Dyflin
Well-Known Member
She looks tough /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif
Fisher 46 - First in 15 years!
- Thread starter Matteeboy
- Start date
machurley22
Well-Known Member
The round window is an interesting styling detail but the wheelhouse must be a wonderful space.
Something about it reminded me of another famous greyhouse.
Something about it reminded me of another famous greyhouse.
ShipsWoofy
Well-Known Member
I am coming around to the Hans Christian, but to be honest I prefer the wheelhouse of the Fisher, more 'British' maybe. As an ex-fisherman (boy..skivvy), I love the fishers and the like. The yacht that Ken cooo'd at earlier, I just don't get it, nice boat n all that, but if there was a fisher nearby I would be gaping at that.
I have to say I prefer the standard layout on the 46, I like the full walk around deck the earlier boats had, I can't be doing with up and down decks. Compared to the fisher, the Hans Christian does not 'look' as tough, she may very well be, but she is somewhere between a yacht and a trawler whereas the fisher is somewhere between a trawler and yacht. I could imagine the fisher would tow quite nicely, I wonder if they would put a gantry on her?
OTOH, the Hans wheelhouse inside is very much larger, I have been looking at both and just can't make my mind up on this. I don't like the idea of 'living' in the wheelhouse, I sort of prefer that to be more functional. Living up there I imagine attracts clutter in the hub of the boat. It would also need dainty curtains in the wheelhouse, of a trawler? The round port holes though, most unfortunately are what makes me squint, though I am sure cutting them out and fitting square windows should not be too difficult, the ones in the stern are fine.
The one thing the hans does have in common with the fisher, there are none for sale. Well, actually there is/was one fisher on the market. If I go this way it will mean leaving the housing market, so bigger is better, maybe seeing both boats back to back is in order.
anyway, I should be dreaming in bed not in here, night night.
I have to say I prefer the standard layout on the 46, I like the full walk around deck the earlier boats had, I can't be doing with up and down decks. Compared to the fisher, the Hans Christian does not 'look' as tough, she may very well be, but she is somewhere between a yacht and a trawler whereas the fisher is somewhere between a trawler and yacht. I could imagine the fisher would tow quite nicely, I wonder if they would put a gantry on her?
OTOH, the Hans wheelhouse inside is very much larger, I have been looking at both and just can't make my mind up on this. I don't like the idea of 'living' in the wheelhouse, I sort of prefer that to be more functional. Living up there I imagine attracts clutter in the hub of the boat. It would also need dainty curtains in the wheelhouse, of a trawler? The round port holes though, most unfortunately are what makes me squint, though I am sure cutting them out and fitting square windows should not be too difficult, the ones in the stern are fine.
The one thing the hans does have in common with the fisher, there are none for sale. Well, actually there is/was one fisher on the market. If I go this way it will mean leaving the housing market, so bigger is better, maybe seeing both boats back to back is in order.
anyway, I should be dreaming in bed not in here, night night.
Rob_Webb
Well-Known Member
Another thing about HC's is that it's very easy to plan passages, you just work on an average speed of 4kts. In fact you can simply plaster a "4.0 kts" sticker over the log and be done with it. And another saving, you don't need a GPS either cos with typical brisk UK tides you'll actually never move over the ground. Easy.
Matteeboy
Well-Known Member
Wingdiver - very nice indeed!
Once the sails are back (being slightly re-done), we'll get her tested in various mags. I'm sure their photos will be a little better than my blurred 2MP phone camera efforts!
Once the sails are back (being slightly re-done), we'll get her tested in various mags. I'm sure their photos will be a little better than my blurred 2MP phone camera efforts!
wingdiver
Well-Known Member
Rob_webb, do you know what an earth are you talking about?!
Examples from this year -
We did Fox's to Burnham Yacht Harbour (48 miles I think) in five and a quarter hours, tide assisted a bit of the way.
The 120 miles across to Holland recently took 16 hours including two locks, the 130 mile return in 15 and a quarter including one lock.
Work that out if you can!!
Motoring, we do 7kts at 1300rpm. Max rpm is 2100!
Some people!
Examples from this year -
We did Fox's to Burnham Yacht Harbour (48 miles I think) in five and a quarter hours, tide assisted a bit of the way.
The 120 miles across to Holland recently took 16 hours including two locks, the 130 mile return in 15 and a quarter including one lock.
Work that out if you can!!
Motoring, we do 7kts at 1300rpm. Max rpm is 2100!
Some people!
wingdiver
Well-Known Member
Hi
I have to beg to differ about the clutter thing. We live on board and it is fine.
That said, some of our sisteships have the galley down below.
If you want to see more about the HC44 there is a lot of information here
As for rarity, you are right. There were only 15 HC44s made. Not that many more Fisher 46s.
If you are ever over in the East, feel free to give us a shout.
I have to beg to differ about the clutter thing. We live on board and it is fine.
That said, some of our sisteships have the galley down below.
If you want to see more about the HC44 there is a lot of information here
As for rarity, you are right. There were only 15 HC44s made. Not that many more Fisher 46s.
If you are ever over in the East, feel free to give us a shout.
Rob_Webb
Well-Known Member
We can all cite occasional exceptional examples of great average speed passages.
But my comments are based on:
1. Sailing on HCs
2. Friends who have cruised on them and would never do so again because of the speed issue. They regarded the trade-off between speed and solidity as well beyond the tipping point - they would much rather have an extra 2-3 kts boatspeed to get to the next destination ahead of the storm, rather than be built like a tank in readiness to be stuck out in it. Ask your wife/partner which option she would prefer!
And from HC discussion forums discussing HC 38s:
"We were sailing in 10 knots and under and were easily hitting 5 knots closed hauled under full sail (almost makes me want to do some racing so I can learn to trim like he does)."
"Dave, What kind of head sail do you have? Right now I only have a Yankee and can not make anywhere near that speed with the wind so low."
etc
etc
Maybe I was being a bit harsh at the 4kts quip. Maybe it's closer to 5. But beating in 10kts of true wind I would expect any decent passage-making 38 foot cruiser to be seeing a log reading of 7kts+ depending on seastate and generating a corresponding 16-17kts over the deck.
But my comments are based on:
1. Sailing on HCs
2. Friends who have cruised on them and would never do so again because of the speed issue. They regarded the trade-off between speed and solidity as well beyond the tipping point - they would much rather have an extra 2-3 kts boatspeed to get to the next destination ahead of the storm, rather than be built like a tank in readiness to be stuck out in it. Ask your wife/partner which option she would prefer!
And from HC discussion forums discussing HC 38s:
"We were sailing in 10 knots and under and were easily hitting 5 knots closed hauled under full sail (almost makes me want to do some racing so I can learn to trim like he does)."
"Dave, What kind of head sail do you have? Right now I only have a Yankee and can not make anywhere near that speed with the wind so low."
etc
etc
Maybe I was being a bit harsh at the 4kts quip. Maybe it's closer to 5. But beating in 10kts of true wind I would expect any decent passage-making 38 foot cruiser to be seeing a log reading of 7kts+ depending on seastate and generating a corresponding 16-17kts over the deck.
wingdiver
Well-Known Member
I am afraid I find your remarks bizzare.
I was quoting from actual passages. The trips across the North Sea were over a time scale and in a direction where tide makes no odds and were the only ones of note since the boat was re-rigged.
I suppose you think I would be better off in a 'racing boat' - if you want to start throwing stones at people for thieir choice of boat!
And my wife has equal say in everything we do so I find your comment about that to show you are a complete idiot!
And yes, we would prefer to be in out boat to anything else we have ever come across that we could afford.
Could your vessel outrun a storm? Of course not. So what's the point of that argument.
And, in case you haven't noticed we are a 44 pilothouse not a 38.
Please keep your stupidity to yourself!
I was quoting from actual passages. The trips across the North Sea were over a time scale and in a direction where tide makes no odds and were the only ones of note since the boat was re-rigged.
I suppose you think I would be better off in a 'racing boat' - if you want to start throwing stones at people for thieir choice of boat!
And my wife has equal say in everything we do so I find your comment about that to show you are a complete idiot!
And yes, we would prefer to be in out boat to anything else we have ever come across that we could afford.
Could your vessel outrun a storm? Of course not. So what's the point of that argument.
And, in case you haven't noticed we are a 44 pilothouse not a 38.
Please keep your stupidity to yourself!
tome
Well-Known Member
Well I think both Fisher and HC look purposeful in a trawler sort of way, but I couldn't live with either to be fair. I'm an outdoor sailor and the wheelhouse would make me feel clautraphobic and trapped. Plus the severe lack of sailing performance would drive me nuts
But one man's meat is another's poison and I can understand that others have different priorities in a boat. You would probably look at my boat and decide that it's a million miles away from what you like
Chill out, it's not a big deal if people are critical
But one man's meat is another's poison and I can understand that others have different priorities in a boat. You would probably look at my boat and decide that it's a million miles away from what you like
Chill out, it's not a big deal if people are critical
CelebrityScandel
Well-Known Member
I see you are from NZ so will be familiar with fast strong cruising yachts. You'll have your work cut out talking about the expectations from real performance cruisers to these people here.
They generally seem to still think boats such as the Twister, designed around 50 years ago, long keeled with big barn door rudder hung off it (and even pivoted off vertical so even more inefficient ???) represent the height of performance cruising. Others such as the Contessa's, Hans Christian, etc.
So to put it into your own local terms you're talking to people who would think the old H28's represent the height of cruising design and performance, nice little boats they may be. You're talking way over their heads.
They generally seem to still think boats such as the Twister, designed around 50 years ago, long keeled with big barn door rudder hung off it (and even pivoted off vertical so even more inefficient ???) represent the height of performance cruising. Others such as the Contessa's, Hans Christian, etc.
So to put it into your own local terms you're talking to people who would think the old H28's represent the height of cruising design and performance, nice little boats they may be. You're talking way over their heads.
wingdiver
Well-Known Member
Criticism I can cope with but that was a complete prat of a poster and I didn't feel like sitting back and taking the smug ill informed rubbish. But I've calmed down now - can you tell?!
Our boat suits the purpose - mainly as a huge liveaboard but still gives great performance especially since the new rig and sails were put on.
And I like being outside too (we have a second wheel outside) and did 1500 miles round the Adriatic and Eastern Med last year but have found the wheelhouse to be of great value on the occasion we have encountered bad weather.
Also helps extend the season which is nice when you don't end up hauled out over the winter(which we don't).
I'm sure your boat suits the purpose for which you bought her otherwise you wouldn't own her.
Can't criticise anyone for that.
Cheers
Our boat suits the purpose - mainly as a huge liveaboard but still gives great performance especially since the new rig and sails were put on.
And I like being outside too (we have a second wheel outside) and did 1500 miles round the Adriatic and Eastern Med last year but have found the wheelhouse to be of great value on the occasion we have encountered bad weather.
Also helps extend the season which is nice when you don't end up hauled out over the winter(which we don't).
I'm sure your boat suits the purpose for which you bought her otherwise you wouldn't own her.
Can't criticise anyone for that.
Cheers
Rob_Webb
Well-Known Member
I think you've hit the nail on the head. I came from the UK 4 years ago so I know a bit about both and you are right, the local home-grown kiwi designs knock the spots off the production cruisers that rule the roost in terms of performance cruising in the Solent. Boats that regulalry get accolades as performance cruisers in Europe like new generation Hanse's, Dufours, Ben/Bav/Jens etc routinely get embarrassed by 10-15yr old kiwi designs both across the water and on corrected time.
Rob_Webb
Well-Known Member
Actually you can get close to outrunning weather systems in certain boats, notably the faster multihulls.
But assuming we are talking about monos in the context of a 500nm hop, say, from one set of islands to another out here in the S Pacific.... a boat plodding along at 5kts will take 100hrs wheras a slightly more spirited 7kts would cover it in a touch over 70hrs... that's over a day's difference in passage time and could make the difference between being snugged up in a cosy anchorage versus battling adverse weather as the 3-4 day weather window comes to a close and things start to get uncomfortable. And it could even extend your trip more.
So in the real world of offshore cruising (which HCs are designed for) as opposed to marina hopping around the Channel ports (which are delightful by the way), a 2 kts speed differential could make a very material difference.
And you don't have to resort to what you would call a 'racing boat' to achieve that extra 2 kts, just a competent fast, strong cruiser.
Another observation about speed. The majority of long distance cruisers who give up and fly home tend to be sailing the slower sluggards. One of the reasons they cite is frustration with lack of progress especially compared to their faster counterparts. Remember that on these trips, a bay full of boats will often gather waiting for the next weather window to make the next hop across the ocean. On the day in question, everyone leaves and the 3-4 day boats arrive first, get the best anchorages and start the parties. Meanwhile the 5+ day boats arrive later (often more tired as well), and often missing the best spots and activities. And they find that whilst the faster boats are planning the next hop in a few days time, they need to wait until the next weather window. Which means they slip out the pack of boats they were with and find a new flotilla of faster boats coming up from behind them.
This might sound trivial but in reality it is not and as I said, leads to a lot of frustration amongst the sailors of the slower heavier boats in an offshore context.
But assuming we are talking about monos in the context of a 500nm hop, say, from one set of islands to another out here in the S Pacific.... a boat plodding along at 5kts will take 100hrs wheras a slightly more spirited 7kts would cover it in a touch over 70hrs... that's over a day's difference in passage time and could make the difference between being snugged up in a cosy anchorage versus battling adverse weather as the 3-4 day weather window comes to a close and things start to get uncomfortable. And it could even extend your trip more.
So in the real world of offshore cruising (which HCs are designed for) as opposed to marina hopping around the Channel ports (which are delightful by the way), a 2 kts speed differential could make a very material difference.
And you don't have to resort to what you would call a 'racing boat' to achieve that extra 2 kts, just a competent fast, strong cruiser.
Another observation about speed. The majority of long distance cruisers who give up and fly home tend to be sailing the slower sluggards. One of the reasons they cite is frustration with lack of progress especially compared to their faster counterparts. Remember that on these trips, a bay full of boats will often gather waiting for the next weather window to make the next hop across the ocean. On the day in question, everyone leaves and the 3-4 day boats arrive first, get the best anchorages and start the parties. Meanwhile the 5+ day boats arrive later (often more tired as well), and often missing the best spots and activities. And they find that whilst the faster boats are planning the next hop in a few days time, they need to wait until the next weather window. Which means they slip out the pack of boats they were with and find a new flotilla of faster boats coming up from behind them.
This might sound trivial but in reality it is not and as I said, leads to a lot of frustration amongst the sailors of the slower heavier boats in an offshore context.
Twister_Ken
Well-Known Member
Rob,
Your description of cruising sounds just like the rat race I thought all those bluewater beardies were trying to get away from!
Your description of cruising sounds just like the rat race I thought all those bluewater beardies were trying to get away from!
Rob_Webb
Well-Known Member
Hah! I know what you mean!
I guess that is a reflection on the fact that more cruisers than ever are now exploring the world's oceans and it is no longer the preserve of the wealthy few. And that even when you are exploring far-flung spots you often still find yourself congregating with a handful of other boats as you all share the same basic needs for shelter, supplies, customs etc.
But it's all relative and the numbers aren't huge and I'd rather be weaving my way through a dozen yachts in a remote anhcorage than a traffic jam on the M25 or crowds of people on the Tube.
Long distance cruising today is no different to the sailors of old - when in port they couldn't wait to get to sea and when at sea they couldn't wait to make port!
And so when once you up anchor and head off with, say, 500nm of open ocean between you and the next island, you want to make passage as quickly as reasonably possible. It's not like a day or weekend sail on the Solent when you savour every hour because you will soon be back at the marina. For sure, you will hopefully enjoy the trip but after 3 days or so you are generally counting down to arriving and 4 days is ideal, 5 days a bit longer than necessary.... Of course this varies hugely depending on comfort levels of boat, weather conditions, crew dynamics etc but generally speaking 3-4 days is a good outing.
So it's just demoralising to leave the anchorage with a handful of friendly boats and watch all their stern lights disappear over the horizon, knowing they will likely be there at least a day ahead of you.
I guess that is a reflection on the fact that more cruisers than ever are now exploring the world's oceans and it is no longer the preserve of the wealthy few. And that even when you are exploring far-flung spots you often still find yourself congregating with a handful of other boats as you all share the same basic needs for shelter, supplies, customs etc.
But it's all relative and the numbers aren't huge and I'd rather be weaving my way through a dozen yachts in a remote anhcorage than a traffic jam on the M25 or crowds of people on the Tube.
Long distance cruising today is no different to the sailors of old - when in port they couldn't wait to get to sea and when at sea they couldn't wait to make port!
And so when once you up anchor and head off with, say, 500nm of open ocean between you and the next island, you want to make passage as quickly as reasonably possible. It's not like a day or weekend sail on the Solent when you savour every hour because you will soon be back at the marina. For sure, you will hopefully enjoy the trip but after 3 days or so you are generally counting down to arriving and 4 days is ideal, 5 days a bit longer than necessary.... Of course this varies hugely depending on comfort levels of boat, weather conditions, crew dynamics etc but generally speaking 3-4 days is a good outing.
So it's just demoralising to leave the anchorage with a handful of friendly boats and watch all their stern lights disappear over the horizon, knowing they will likely be there at least a day ahead of you.
CelebrityScandel
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
So it's just demoralising to leave the anchorage with a handful of friendly boats and watch all their stern lights disappear over the horizon, knowing they will likely be there at least a day ahead of you.
[/ QUOTE ]
And also demoralising to fly the same passage after doing it even in a big fast boat and reflect on how long it took to sail it /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif.
Looking through some of the details some have posted of their own boats recently are
44 foot 22 tons
35 foot 12 tons
33 foot 10 tons
Now these are seriously, and dangerously overweight in that they are close to being twice as heavy as what one would normally call a heavy boat. They will be real dogs but no doubt their owners love them, however, with such poor design resulting in those extreme weights one has to wonder what else is wrong with them.
Their owners must also like the very slow waddle at sea between anchorages more than the being in the anchorages so perhaps the friendly boats you mention are of little importance to them. Or maybe they just don't go anywhere?
So it's just demoralising to leave the anchorage with a handful of friendly boats and watch all their stern lights disappear over the horizon, knowing they will likely be there at least a day ahead of you.
[/ QUOTE ]
And also demoralising to fly the same passage after doing it even in a big fast boat and reflect on how long it took to sail it /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif.
Looking through some of the details some have posted of their own boats recently are
44 foot 22 tons
35 foot 12 tons
33 foot 10 tons
Now these are seriously, and dangerously overweight in that they are close to being twice as heavy as what one would normally call a heavy boat. They will be real dogs but no doubt their owners love them, however, with such poor design resulting in those extreme weights one has to wonder what else is wrong with them.
Their owners must also like the very slow waddle at sea between anchorages more than the being in the anchorages so perhaps the friendly boats you mention are of little importance to them. Or maybe they just don't go anywhere?
Rob_Webb
Well-Known Member
Ha - a kindred spirit!
Jeez, those are bricks. At 35 ft and 5 tons, I am the heaviest that I would want to be. Off the wind, the transition from displacement mode to planing happens barely noticeably at around 8.5kts at which point double-digits come up quite quickly. But if I was a few 100kgs lighter it would happen in a lighter breeze, always nice.
BTW, Celebrity, tried to send you a PM - you don't seem to be accepting them?
Jeez, those are bricks. At 35 ft and 5 tons, I am the heaviest that I would want to be. Off the wind, the transition from displacement mode to planing happens barely noticeably at around 8.5kts at which point double-digits come up quite quickly. But if I was a few 100kgs lighter it would happen in a lighter breeze, always nice.
BTW, Celebrity, tried to send you a PM - you don't seem to be accepting them?
Bajansailor
Well-Known Member
I am a fan of all types of vessels, light and heavy, multi and mono, but I just wanted to add some balance (controversy?) here.....
Some Norwegian pals of mine used to own a ferrocement gaff ketch rigged Colin Archer. She was 39' on deck, and apparently weighed 19 tonnes in full cruising mode. But she was no slouch.
OK, in light winds light boats would have beat the pants off her, but once the wind picked up to a F 5 or 6, then she was in her element (so long as she was not sailing hard on the wind).
I sailed with them one summer from Southampton to Lisbon - I remember tramping down channel on a close'ish reach in about a F 6, probably doing about 6 knots, and we were all sitting around the saloon table having dinner very happily, with nothing being spilled. We had such a pleasant voyage to Porto that we didnt (in a way) want it to end - would have been nice to have carried on for a bit longer, rather like the Flying Dutchman.
I cant remember how long we took - I think it was about 5 or 6 days - and I see that Hugo Boss has just sailed the long way from Gosport to Barcelona (2,000+ miles) in 7 days - but I am sure that we had just as much fun as they did (if not more), and we were not eating freeze dried food........ /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Some Norwegian pals of mine used to own a ferrocement gaff ketch rigged Colin Archer. She was 39' on deck, and apparently weighed 19 tonnes in full cruising mode. But she was no slouch.
OK, in light winds light boats would have beat the pants off her, but once the wind picked up to a F 5 or 6, then she was in her element (so long as she was not sailing hard on the wind).
I sailed with them one summer from Southampton to Lisbon - I remember tramping down channel on a close'ish reach in about a F 6, probably doing about 6 knots, and we were all sitting around the saloon table having dinner very happily, with nothing being spilled. We had such a pleasant voyage to Porto that we didnt (in a way) want it to end - would have been nice to have carried on for a bit longer, rather like the Flying Dutchman.
I cant remember how long we took - I think it was about 5 or 6 days - and I see that Hugo Boss has just sailed the long way from Gosport to Barcelona (2,000+ miles) in 7 days - but I am sure that we had just as much fun as they did (if not more), and we were not eating freeze dried food........ /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
CelebrityScandel
Well-Known Member
Sister to "Medicine Man" which was in Hawaii in around 1994 ???
If so, definitely no slouch at all /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
If so, definitely no slouch at all /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif