New Dutch lifeboat

[Bajansailor]

I was just going to post this on the currently running RNLI thread, but then I thought that was drifting too much, and many folk like me probably gave up on it about 30 pages ago anyway.

Here is some info on a new Dutch lifeboat - she certainly looks the business!

http://www.maritimejournal.com/feat.../dutch-knrm-launches-next-generation-lifeboat

I like the concept of the retractable daggerboards aft (a bit like the Open 60s?), and the Axe bow.

However I am baffled as to where they are going to stow 125 survivors on deck - sardines in their tin have spacious surroundings in comparison!
(I think what this means is that the stability of the vessel is acceptable with this much weight on the deck - which is pretty impressive).

 

[penfold]

However I am baffled as to where they are going to stow 125 survivors on deck - sardines in their tin have spacious surroundings in comparison!
(I think what this means is that the stability of the vessel is acceptable with this much weight on the deck - which is pretty impressive).

They get stacked like cordwood! Seriously though, if you take a look at the inside of commercial lifeboats the seating pitch is very tight, with a full load you get very familiar with your neighbours. Being able to cope with an extra 10 tonnes at deck level is pretty good though, the naval architects have obviously earned their pennies.

 

[sarabande]

that looks a good 'un !


However, not wishing to be churlish, I note that the Dutch have decided to design the vessel using a committee approach

"Working with a group of Dutch marine experts, including TU Delft, TNO, Marin, Damen Shipyards, and De Vries Lentsch Naval Architects"

How that contrasts with the RBLI approach of one man, in house.

 

[viago]

that looks a good 'un !


However, not wishing to be churlish, I note that the Dutch have decided to design the vessel using a committee approach

"Working with a group of Dutch marine experts, including TU Delft, TNO, Marin, Damen Shipyards, and De Vries Lentsch Naval Architects"

How that contrasts with the RBLI approach of one man, in house.

cant imagine that lot came cheap.
i cant find the dimensions anywhere, don you know what they are? its a pity they wont be doing sea trials til late 2013, so the development and full production cost are not yet available.
i note that damen shipyards will be going into full production though, hoping to sell worldwide. have the rnlii missed a marketing and sales trick with their boat being already commissioned?

 

[Neil_Y]

It's a 19m hull, looks good and the aft fins are quite interesting, they may even help when stopped or manouvering slowly, with the deep bow section and fins, sideways drift will be a lot less than a conventional planing/semi planing hull shape...won't they Martin?

 

[Wunja]

Interesting departure from the KNRM's normal giant RHIBs, though they do seem to have put aluminium sponsons on the sides.

 

[TimBennet]

. . . How that contrasts with the RBLI approach of one man, in house.

One man? Really? I've met at least three who worked on the FCB project and non of those were even part of the 'in house' team.

I would love to see some hard data that the axe bow has any advantages on a planing hull of that size. There is some evidence of their advantages on large displacement rig support vessels, etc, but that's not the same dynamic as a small planing boat. The rear stability dagger boards are used, I presume, as it has a tendency to bow steer? Interestingly, the scow bows used on the latest open class sailing boats would suggest when planing in big seas, that the complete opposite might have some merit and certainly be worth looking into.

But this is one of the advantages of the RNLI keeping an independent research and design operation. They can evaluate anything they think might improve their boats and remain immune from the pressures of commercial operations who might look to the advantage of seeing their proprietary technology used by a rescue organisation as a marketing tool for selling it on to other users. I'm not saying this is the case with the tie up between KNRM and Damen Shipyards, but I know how hard it is when you run a voluntary funded organisation, to look closely enough in any gift horses mouth.

 

[sarabande]

from the RNLI site

"Shannon and Peter

Peter Eyre, an RNLI Naval Architect Northern Ireland was instrumental in the development of the new lifeboat – he designed the hull form at the age of 24 in his spare time. Peter explains: ‘I kept the design under wraps in the early stages. After a while my boss could see I was working on something and encouraged me to continue. I was the youngest in the team and before long I had designed the new lifeboat hull!"

 

[TimBennet]

The initial lines drawing of a hull form is a long way from designing a lifeboat.

 

[sarabande]

http://rnli.org/newlifeboatappeal/design/Pages/design-and-evolution.aspx


the story is one of empirical development; design, build test, amemd retest, rebuild.... and has beeen going on for >9 years. Meritorious, but given the RNLI's experience with lifeboats, and the parallel developments in the commercial world and other rescue organisations, I question why it took so long (and hence so much money).

(I was involved in the initial design of the beach launch system with the original exceptionally talented engineer from Supacat. The RNLI was likened to the MoD in terms of its project management and design/development processes.)

 

[TimBennet]

. . . The RNLI was likened to the MoD in terms of its project management and design/development processes.)

I think that is probably (at last!) a valid criticism that can be levelled at the RNLI. There are all sorts of difficulties in deciding when a design is finished. In yachting, it's one good reason why we have ocean races with scheduled start days, so there's an imposed deadline on the design and build process. Otherwise we would carry on running tests for ever.

And in some ways 'races' could also be good for the RNLI in similar ways - it enables you to evaluate your work against that of others. The RNLI are very sensitive about getting too inward looking. They remember the whole culture of the early pre 1960's boats (low profile, slow with mechanical systems for self righting) ultimately proving to be a dead end. Bringing in the 'revolutionary USCG 44 footer was hard to take for many who had been involved in the development process up to then.

The culture is now far more outward looking (for instance the use of a commercial hull for the trial horse at the start of the FCB2 project and the evaluation of six or seven other hulls at the test tank stage0. But deciding when enough is enough is desperately difficult when 'designing the best' is your yardstick.

 

[Bajansailor]

It's a 19m hull, looks good and the aft fins are quite interesting, they may even help when stopped or manouvering slowly, with the deep bow section and fins, sideways drift will be a lot less than a conventional planing/semi planing hull shape...won't they Martin?

I think I know what you are referring to Neil.........

Was it my thread on PBO re adding extra depth up forward to the keel on a fishing boat here?
http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3785050

I think that the aft fins on the lifeboat will also be useful when running fast with a large following sea, as then that axe bow could perhaps tend to dig in and try to take control if the aft fins were not there to maintain directional stability.

And I can see how that very slender axe bow will result in relatively less slamming when bashing into the seas at speed, compared to a more 'conventional' type of planing / semi-planing hull form.