jfm
Well-Known Member
Hugin perhaps google image fairline phantom 48 for an example of small midships cabin with athwartships bed, compromised ceiling height, compliance with JtB comments, etc
Midships Owner's Cabin - Most valued "extra" features. Opinions welcome
- Thread starter Hugin
- Start date
Hugin
Well-Known Member
As kashurst already remarked; there's no door or partition in this area. I attach a picture from Princess V39. I think the access is very comparable to this photo except I doubt there are even 160 cm headroom at the critical spot in V39's cabin. The "aisle" alongside the bed is most certainly also narrower...... looks like 30 cm to my untrained eye.
Second pic includes a known face next to the stairs. Notice the top of the steps........ that's the level you'd have to dive under in order to access the side of the bed. Nick's elbow height or thereabouts (~125cm) plus 1 step down in the cabin minus the thickness of the deck. Probably around 140 cm headroom I would say, but maybe we have a V39 owner here somewhere who knows the actual figure.
Caution is justified of course, but I believe it's a balance between added cost and complexity, perceived convenience versus the gained functionality. Some well thought through multi-functionality can increase the boating utility (term used almost tongue in cheek) to match a bigger and more expensive boat. I have also noticed boat reviewers often mention and demonstrate seats that can be reversed, doors that fold/slide or tables that roll/fold/elevate/convert to whatever with a sort of "listen, this is almost a USP" intonation. I don't know how many experienced boaters find it credible, but I can imagine less experienced potential buyers are eating it up.
I can mention a multi-functionality feature which no one seems to have a problem with - probably because they don't see it as multi-functionality - even though it is inconvenient in use and often destroys an otherwise eye pleasing design: The common, almost universal, aft cockpit canopy.
It transforms an outdoor space to a relatively dry and protected indoor area; yet It requires half an afternoon's effort to accomplish the function, deteriorates visibly over time and most boats looks horrible anyway when blessed with a canopy. Even 50-60 ft boats have this most inconvenient and displeasing of all multi-function features; I just mention it to illustrate multi-functionality is an accepted concept among boaters even when inducing significant inconvenience.
Whitelighter
Well-Known Member
Ah, but in the V39 the mid cabin is not the master, it is the second or guest cabin.
Accepting there is a compromise in most boats - but I don't want it in my cabin if I'm writing the cheque
Accepting there is a compromise in most boats - but I don't want it in my cabin if I'm writing the cheque
Hugin
Well-Known Member
The only real compromise I can identify when I compare the two cabins on V39 is the lack of direct access to the heads from the midships one.
Space,, mattress size and storage seem at least as plentiful in the midships cabin and no doubt it's more quiet at night.... waves often are more noisy when slapping (or whatever it's called) the bow hull sides. I'd suggest many owner couples would prefer the midships cabin as Owner's Cabin at least when they are alone.
jimmy_the_builder
Well-Known Member
Hang on, you're comparing the mattress position and size on the secondary cabin of the V39 sportcruiser with the owners cabin on your 42ft flybridge. The master cabin on the V39 is very definitely the forward cabin, and that has a centre-line mattress with access on three sides. I just don't think your comparison stands up, sorry.
Hugin
Well-Known Member
But isn't it merely the lack of direct access to the Heads which disadvantage them compared to the bow Master Cabins on both boats? Certainly they appear at least as spacious.... and the midships location should all things else being equal be the quieter one.
It's a fair objection and there can be an issue there for some owners........ but there's also a relatively straightforward solution to it.
By coincidence I sleep every night in a bed with the same issue.... my partner is always trapped next to the wall, yet she routinely manages to get up in the morning before me and I usually don't notice. That doesn't mean others wont have a problem, of course, but here I suggest to split the two beds in the same way as on the V39 and slide one two the opposite side...... just for the night and only if it's an issue. The corner of the Heads could be angled a bit to create a nice 50 cm wide "highway" allowing both occupants comfortable entry and exit.
The solution you suggest would seriously compromise the size of the Heads, allow only 25 cm wide aisles each side of the bed (definitely too narrow IMHO) and require the mattress corners in the foot end to be cut anyway, which abandons the use of standard mattresses. There will also be a serious headroom issue over the aisle to the right; which could not be solved without a significant redesign of the salon above. All in all, that's just too compromised and too many new unsolvable problems. Adding length and/or beam to the boat could solve it, of course but one major design parameter is to stay within 12 x 4 m. hull size according to ISO 8666 and the hull is already maxed out.
I don't think this is an issue. Tugging bed sheets around the edges and under the mattress is fairly common and easy...... how would you do it in a twin cabin or if there is a guest cabin with bunk beds? Same procedure (just more inconvenient and time consuming for the bunk beds). Many people use shape sheets - sometimes stretchable - anyway; couldn't be easier!
Hugin
Well-Known Member
I don't dispute that..... obviously with only one "bathroom" it is a bit complicated to create a direct access from a midships cabin, so by default the bow cabin becomes the Master Cabin.
If it wasn't for this issue, I'd say the midships cabins on the two mentioned boats would have the upper hand as their beds are lower in the hull than the bow cabins' beds and it is (usually) quieter midships.
The three-sides access is a bit of a red herring, I believe. Not completely irrelevant, but there are simply ways to deal with the issue..... when it is perceived to be an issue. Owners of slightly smaller boats, say a Sealine S330, seem to cope completely without three-sides access even to the extent that one occupant will be seriously "trapped" at night in the mid-cabin's crawl-in bed. On many sailboats as big as 50 ft you'd find Master Cabins with the same "entrapment" issue.
MapisM
Well-Known Member
Positively +1.
To be completely honest, the whole layout looks to me like an effort to pretend to offer a midship master cabin in a boat where it actually doesn't fit.
Frankly, I can't see a market for a 42' f/b boat where people are willing to accept a non-walkaround bed.
That's a compromise I used to live with in an open 34' boat, and even then swmbo kept complaining about it.
I'm not saying it's impossible to design a decent midship master cabin at that boat size, but you must sacrifice a lot of the rest.
The only example that pops to my mind of a boat that got it right is the N43 - here's the drawing:
http://www.nordhavn.com/models/43/drawings/pdf/43_standard_interior.pdf
But that is a VERY tall boat, to start with - and even at Nordhavn, they must have thought that the bow master cabin was a better solution in more ways than one, because the more "traditional" layout is also available - though afaik the one I linked is the most popular.
Nigelpickin
Well-Known Member
http://http://www.mby.com/reviews/sportscruisers/prestige-420-s-review
minute 1:07 shows the way Prestige have dealt with this in their 42'er. I'm not sure that the fwd cabin would be my prefered choice but given the limitations of the capacity, I think it preferable to have to a two 'master' or indeed two 'VIP' option with a scissor berth forward than the tradition Master to fwd and kids 2'6 twin with a window seat aft. It justs give the perception of more options.
Plus given the way my anger management occasionally failed this year during berthing in high winds, Its always good to have a comfortable bolt hole in which to hide while Mrs Nigel takes time to forgive me
I think its got legs, as long as the fwd cabin is equally as strong.
Last edited:
Whitelighter
Well-Known Member
I think Hugin is not really looking for constructive criticism- it seems he has decided that he's going to do it a certain way and was just looking to validate his ideas. No we don't like it there is a lot of effort defending what he's already decided to do
Whitelighter
Well-Known Member
Beneteau Monte Carlo 42/Flyer 44 has a very decent, mid cabin logitudibal master cabin and still manages a small dinette, galley and decent forward cabin.
Even if you want shaft drive either use V drive gearboxes to keep the internal space or loose the galley/dinette and shove the master forward
Nigelpickin
Well-Known Member
To be fair Jez the op was only asking what to do with the spare space to port of the bed, I think he implied that in post #1.
Whitelighter
Well-Known Member
To be fair Jez the op was only asking what to do with the spare space to port of the bed, I think he implied that in post #1.
Fair point
Hugin
Well-Known Member
In a sense you are correct..... except for the words pretend to. I believe the layout as it currently stands actually does offer a spacious and comfortable cabin with adequate storage and a decent Ensuite; which would serve the needs and expectations of many an owner couple - but as always; if you try to please everyone then you end up pleasing no one.
The elephant in the room...... the debate boils down to three-side bed access or not; all other considerations suddenly fades away.
No offense, but I think you are being a tad narrow-minded here. Surely there is a market for 40+ ft boats even with open plan layouts (the pricey Fjord 40 Open comes to mind). There's a charter market where any notion of a Master Cabin is actually a disadvantage because you may have 3 couples or 2 families contributing equally to the charter and therefore they expect comparable accommodations. And there's a huge Asian market where cabins in general are considered an irrelevance or at best an afterthought, because the important thing is that you can receive 20 guest aboard for an evening of Mahjong playing or Karaoke..... the size of the saloon becomes the only crucial issue.
I've never owned a boat bigger than 32 ft. so frankly walk-around beds have never been even a remote issue for me; nor can I imagine it ever will until some time AFTER I have owned a 50+ ft. mobo. As per you description of your earlier boating experience I suggest that it is not really a big issue for the more than 90% of all boaters who have never owned a 50+ ft. mobo. Granted, there could be an issue for the relatively few deciding to move down market, exchanging their 50+ ft. for a new 42 ft., but for all those up-sizing there will be a whole range of other features and capabilities which will count for a lot more in the decision process. Number of cabins/berths? How many sunbeds? How many can you have for dinner on a grey cold day..... or on a sunny day? How big a tender can you have on the back? Position of Galley (up/down - forward/aft)? Hydraulic platform or not? Stabilization? Permanent 230V power supply? And the biggie........ Joystick control? (has probably sold more 40+ ft. mobos than any other single feature the last 10 years).
You imply it can only be decent if there is a three-side accessible bed? Overall I'd have to disagree with that..... only people who have already owned even larger mobos might consider this a show stopper. Overall comfort & privacy, wardrobe and storage, general spaciousness, a seat facing the bed (for social interaction between couples) and things like good reading lights and a bed with a comfy backrest (and headroom over the mattress) or USP-connectors for recharging not to forget a decent TV in a near optimal position decide if a Master Cabin serves your needs and expectations. It's a long list and no single item on the list will be a show stopper for a majority. Personally I don't care about TV, but I would be completely put off by the hard edged headboards I have seen on some beds - even in large, expensive boats. I like to read in bed, sometimes even work/write in bed..... so I have a potential killer issue here; which I probably only share with a small minority.
Hugin
Well-Known Member
I was looking for feedback and I did indeed receive very useful feedback, which enabled me to decide between different options and end up with a solution which I now consider close to optimal; where I was actually a little inclined towards the useless breakfast dinette before the discussion. So no, I'm not here to validate my ideas.....
The whole issue of walk-around beds is in a sense a sidetrack but I still find it useful, as it forces me to look at the issue from different angles and sharpen arguments (for possible future use). However, that others have different opinions doesn't mean I automatically backs down and concede my ideas are bad..... I wouldn't be spending time on this if I wasn't convinced I could contribute something genuinely new and better than what is currently available.
I am developing this concept with a former employee from Seaway's design department. I understand it is impossible to discuss specific details without quickly entering into issues relating to the whole package - I can reveal the whole package is very innovative - but we are not quite ready to publish too much at this stage. I certainly intend to use this forum for feedback on other issues at a later stage, when revealing more details can no longer harm our business prospects.
MapisM
Well-Known Member
I sincerely don't think so.
The 34' open boat I previously mentioned was the bigger I owned till then.
After that, before eventually buying a 53 footer, I saw plenty of other f/b boats, in a rather wide size range, from 38' to 55'.
Now, aside from the fact that I can't remember among any of them a master cabin without a walkaround bed, I can assure you that the lack of it would have been one of the very few show stoppers, at least for my wife, but probably also for myself - not that this really matters, since it was for her, anyway.
And I can also assure you that plenty of Med boaters would think along the same lines - which, admittedly, can be considered as the narrow-minded limit in whose framework my comments are made - I'm aware that many Asians are more interested in boats for floating parties than anything else, but if you are thinking to design a EU boat with the aim of selling it to them, I can only think of two words: good luck.
Otoh, even assuming that you personally (and possibly many others) can accept a non-walkaround bed, do tell, honestly: looking at the master cabin layout of the N43, of the Beneteau, and of your drawing, which is your ranking?
Without considering anything else of course - they can well be completely different boats in all other respects (as the N43 and the Beneteau surely are), but let's stick to the preferred master cabin layout, considering AOTBE as an assumption.
benjenbav
Well-Known Member
I can't see where the sex swing goes?
petem
Well-Known Member
It's not a Sunseeker you know.
jimmy_the_builder
Well-Known Member
They don't call them 'squeakers' for nothing...
jfm
Well-Known Member
hugin, I'm worried that you are applying to much of a practicality test, whereas what really matters is whether the customer will like it (or love it, given the way price for a boat like this is 3x nice Ferraris)
A chaise longue or breakfast thing might look nicer. for sure I've never used either sofa/chaise in my last 2 boats yet if I were building a third one I would for sure specify it again because I like how it looks.
More generally, your non walk around bed and the multiple angles and ceiling heights are just not going to look good. When you lie in bed and look across you just see the wall of the ensuite, urgh. It's all just not going to be a pretty shape. It doesn't contain enough classic "tools for beauty" like some symmetry and some golden rectangles. IMHO enough people will fail to love the boat to materially hurt sales, despite its practicalities and storage
The Beneteau shown above is way better. The bed is walkaround and on fore-aft centreline. The only part of the cabin where you stand is on centreline so maximum ceiling height. There are no low-ceiling intrusions that block access to a high ceiling area beyond (which is a design disaster in my book, and which is included in your design). The beneteau layout is much more loveable and you ought to copy it imho (though I realise the need for a full staircase and a U turn aftwards stops you copying it easily. I think you need a non centreline staircase for which there are many precedents)