worth trying to explain it.

 

[MedMilo]

A couple of months ago someone very closely connected to Fairline said to me that they are working on some trawler style semi-d type designs - will be very interesting to see whether they pull it off. In terms of contemporary design and layout I think the mainstream British builders are leagues ahead of any of the semi displacement and displacement builders. If they bring out a range of Fleming style boats but with Sq 65 layout and style I reckon they'll clean up!

 

[PowerYachtBlog]

LOL, U must be joking!?!
Because your pointy hull is NOT sharp at all, and does NOT cut into the water.
It's actually designed to achieve an exactly opposite objective, i.e. LIFTING the boat above the liquid stuff, rather than cutting through it.
If and when you'll have the opportunity to look carefully at the bow of some proper trawler, you'll see that the difference is so obvious that it's not even worth trying to explain it.

for once I have to disagree with you Mapis from a certain PoV but not totally....
a planning hull bow is made to cut the water/ waves but it is not made to make this at displacement speeds... (may be u meant this)
In my perspective and my knowledge I also think a full displacement bow does not really cut the water, especially later bulb designs, but are more made to open it softly in a certain way. This is sometimes different in some TUG boat designs with high power but in most cases, I would not consider displacement hull of most yachts as cutting the water.

IMO unless it is calm sea planing boats are uncomfortable at slow speeds, you need to get them on the hump, and if its rough you more need to do this, even tough at the lower planing range. Or else the hull want be working as intended.

It will be interesting what Fairline will come up with and if they are ready to do it, and jump in this trend as the Azimut Magellano. The problem here is that you have to see the perspective in sale. Explorer yachts from 15 - 23.9 meters have a global market share of about 7% at the moment, with a growth of about 0.4% per year in the last 5 years. Interestingly under 15 meters the numbers is a bit higher, mostly due to the US market where these kind of boats are pretty popular even in small sizes.

Just to make into perspective Sport Yachts in the same size where growing at 3% from 2000 to 2005, and the Azimut S range, Sunseeker Predators, and Pershing where among the greater holders of this percentage. But the first was definitely a game changer, when they presented the 68S in 2003, selling like 50 in the first 6 months. Today SPort Open Yachts hold 25% of motor yacht market share from about 12% back in 2000...

 

[grumpy_o_g]

has anyone tried to make a hull which changes shape ? Lots of cars and aircraft do it with stabilisers and wings.

Just a thought...

Hydrofoils do sort of, in that they lift the hull clear of the water - which is the medium the boat travels in - a planing hull does the same thing to a lesser extent.

Other than that trim tabs on power boats (broadly analogous to flaps on an aircraft?), lifting keels on yachts and even trimming a drive down will change the shape of the hull in the water. Beyond that what would you change the shape too? I guess you could increase the waterline length of a planing hull to increase it's displacement speed or deepen a vee in rough weather and flatten it in smooth seas but you'd be stuck with the smallest volume of all configurations for accommodation.

I guess a submarine is more analogous to an aircraft, as it's flying through the water as the opposed to floating on it. Aircraft only change the shape of the lifting surface, which doesn't have accommodation it.

 

[MapisM]

for once I have to disagree with you Mapis from a certain PoV but not totally....
a planning hull bow is made to cut the water/ waves but it is not made to make this at displacement speeds...

Hang on a minute W, this is an oxymoron.
At P speed, by definition you're not cutting the water at all.
Don't mistake the fact that you still need to dampen the impact with the waves (and the faster the speed, the higher such need - which lead to deep-V hull design), with the need to cut THROUGH the water.
Even with the P hulls which are best known for being able to take substantial waves without falling apart (like Magnum, Itama, etc.), the name of the game is still LIFTING, rather than cutting through.
The deep V is in fact meant to better absorb vertical, rather than horizontal impacts - though arguably all wave impacts in a boat are actually diagonal, but you see what I mean.

Otoh, D hulls (and also SD to some extent, though there are big differences in this category) are bound to be optimized to cut through the water, because that's what they do at all time - and this is true also for the bulbous bow designs.
Now, if you prefer to call this hydrodynamic effect "opening gently" the water rather than "cutting through" it, that's more a matter of semantic than anything else.
At the end of the day, what really matters is the net effect in terms of "slamming" (which was the point that started this debate).
To simplify, let's think of the boats which typically have the most optimized D hulls: those with a funny mast on top of them. And let's not consider the effect of the flappy stuff normally attached to it, but just their behaviour when motoring.
Now, I'm sure you'll agree that with P mobos, while cruising at D speed in a head sea, for any given hull length and sea conditions, the slamming is always a multiple of what you would experience with a sailboat.
Up to the point that in some sea conditions, the sustainable speed with a sailboat can be even a bit higher than with a P boat, unless you don't mind having all its interiors falling apart!