How is Match, after 4 months JFM?

[MattM]

Retro Stabs Option?

Monday this week we went out to sea with a team from San Lorenzo including the engineering director, Paolo Bertetti . They are used to Tracs and Naiads because they have fitted them to SL88 and above for a few years. It was a f7 westerley with big breaking crested seas south of Cap D'antibes, and certainly the worst seas I have contemplated taking the boat out in voluntarily. The SL group called Sleipner in the morning to ask if the trip would be cancelled "because we assume the owner would not want to take his boat out in that sea?" Sleipner said nope, no cancellation. It's fair to say Paolo was VERY impressed with the performance of the Sleipners and privately told me I had an excellent set up.

Just wondered how practical would it be to fit stabilizers (such as the Sleipner system installed on Match) to a Squadron 78 retrospectively? It seems to have made such a fundamental improvement that I’m curious to know whether stabs could be fitted on a pre-owned model?
One other question comes to mind re: Match four months on - has there been any issue with the third fuel tank under the bed and hot fuel returning to this tank?
Great posts and pictures btw, and thanks for all the useful info (especially the piece on prawns!).

 

[MapisM]

haw does this defie laws ?

...

after a few hours cruising with nasty beam waves, Elly wants stabilizing fins on Blue Angel

LOL, I wouldn't take what J said literally, though it's correct to say that the design of a proper planing hull is indeed a fight against laws of physics.
As Renzo Piano says, he spent his whole life fighting gravity force...
Based on your numbers and your pic of BA cruising at 16kts, at Canados they maybe didn't win such fight, but got damn close!

Re. Elly complaints, well, she didn't like the Hatteras I suggested, as I recall... Horses for courses!
'Fiuaskme, I'd rather buy a container of sea sickness tablets than retrofitting stabs to a perfectly balanced boat like yours.

 

[BartW]

'Fiuaskme, I'd rather buy a container of sea sickness tablets than retrofitting stabs to a perfectly balanced boat like yours.

ab - so - lu-te-ly

but she almost ran out of stock of pills yesterday

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

mmm that's interesting,

had a full fuel tank on Blue Angel,
refueled 2471 liter after 162nm,
this equals 15,25l /nm

not too bad for a 20yo boat, and +70 Ton weight
when new, on paper dry weight was 64,5T
previous owner told me it is approx 70T, measured on a liftout

cruising speed was 18..20kn

I am happy to say that I'm pleased with the fuel consumption of my boat

Bart, 15.25 l/nm is equivalent to about 0.3nmpg (nautical miles per UK gallon!) and that seems about right to me for a 70footer at 18-20kts. I'm not sure what jfm means by his comments either!

 

[MapisM]

He probably meant that it's a fantastic result for a 70T boat, rather than for a 70 footer as such. And I would agree.
Remember, we're used to think about consumption as related to the vessel size, but for a planing hull it's rather the weight which is the main driver. A modern 70' is normally much lighter.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

He probably meant that it's a fantastic result for a 70T boat, rather than for a 70 footer as such. And I would agree.
Remember, we're used to think about consumption as related to the vessel size, but for a planing hull it's rather the weight which is the main driver. A modern 70' is normally much lighter.

Agree 64t dry/70t wet is heavy for a 70 footer but about 0.3nmpg still sounds to me like its in the right area and in any case, that seems to be what BartW is getting and what BA has been achieving in the past. I dunno but maybe BA has an easily driven hull with fairly flat sections aft or maybe the engine/hull/prop match is spot on.

 

[BartW]

He probably meant that it's a fantastic result for a 70T boat, rather than for a 70 footer as such. And I would agree.
Remember, we're used to think about consumption as related to the vessel size, but for a planing hull it's rather the weight which is the main driver. A modern 70' is normally much lighter.

exactly,

@ Deleted User
I can confirm that
weight, hull shape, engines and prop, all feels well ballanced
even some nasty 45° beam waves she took at ease.

but lets go back to match now,
how about extra fuel cons. by stab fin drag ?

(not that a don't regret to have no stab fins on BA )

 

[jfm]

Any progress on the second station for the stab controller?

I was talking to JtB about something else and he reminded me I hadn't replied to this

The upshot is that although I have a second touchscreen controller (held as a spare) Sleipner advise not fitting it to the flybridge because they are not convinced it is w/proof enough. Apparently it's very difficult to find touchscreens that are user programmable in the way they want and are warterproof

But no matter. I have on the flybridge the new Sleipner bow/stern thruster control panel with the LCD screen and soft keys. This is fully wateroroof to ip-whatever. Sleipner are writing software to give basic stab control via this screen and its softkeys, which will be ready in a month or two, and they will send me this software to install. Job sounds a good un.

 

[jfm]

but lets go back to match now,
how about extra fuel cons. by stab fin drag ?

I don't actually know Bart but can guess from secondary evidence. The boat does 31knots full of fuel and water with 7 people on board, and it is nearly 2 tonnes heavier than standard because of the fuel, so it might have done 32kts with 50% fuel. Normally a Sq78 does 33kts with the 1572hp Cats, so it feels like the stabs create 1knot worth of drag, which I suppose is in the order of a bit less than one litre per mile during cruise. I checked on the weekend and at 19knots and 90% fuel (so 60 tonnes) I do 16.2 litres per mile and you could therefore guess 15.5 litres without stabs. That 16.2 is very precise measurement from the engine electronics and GPS speed, done by the Garmin gear

I take my hat off to your 15litres per mile - seems a very good result!

 

[rafiki_]

I don't actually know Bart but can guess from secondary evidence. The boat does 31knots full of fuel and water with 7 people on board, and it is nearly 2 tonnes heavier than standard because of the fuel, so it might have done 32kts with 50% fuel. Normally a Sq78 does 33kts with the 1572hp Cats, so it feels like the stabs create 1knot worth of drag, which I suppose is in the order of a bit less than one litre per mile during cruise. I checked on the weekend and at 19knots and 90% fuel (so 60 tonnes) I do 16.2 litres per mile and you could therefore guess 15.5 litres without stabs. That 16.2 is very precise measurement from the engine electronics and GPS speed, done by the Garmin gear

I take my hat off to your 15litres per mile - seems a very good result!

John, I think the other variable is speed. I am guessing that your cruising speed is higher than Barts. Match will have an optimum cruising speed for max fuel efficiency. This is likely to be different for Barts boat, which I'm guessing is a D or SD hull (sorry if I have missed this bit if I'm wrong, have been travelling a lot lately, so miss some of the threads).

 

[BartW]

John, I think the other variable is speed. I am guessing that your cruising speed is higher than Barts. Match will have an optimum cruising speed for max fuel efficiency. This is likely to be different for Barts boat, which I'm guessing is a D or SD hull (sorry if I have missed this bit if I'm wrong, have been travelling a lot lately, so miss some of the threads).

No,my Canados is a real planing boat, but hull shape is slightly diffrent from traditional brit buylders
cruising speed is 18-20kn (2000RPM optimum RPM for the engines)

as far I understand jfm's figures are also for 20kn average speed,
where as his "optimum" (not sure if this exists) is closer to 25-27 knots I believe

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

No,my Canados is a real planing boat, but hull shape is slightly diffrent from traditional brit buylders
cruising speed is 18-20kn (2000RPM optimum RPM for the engines)

as far I understand jfm's figures are also for 20kn average speed,
where as his "optimum" (not sure if this exists) is closer to 25-27 knots I believe

I'm surprised that your fuel consumption figures seem better than Match. Just a guess but could be that the Sq78 has deeper V sections aft which could mean it needs more power to push it along. Possibly the Canados has flatter sections aft which allow it to plane more easily in the sub 20kt range. Just a guess.

 

[rafiki_]

No,my Canados is a real planing boat, but hull shape is slightly diffrent from traditional brit buylders
cruising speed is 18-20kn (2000RPM optimum RPM for the engines)

as far I understand jfm's figures are also for 20kn average speed,
where as his "optimum" (not sure if this exists) is closer to 25-27 knots I believe

Thanks Bart. Phew, that is some boat at 70 tonnes to plane. Apologies if I missed some of the replies.

It is still surprising that a 70 tonne boat is more economical than a 50 tonner at the same speed.

Most planing hulls have an optimum speed where their efficiency is such that the fuel consumption is best.

 

[Nautical]

Just back on the stabs thing, someone kindly sent me vid of the sea trial/ commissioning on 67 ORY with ABT man aboard I mentioned earlier, first ten sec's of vid only one stab is active and doing all the work, although not much of a sea running you can see that boat is not rolling at all with the sea abeam(ish) port side.


Excuse that it's an ORY, not meant PR'ish just so those that haven't experienced stabs can appreciate the difference they make to the comfort aboard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GmA15u8P6U


.

 

[jfm]

Just back on the stabs thing, someone kindly sent me vid of the sea trial/ commissioning on 67 ORY with ABT man aboard I mentioned earlier, first ten sec's of vid only one stab is active and doing all the work, although not much of a sea running you can sea that boat is not rolling at all with the sea abeam(ish) port side.


Excuse that it's an ORY, not meant PR'ish just so those that haven't experienced stabs can appreciate the difference they make to the comfort aboard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GmA15u8P6U


.

Looks familiar Trev. That boat should have been rolling +/- 4degrees in that sea but the horizon was dead flat. That's just the magic carpet feeling that I have suddenly had the pleasure of becoming accustommed to. Fantastic stuff. I note the ORY had a bit of speed on (10kts initially, rising to 20?) and that would have made her fins very effective, as the vid shows

 

[Nautical]

yes, magic isn't it , I have kind of forgotten what it is like on a non stab boat these days but did do a short sea trial on a Part X the other day and for a moment thought something was wrong with the stability of the boat only to have a reality check "no stabs".

Gotta be the future of 50'+ mobo's to have them fitted as standard, as said before, the new black!.

Not sure what top end she pulled, although I heard our commissioning manager on board say 14 knots at 2350 rpm, probably light (she carries nearly 8000 litres of fuel) would do 16 Knots +.

I wasn't on this commissioning but she has twin C9's so those numbers seem about right, you can go C12's and C18's which push you up past 20 knots, or if you want to go lunatic mode, C32's !

 

[Nautical]

To chappie that PM'd, sorry I deleted you before replying , oops !

Not sure on that one what the db in the Pilot house is but very low, even at full chat you can have a very civilized conversation at normal volume, pull back to 1000 rpm and 9 knots and you can hardly hear the motors. Interestingly, on latest 70 we fitted Sea Torque's (shafts) and PH background din dropped nearly 2 db which doesnt sound a lot but in reality a very noticable difference, really adds to that "magic carpet" sensation.

Apologies forum chums and JFM for HiJack, numpty here doesn't know how to work his PM's.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

It is still surprising that a 70 tonne boat is more economical than a 50 tonner at the same speed.

.

The only conclusion can be is that Blue Angel is a better boat than Match! Can I say that on this forum or will the moderator ban me

 

[jfm]

The only conclusion can be is that Blue Angel is a better boat than Match! Can I say that on this forum or will the moderator ban me

Yup, you're banned Mike

In answer to the question in the title, a pic tells a thousand words, so here for no particular reason other than that this thread is lacking pics are a few pics and vids from the last month or so...

The gorgeous Royal Huisman, Borkumriff IV, under sail

The sea off Antibes

Food glorious food! Fantastic chef onboard this summer

Cannes fireworks, Bastille day

This is Trafalgar, #1 of the Aquastar 80 that was pictured on this forum at launch and is on Aquastar's website. Lovely machine, now permanently berthed 6 doors down from me on Mole Sud in Antibes. It does look quite "sinky" underway though. Nice bimini made by penprommo of this forum i think. The huuuge new Lurssen, Katara, the Qatari ruler's boat, is in the background

The Perini, Selene, off Cap Ferrat

Lots of interesting boats to see all day long

Villa Fiorentina, possibly the best/most valuable private house in the world (Forbes reckon so), looking great this year with new purple awnings. I love the private dock and RIB garage in foreground of pic

Sq58 earlier model, before the facelifted smooth C pillar, with the black decals removed from the C pillar to sort of make it look like a facelifted model. Not good!

Interesting skies some evenings

m/y A, beautiful machine imho but you either love it or hate it. Anchored off Antibes. Now over in Portofino way I think, where BartW saw it

Vid of Cannes fireworks, bastille day



Finally, a slightly random video of the boat in a slightly choppy anchorage

 

[rafiki_]

Lovely pics/vids John. Match is riding the swell with ease. I guess the swan analogy is never more apt, lots of effort below the waterline, looking serene above.