Sète's new lifeboat

[dogleg]

I really would like to know if the CTT engines are running at full output unlike the 60% of the Shannon

apologies this should be 80% the Dutch lifeboats are built locally to an off the shelf design that was also used by many Dutch pilot boats the new 19 meter boat was designed and built entirely in the Netherlands

lovely across Biscay at moment sunny with f3/4 ene just past Oueshant

 

[Sybarite]

And that is exactly my point!

I don't know enough accurate detail to form anything other than an opinion and neither do you! Yet you repeatedly assert as fact that the CTT is a "better boat" than the Shannon based on your interpretation of a handful of videos and incomplete data.



You may

That would be a more valid basis for comparison but I can't find a shred of info about the jet propulsion version

I have to find everything for you...!!!

http://www.bernard-naval.com/vedette-sauvetage-orc-182.html

It's funny but the pantocarene hull has been adopted everywhere. How many Shannons has Berthon sold?

PS Sorry; it was Belgium rather than Holland. I was speaking from memory.

PPS It should be noted that there are two different yards building pantocarene hulled boats for the SNSM: Chantiers Bernard for the ORC 14 Vedette N°1 and Sibiril for the CTT. This promotes competition which helps keep the boats up to date and cost effective.

 

[Bru]

I have to find everything for you...!!!

http://www.bernard-naval.com/vedette-sauvetage-orc-182.html

It's funny but the pantocarene hull has been adopted everywhere. How many Shannons has Berthon sold?

PS Sorry; it was Belgium rather than Holland. I was speaking from memory.

PPS It should be noted that there are two different yards building pantocarene hulled boats for the SNSM: Chantiers Bernard for the ORC 14 Vedette N°1 and Sibiril for the CTT. This promotes competition which helps keep the boats up to date and cost effective.

Thanks but I prefer the English version http://www.bernard-naval.com/vedette-sauvetage-orc-182_en.html which I'd already found

Absolutely zero information on the propulsion system (it looks like jet propulsion in the photos to be fair)

No dimensions, no engine details, no useful info at all

Like I said, I can find no info to make an even vaguely useful comparison

What is stated is a maximum significant wave height of 4m (Douglas scale 6 Very Rough). That's F7/8 territory!

That may suitable for conditions in the North Sea off the Belgian coast but of no use whatseover to the RNLI off the Atlantic coast

That immediately rules the ORC182 out of contention as any sort of comparable boat to Shannon which has no such limit (In fact, I would go so far as to say that a stated limit of sea state 6 makes the claim that the ORC182 is an "all weather" lifeboat dubious, to say the least).

Shannon is designed to operate in 60+ knots of wind (F11 plus) which equates to a sea state of very high to phenomenal

Furthermore, correct me if I'm wrong but I've just twigged that the ORC182 is a version of the Vedette No.1 and NOT the CTT.

You really do need to learn the difference between chalk and cheese!

By the by, Shannon is not a production boat from a commercial builder so it's pointless asking how many have been sold. The answer is, of course, none (Berthon were a sub-contractor on the early builds, are no longer involved, and never had the rights to sell the design or the boats. They never, in fact, built any Shannons as such, they fitted out the first few built whilst the RNLI in-house facility was under construction)

 

[Sybarite]

Thanks but I prefer the English version http://www.bernard-naval.com/vedette-sauvetage-orc-182_en.html which I'd already found

Absolutely zero information on the propulsion system (it looks like jet propulsion in the photos to be fair)

No dimensions, no engine details, no useful info at all

Like I said, I can find no info to make an even vaguely useful comparison

What is stated is a maximum significant wave height of 4m (Douglas scale 6 Very Rough). That's F7/8 territory!

That may suitable for conditions in the North Sea off the Belgian coast but of no use whatseover to the RNLI off the Atlantic coast

That immediately rules the ORC182 out of contention as any sort of comparable boat to Shannon which has no such limit (In fact, I would go so far as to say that a stated limit of sea state 6 makes the claim that the ORC182 is an "all weather" lifeboat dubious, to say the least). Shannon is designed to operate in 60+ knots of wind (F11 plus) which equates to a sea state of very high to phenomenal

You really get your knickers in a twist over nothing. All I said was that a jet-propelled version exists. (Before somebody else claims the Shannon has an uncloseable advantage over the French boats.) It's true that the hp is not mentionned possibly because the same hull may be equipped with different engines depending on whether it will be used as a pilot boat or a lifeboat. (I'm surmising.) However they did say that it was designed to tow a 500 GT boat. So that would suggest serious power.

These boats are all weather boats and if I had to head out in a winter storm, I sure know which boat I would prefer to be in.

Furthermore, correct me if I'm wrong but I've just twigged that the ORC182 is a version of the Vedette No.1 and NOT the CTT.

Was there something in this that you couldn't understand?

(Sybarite) PPS It should be noted that there are two different yards building pantocarene hulled boats for the SNSM: Chantiers Bernard for the ORC 14 Vedette N°1 and Sibiril for the CTT. This promotes competition which helps keep the boats up to date and cost effective.

(Bru) You really do need to learn the difference between chalk and cheese!

You really need to learn to read. And to learn that it is the (same) architect (briefed by the client) who defines the (same) standard to which the boats are built.

By the by, Shannon is not a production boat from a commercial builder so it's pointless asking how many have been sold. The answer is, of course, none (Berthon were a sub-contractor on the early builds, are no longer involved, and never had the rights to sell the design or the boats. They never, in fact, built any Shannons as such, they fitted out the first few built whilst the RNLI in-house facility was under construction)

It's funny then that they, Berthon, announced that they intended to build the Shannon for other potential clients. But then perhaps you know better than them.

PS If you want to see the link I will let you do the search on previous years' postings.

 

[Bru]

All I said was that a jet-propelled version exists.

In a discussion about the relative merits of the new SNSM CTT and the Shannon. The obvious implication was that a jet version of the CTT exists, It doesn't

So that would suggest serious power.

A few blokes in a rowing boat could tow 500 tonnes. I've towed 40 tonnes by myself. You're just making assumptions based on insufficient data again

These boats are all weather boats

The CTT is, certainly. The Vedette No.1 / ORC182 is not by any sensible definition an all weather boat (by the manufacturers own statement)

Was there something in this that you couldn't understand?

Nope, but there's an awful lot you clearly don't. At the root of it is that you persistently refuse to accept that numbers don't tell the whole story. That is compounded by your persistent use of insufficient data to make assumptions which you present as fact. And the icing on the cake is that you persistently make invalid comparisons between vessels designed for different purposes

The SNSM CTT is a significantly larger boat than Shannon. Comparisons between the two are a crock

Shannon and the ORC182 is a much closer match. Similar size, similar propulsion system etc. And you can duck all you like but the plain fact is that whilst Shannon has a stated design capability to operate in 60 knot plus winds, the ORC182, based on your beloved Pantocarene hull, has a manufacturer stated limit of sea state 6 which equated to about F8.

It's funny then that they, Berthon, announced that they intended to build the Shannon for other potential clients.

Announced, Past tense. I did have a hunt around and could find no indication that there are any current plans to offer Shannon for sale to other organisations now that production of the boats has moved entirely in-house

(Remember that despite bigging themselves up, Berthon were in fact only glueing the bits together and sticking the insides in. They were never building Shannon in it's entirety nor do they have any rights to the design)

 

[Sybarite]

In a discussion about the relative merits of the new SNSM CTT and the Shannon. The obvious implication was that a jet version of the CTT exists, It doesn't

One really needs to go slowly and gently with you in order for you to comprehend.

Only 3 of the new CTTs have been built so far. I showed the ORC Belgian boat (same size as the CTT) , to show that if needs be they could offer a jet version. Which they have done for Belgium.

A few blokes in a rowing boat could tow 500 tonnes. I've towed 40 tonnes by myself. You're just making assumptions based on insufficient data again

In a storm?

The CTT is, certainly. The Vedette No.1 / ORC182 is not by any sensible definition an all weather boat (by the manufacturers own statement)

It's funny that they say "bateau de sauvetage tous temps" immediately under the photo. Perhaps I need to help you with the translation?

Nope, but there's an awful lot you clearly don't. At the root of it is that you persistently refuse to accept that numbers don't tell the whole story. That is compounded by your persistent use of insufficient data to make assumptions which you present as fact. And the icing on the cake is that you persistently make invalid comparisons between vessels designed for different purposes

I see data that you apparently miss with a superficial perusal.

The SNSM CTT is a significantly larger boat than Shannon. Comparisons between the two are a crock

That was exactly the point I was making. The CTT is a significantly larger boat than the Shannon but it is about half the price. At least the SNSM had the good sense to use existing yards to build their boats rather than spending £24m for their own to reinvent the wheel.

Shannon and the ORC182 is a much closer match. Similar size, similar propulsion system etc.

Similar size ??? : Shannon 13m60 ORC 18m20 CTT 18m60 You're supposed to be the engineer right? I thought you claimed that there was no information on the propulsion units for the ORC?

(Bru) Absolutely zero information on the propulsion system (it looks like jet propulsion in the photos to be fair)

Which is it?

And you can duck all you like but the plain fact is that whilst Shannon has a stated design capability to operate in 60 knot plus winds, the ORC182, based on your beloved Pantocarene hull, has a manufacturer stated limit of sea state 6 which equated to about F8.

See above.

Announced, Past tense. I did have a hunt around and could find no indication that there are any current plans to offer Shannon for sale to other organisations

Why does that not surprise me when you can get a better boat at half the price ? OTOH look at the wide distribution of pantocarene hulled boats.


Dunning - Krüger?

 

[Bru]

The jet propulsion ORC182 supplied to Belgium And to which you yourself linked is NOT the same size as the CTT

It is a version of the much smaller Vedette No.1

And I'll say it again because you're obviously hard of reading ... the manufacturers of that boat state a design limit of Sea State 6 which means, whatever they may like to claim, it is not an all weather boat

Your ball Sir

 

[Sybarite]

The jet propulsion ORC182 supplied to Belgium And to which you yourself linked is NOT the same size as the CTT

It is a version of the much smaller Vedette No.1

And I'll say it again because you're obviously hard of reading ... the manufacturers of that boat state a design limit of Sea State 6 which means, whatever they may like to claim, it is not an all weather boat

Your ball Sir

One is not a version of the other. The common denominator is the architect, Didier Marchand of Pantocarene.

A boat which is described as "autodressable" (self-righting), "incoulable" (unsinkable) and "tous temps" (all weather) on their site means exactly that : irrespective of some arbitrary official categorization.

As far as size is concerned in the literature the CTT was first described as being 17m80 (58') but the builder described the latest one (see the video in the OP) as being 18m60 (61').

I would say the 18m2 is not far off those dimensions....

Advantage - Sybarite.... Time to hang up your shovel.

 

[fisherman]

Advantage - Sybarite.... Time to hang up your shovel.

Gosh you're rude.

 

[Bru]

Sybarite my dear chap, you are wrong.

You're own link to the Belgian boat (the ORC182) on the manufacturers website states that it is a version of the smaller Vedette No.1, not the larger CTT

You have yet to come up with a link to a jet propulsion version of the CTT

The manufacturer states that that boat has significant weather limitation. The statement that it is capable only to sea state 6 is a lot less arbitrary than titling it an "all weather" boat

Keep wriggling

 

[Sybarite]

Sybarite my dear chap, you are wrong.

You're own link to the Belgian boat (the ORC182) on the manufacturers website states that it is a version of the smaller Vedette No.1, not the larger CTT

You have yet to come up with a link to a jet propulsion version of the CTT

The manufacturer states that that boat has significant weather limitation. The statement that it is capable only to sea state 6 is a lot less arbitrary than titling it an "all weather" boat

Keep wriggling

I wonder what their Bureau Veritas certification of "unrestricted navigation" means?

 

[viago]

I wonder what their Bureau Veritas certification of "unrestricted navigation" means?

i think veritas has something to do with kilroy silk.

 

[Bru]

I wonder what their Bureau Veritas certification of "unrestricted navigation" means?

Certification of which design? And anyway, I don't know and I don't care. The manufacturer STATES that the ORC182 design (the design using the Pantocarene hull that most closely resembles Shannon) is limited to Sea State 6 (equating to F8/9. Shannon is good for F11+ according to it's stated capabilities)

Keep wiggling

And you still haven't provided a link to a jet propulsion version of the CTT

I'm bouncing this back every time, as tedious as it is becoming, to highlight several major flaws in your arguments that persistently hamper your case and mislead those who have neither the time nor the inclination to do their own research

The first fallacy you keep on promoting is that you can compare two different designs based on a handful of generalised characteristics.

The second fallacy is that you can evaluate the performance of two different hull designs by comparing a handful of YouTube vides

And the third, and crucial, fallacy is your frequent confusion of boat types. The new SNSM CTT is not the same boat as the Belgian ORC182 for example

And when these fallacies are pointed out you don't address them, you just go back to repeating them with new variations on the theme

 

[Sybarite]

Certification of which design?

The ORC 182. I told you that you don't read the information completely.

And anyway, I don't know and I don't care

.

Another "don't know" reinforced by a "don't care."

The manufacturer STATES that the ORC182 design (the design using the Pantocarene hull that most closely resembles Shannon)

What idiocy are you descending into? The pantocarene hull in no way resembles a Shannon. A pantocarene hull resembles a pantocarene hull as used on both the ORC 182 and the CTT. The Shannon was an evolution of the Carmac hull.

is limited to Sea State 6 (equating to F8/9. Shannon is good for F11+ according to it's stated capabilities)

The manufacturer STATES that the ORC182 design (the design using the Pantocarene hull) is "tous temps" and is certified by Bureau Veritas for "unlimited navigation".

You really are scraping the barrel in your attempts to discredit me.

And you still haven't provided a link to a jet propulsion version of the CTT.

If what I wrote wasn't clear enough I think that you really do have a problem.

The second fallacy is that you can evaluate the performance of two different hull designs by comparing a handful of YouTube vides

I clearly saw that (and commented upon it) but then this impression was scientifically backed-up, had you chosen to watch the link shown in post #35.

And the third, and crucial, fallacy is your frequent confusion of boat types. The new SNSM CTT is not the same boat as the Belgian ORC182 for example.

Tell in what way they are different.

Let me point out the similarities:

Both are lifeboats designed by the same architect.
They both use the same basic hull design.
They are as near as dammit the same size.
They are both built of composite; one by Sibiril; the other by Barnard.
SNSM does not need jets (or rather has so far not needed jets )for the purpose for which the CTT was designed.
The SNSM has other jet boats for use in shallow water (the 30knt vedette N°2)

As far as the V2 9m jet boat is concerned it has two 200hp diesels and, at €210k is 16% cheaper than the RNLI Atlantic 85 RIB with 2 x115hp outboards. .... (RNLI " a B class Atlantic 85 inshore lifeboat costs £214,000")

https://www.snsm.org/flotte/vedette-v2-serie-des-9-m

There is also a 10m50 version at €320k. (2x250hp)

 

[Bru]

Sybarite, get a grip mate. You really are losing the plot

The ORC182 is NOT the same boat as the CTT,

And they can tag it as "all weather" as much as they like but from the Bernard Shipyard's own web page regarding the ORC182 I quote "ORC182 is provided for a heavy seas service with very high signifiant wave 2.50m to 4m (surges 6 - Douglas scale)"

I'll say it again; sea state 6 equates to F8, F9 at a pinch, nowhere near the F11 plus capability of the Shannon

In a nutshell, the claim that the ORC182 is "all weather" is at best misleading

No doubt you'll respond once again with a repetition of the same old mantra but I've got more important things to do this coming week so I'll leave you to it!

 

[Sybarite]

Sybarite, get a grip mate. You really are losing the plot

The ORC182 is NOT the same boat as the CTT,

And they can tag it as "all weather" as much as they like but from the Bernard Shipyard's own web page regarding the ORC182 I quote "ORC182 is provided for a heavy seas service with very high signifiant wave 2.50m to 4m (surges 6 - Douglas scale)"

I'll say it again; sea state 6 equates to F8, F9 at a pinch, nowhere near the F11 plus capability of the Shannon

In a nutshell, the claim that the ORC182 is "all weather" is at best misleading

No doubt you'll respond once again with a repetition of the same old mantra but I've got more important things to do this coming week so I'll leave you to it!

Whatever.

I don't want to waste any more time dscussing this with you.

Now if anybody else has something intelligent to say...??

If not, back to post #157

 

[fisherman]

No, many thanks Sybarite, but I think we're all done here.

 

[[70521]]

Oh this has been fun while I have been away...

Perhaps there should be some sea trials in shall we say the most northerly stations of the combined services and see what the crews say. As Iam yet to hear anybody talk about the design parameters of the environment they are operating in.

UK = Shetland 60 degrees north

FR = Dunkirk 51 degrees north.

 

[Juan Twothree]

Sybarite wrote:

Whatever.

I don't want to waste any more time dscussing this with you.


No, please, don't give up now!

I'm sure that if you keep repeating yourself for a bit longer then everyone will eventually come round to your point of view.

This thread hasn't even been running for a month yet; it's barely started. GIve it time old chap

 

[Sybarite]

I started off by simply presenting the lovely new boat. But then the knee-jerk reactions set in trying to show that it couldn't possibly be as good as the British boats.

Well the distribution of the French type boat would tend to suggest the contrary. At a fraction of the price.