Hull design

[adarcy]

Kevin,

in general I agree with what I think you mean but....

<<narrow beam, a deep v, say about 24 degrees BUT keeps that all the way to the bow>> so we're looking from the back to the front so..
<<most boats start off with a decent v but that diminshes as you move forward>>

errr no, a typo methinks, in every semi-displacement or planing hull I can think of the vee steepens as you go forwards and it flattens as you go backwards.

A constant vee gives much less lift aft and so needs more power for the same speed but handles the rough much better. Most popular non-racing hulls flatten out as you go aft so it is beamier and gets more lift. The trick in good ones is how much of a forefoot and when/how the vee flattens out that gives the best compromise of speed, economy, soft riding, rough weather handling and space.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Kevin]

yep your right, i made a mistake, it is a constant profile of the hull that is needed as you stand forward looking towards the back of the boat, coupled to a good degree of deadrise. like you say not ideal for pleasure boats due to the power needed in this type of set up the room that has to be sacrficed and lack of stationary stability

I agree with you most boats are a compromise and have to be.

Kevin

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[whisper]

Think you should add Botnia Targas to this list too. Our little one is superb in the rough stuff, provided you stay in the nice dry wheelhouse.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[PhilF]

funny you should mention the Regal Hull. I was swimming around the Boat and a wave pushed it up in the air exposing the underside. What a sexy hull I said to myself, never seen it out of the water so I was surprised at the shape

<hr width=100% size=1>