Passarelle length

Magnum this is something you have to check for each model of boat you buy. Some are fine; some aren't. Yours isn't anywhere near ok. On both my sq 78 I speced a custom longer Besenzoni so as to get a 1.5m overhang. Imho you need this for many reasons, including in winter when you want your boat well off the quay in case of storms but you need your crew girl still to be able to get on. I would be having firm words with princess about a free upgrade. That will be technically difficult though. A longer 2er will need a longer cassette box and therefore mods to crew cabin ceiling. A 3er may be too tall/thick. The beast itself will be £15 k and then fitting will be a big job potentially. Buckle up for princess resistance.
 
I can share Magnum's concern about enabling wife and sprog to cross safely. As an intermediate solution pending long negotiations with the builders, would a 'drawbridge' solve the access problem ? A small section of aluminium/teak "plank" attachable to spigots at the outer end of the passerelle, so that when needed it can be let down or raised or attached by hand. Similar to the ones used in castles , and not unlike the bascules in road bridges.


As a quick safety fix you might be able to adapt a dog ramp - some of which are St Bernard rated :)

http://www.rampsdirect.org/best-dog-ramps/
 
jfm said:
A 3er may be too tall/thick.
Click to expand...
Actually the thickness difference is not much, in most models I've seen - hence my previous comment on being good news that the existing passerelle has only 2 segments.
It's surely much harder to fit something requiring a longer box, anyway.

Ref. asking a FoC upgrade, while I agree that the builder should be ashamed to have installed that thing, maybe it would be fair to get the longer version installed at the same cost of the upgrade if specced from the beginning.
Well, at least I for one would be happy with that, in Magnum's boots...
 
MapisM said:
Actually the thickness difference is not much, in most models I've seen - hence my previous comment on being good news that the existing passerelle has only 2 segments.
It's surely much harder to fit something requiring a longer box, anyway.

Ref. asking a FoC upgrade, while I agree that the builder should be ashamed to have installed that thing, maybe it would be fair to get the longer version installed at the same cost of the upgrade if specced from the beginning.
Well, at least I for one would be happy with that, in Magnum's boots...
Click to expand...
Yup all agreed, but 10mm thicker might be too much. The housing is formed as a tray in the deck mound and it can be easily deepened or widened during build (by simply blocking the mould) but not afterwards. The thickness is not a function of the thickness of the 2 or 3 segments; it is determined by the thickness of the tilt mechanism that will have drop down webs to give the (horizontal) tilt cylinders their leverage (such as it is, perhaps 50:1 against). On my Besenzoni the height of the whole thing is somewhat greater than the thickness of the segments, for this reason. Anyway, all this can be found out by princess from the passerelle maker. Besenzoni will do custom adaptations of their standard models; I hope opacmare will too
 
Magnum are you running such a large boat on a yellow 60 amp shore power cable that you plug in at each end with the excess wound around the box? No glendinning? Sheesh!
 
It's just under 3.5m long and at a rough guess overhangs the bathing platform by no more than 50-60cm which seems woefully inadequate
Click to expand...
Agreed. My pasarelle overhangs the bathing platform by more than 1m.

Sumianda.jpg


I wouldnt feel secure having to leave my boat moored just 0.5m off the quay because of the length of the pasarelle and IMHO Princess are guilty of penny pinching here
 
An annoying situation for sure, especially with a brand new EUR 2 mil+ boat. A bit fed up with manufacturers with equipping boats with one level down equipment than needed. Same applies with several other serious equipment such as windlass capacities etc. The bad thing is they saved only EUR 1500-2000 by installing this pasarelle than the really needed one. Now there will be a EUR 20.000+ bill whose payer is not clear. And unfortunately the newer the boats, the more we see these examples. Below is a photo that shows the overhang at my SS M70. I think it is more than 1.2 meters:

IMG_9296.jpg
 
Last edited:
Eren said:
A bit fed up with manufacturers with equipping boats with one level down equipment than needed. Same applies with several other serious equipment such as windlass capacities etc. The bad thing is they saved only EUR 1500-2000 by installing this pasarelle than the really needed one.
Click to expand...
Thats what comes from allowing bean counters to run companies instead of engineers;)
 
Deleted User said:
My pasarelle overhangs the bathing platform by more than 1m.
Click to expand...
Yup M, the overhang is fine, but TBH at the size of your boat it's the placement which is debatable.
I mean, attaching the passerelle on top of the stern is fine for using it also as a tender crane, but on big boats that implies a rather steep angle, particularly with floating docks.
The cassette passerelle, attached at the cockpit level, is more convenient in this respect. Compromises, as always...

Anyway, sod the passerelle, where's the detailed report about gyro stabilization we are all waiting for? :cool:
 
The CEO recently did an interview for Barche mag .
It's sold on the continent printed in Italian and English --the main thrust / theme running through the 3/4 pages was along the lines that Princess were engineered first and allways placed the engineering and sea worthy ness in terms of use above style .He made out that side was Allways in Princess while competitors ( not named ) had concentrated more on the style side --at the expense of the engineering integrity .

I was quite taken the article ---believed it -yeh I know a mag article about a major "customer " re advertising revenue !
How ever ---as ever there's no substitution for Mk 1 eyeball .

So I,am surprised about this thread and the other kinda related Magnum one a while back about the chain stopper , or lack of it and the woefully inadequate L and size of chain fitted as std .

Maybe they are all at it --cost cutting to the next vs down ,size down etc --- but surley that may work @ into modals aimed a newbys who's can not tell ,but an experianced big boat buyer ---it's a put off .
Short term ism .
 
Yup M, the overhang is fine, but TBH at the size of your boat it's the placement which is debatable.
I mean, attaching the passerelle on top of the stern is fine for using it also as a tender crane, but on big boats that implies a rather steep angle, particularly with floating docks.
The cassette passerelle, attached at the cockpit level, is more convenient in this respect. Compromises, as always...
Click to expand...
To answer why I prefer the Ferretti way when it comes to pasarelles, I only have to point you to the Sq78 parked next to me in Antibes. He has to tie his boat up at an angle so that access to his pasarelle is not obstructed by the electricity box which, unfortunately for him, is directly behind it. I will never have that problem because of course my pasarelle slews left and right and to get that facility I will gladly put up with walking uphill onto my boat;). Besides that, its good exercise

Anyway, sod the passerelle, where's the detailed report about gyro stabilization we are all waiting for?
Click to expand...
As soon as I can get out on the boat and test it myself. Unfortunately, S has had an operation recently and needs looking after at home so we havent been able to get out to Antibes for the last month or so and she probably wont be fit enough to travel for another month either. The skipper who brought the boat back from Barcelona said the gyro worked very well so I am looking forward to trying it
 
Deleted User, best wishes to S for fast recovery

Looking fwd to hearing about the gyro.

I don't think you can blame sq78; virtually all letterbox passerelles are non slewing. It's horses for courses but you have paid a heck of a price for your slewing, in the form of a steep angle and the walkway joining the boat at the dining table so splitting it in half. For sure, fairline would build precisely that on a sq78, or any slightly custom 70-80 foot builder would do it; a customer just needs to ask them.

In any case ferretti cut a slight corner: on pershing 64 for example, same group, the passerelle is letterbox AND slewing, showing that it can be done on your size boat.
 
Deleted User said:
Unfortunately, S has had an operation recently and needs looking after at home so we havent been able to get out to Antibes for the last month or so and she probably wont be fit enough to travel for another month either.
Click to expand...
Yup, coming to think of it, you told me about that. I hope all went well.
Anyway, if S would be fit enough to come onboard as a passenger, you know you'd be welcome to join us anytime during the delivery trip to CF.
The last i's and t's are being dotted and crossed as I'm writing, but hopefully we should start the journey in a week or so...
 
Last edited:
There is a 3 piece model that fits with minor modification to an internal bulkhead. With the current passarelle it would be physically impossible to get back onboard when the boat is left in "storm readiness".

I have been advised that I am the first 68 owner ever to have raised this issue, which surprises me given the problems we are experiencing, but I don't doubt it. One thing I will say is that Princess have never backed away from a problem when presented with the facts. That's why this is my 4th new Princess.

jfm said:
Yup all agreed, but 10mm thicker might be too much. The housing is formed as a tray in the deck mound and it can be easily deepened or widened during build (by simply blocking the mould) but not afterwards. The thickness is not a function of the thickness of the 2 or 3 segments; it is determined by the thickness of the tilt mechanism that will have drop down webs to give the (horizontal) tilt cylinders their leverage (such as it is, perhaps 50:1 against). On my Besenzoni the height of the whole thing is somewhat greater than the thickness of the segments, for this reason. Anyway, all this can be found out by princess from the passerelle maker. Besenzoni will do custom adaptations of their standard models; I hope opacmare will too
Click to expand...
 
Guys I have the Squadron 60 and it has the extended bathing platform so is in 3 sections and has a reach of 4.1 meters and fits in a cassette so I am sure you can get 1 that will give more clearance, don't suppose they would take it back to the factory and rebuild it?
 
jfm said:
Deleted User, best wishes to S for fast recovery

Looking fwd to hearing about the gyro.

I don't think you can blame sq78; virtually all letterbox passerelles are non slewing. It's horses for courses but you have paid a heck of a price for your slewing, in the form of a steep angle and the walkway joining the boat at the dining table so splitting it in half. For sure, fairline would build precisely that on a sq78, or any slightly custom 70-80 foot builder would do it; a customer just needs to ask them.

In any case ferretti cut a slight corner: on pershing 64 for example, same group, the passerelle is letterbox AND slewing, showing that it can be done on your size boat.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your good wishes. I have passed them on to her

Yes the pasarelle on a Pershing 64 is indeed a thing of engineering beauty but I still say the position, or at least the height, at which Ferretti have mounted the pasarelle on my boat is a reasonable compromise. I have been moored to much higher quays than the one in Antibes and even my pasarelle has to be angled upwards to get off the boat. Against a very high quay a low mounted letterbox pasarelle may not even raise itself up high enough to get to the level of the quay and if it does it will be a very steep angle. So I think I can live with the Ferretti pasarelle position given the fact that it slews as well even though it cuts my cockpit table in half. Of course the other reason it is in that position is because it has to lift the tender as well
 
MapisM said:
Yup, coming to think of it, you told me about that. I hope all went well.
Anyway, if S would be fit enough to come onboard as a passenger, you know you'd be welcome to join us anytime during the delivery trip to CF.
The last i's and t's are being dotted and crossed as I'm writing, but hopefully we should start the journey in a week or so...
Click to expand...

Thanks P. Very kind

Look forward to your forum cruise report!
 
I know little about Passarelles and in fact I did not know what one was until I read this thread. The answer seems to attach the carbon fibre add on jobbie as a temporary solution until the new one can be made. There is no way I would want to jump over that gap on my own and carrying a baby would be very scary indeed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top