The best of Both Worlds?

[Gludy]

"I'd also like it to be collapsible"

I thought all your boats had that characteristic the moment you tried to berth them?

I understand your need for hot women but can you please expand (without using any facts of course) on why you want some cold women on board?

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Wiggo]

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

I thought all your boats had that characteristic the moment you tried to berth them?

<hr></blockquote>


You been watching my missus park, then?

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

I understand your need for hot women but can you please expand (without using any facts of course) on why you want some cold women on board?

<hr></blockquote>


Pure speculation on my part, but I though it might be nice to have some cold ones available for the hot weather, as we don't have aircon. If it gets really hot, you could put one on either side of you. Has anyone tried this? Does it work? Any tips on how I can convince Senior Management that it's a good idea?

<hr width=100% size=1>Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

 

[jfm]

Gludy:
Marlow isn't well known in Europe boat but undoubtedly one of the finest boats on the planet. Very much hope you get one. A zillion times better than the carrigaline tub imho Let us know how the trial goes.

What was your issue with the squaddie 58? I'm interested naturally. If it is a bit legally, can you PM me?

To come back to your original question, I wanted Grandbanksy practicality but a bit more zippy looking. I also have no interest in 12knots cruising - I have done that at length on my brothers trawler yacht and it's too boring and there can be guests/seasickness issues. The sq 58 allows fast cruising and modern looks but does have all the granbanksy fiddledall-over the place practicality etc. Dont you think you'd have the same issue? I mean 12 knots is fun on a saiboat but isn't it a bit boring in a mobo? In which case, get a planing boat and dont worry bout the fuel costs?



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kimhollamby]

More confusion

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

Tell me how you can with a 65 foot boat get 3000 miles using (1600 USA gallons which is 1332 UK gallons) out of a pair of 700hp Cats when cruising at displacment speed say 10 knots? That is 2.25 miles per gallon!!!

<hr></blockquote>


Paul, you might actually get that on some planing hulls too if used that cruising speed. That's much more to do with waterline length than underwater form because the 10 knots is not really digging much of a hole for that length.

I could equally say how come a 7-ton Sealine S36 can cross the Channel at 22 knots and achieve 2mpg and an 11-ton Pedro 33 can cross the Channel at 8 knots and do...errr...2mpg. True stats (much to my wife's disgust who preferred the thought of the 4-hour passage over the 12-hour one for the same money.

Would it be uncomfortable to trawl a big 'planing' hull along at displacement pace? In reality not as bad as you think because in the conditions most people likely to use them they have all the weight and length to manage a variety of speeds. If your Marlowe has stabilisers then it would win out, but only because it could steady up the rolling motion that tends to affect any boat at those speeds.

The real point is, surely, that you appear only to favour a 12-knot (more expensive) cruise when the going gets a little tough and will otherwise push on. It's at the push on part that the stats get really interesting (and I get a touch sceptical).








<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kimhollamby]

...and is there so much difference...

...between big planing boats and semi-Ds these days? Okay controversial but the issue has got so clouded
since the days when planing usually meant some kind of modified vee and semi-D meant some kind of narrow modified round bilge with keel and flattish sections aft.

Now many are hybrid variations on a theme. What do I mean? Well, the bigger 'planing' hulls come so loaded with marble, solid wood and machinery that they sit well into the water even at cruising speeds. The semi-Ds are forever being tweaked with smaller, narrower keels and almost dead flat sections aft to get the lift necessary for 20-plus knots; they are often as fat as their 'planing' counterparts. In the case of the more narrower older fashioned designs they probably lift more forefoot out of the water than the planing equivalents when pushed really hard.

I think it's fascinating that Atlantic, for instance, has dropped the keel altogether on its new 60. Okay it's based upon the Bennett 53ft full planing hull (more normally found on fast patrol boats) but the reality is it can do all that the older keeled designs can manage, but with greater top-end potential and less chance of the keel upsetting handling at higher speeds. I presume the efficiency is greater too.




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gludy]

My issue with the 58 is that there are many aspects that I find are not practical. If you just compare the total ease of maintainance in every respect on a Marlow the standard gin palace becomes a laugh.

I think looks are important and I think it was more luck than judgement that My squadie had the 600 hp engines and all round access. However wiring up new cable runs can be days of work. As boats go I prefer it to the new 58. Watching all that furniture come out just to lift off rocker covers. I was even tempted with the fortchcoming Fairline 66 but decided that the Marlow offered so much more hence I am looking at 65 and 70 foot Marlows but there are also some very nice Traders..

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[jfm]

Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

We paid extra to have our Sq58 built with several 1inch dia ducts with string threaded thru, so I can pull a cable from anywhere to anywhere, pretty much. Would be nice if all new buyers specified the same. To their credit, fairline will do this on request

What were the things in the sq58 you found impractical?

It's partly down to priorities though. Is maintenance and wiring ease as important as having fun? For its size, the Sq58 is perhaps the most sociable of all flybridge boats. Day before yesterday sunday we were anchored in villefranche with 11 people (8 adults all forumites or swmbos, 3 kids) all sitting round the same lunch table on the flybridge. The table is kind of square with curved sides ( TV screen shape) so we could all talk. The stewaress had 2 good staricases to walk up and down with plates and food. Fabulous afternoon. That's the most important thing in a boat, not just the ability to run extra wiring easily.

I agree the marlow is totally fab though. But I'd check they make the dining tables the right size and shape (no doubt they will customise) because a boat that you can't yak to your mates on is a total POS no matter how well engineered, even if it's a blimmin Feadship.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Wiggo]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

We paid extra to have our Sq58 built with several 1inch dia ducts with string threaded thru, so I can pull a cable from anywhere to anywhere, pretty much. Would be nice if all new buyers specified the same. To their credit, fairline will do this on request

<hr></blockquote>


So why don't the tossers do it as standard, then???

<hr width=100% size=1>Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

 

[jfm]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

Becasue most owners dont want it, I suppose. Only me, Gludy and a few others The cost was only £300 by the way

Do you happen to know if other production builders offer this Wiggo? Sealine?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gludy]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

$300 for putting a few platic tubes around the place so that it is possible to draw wires through when you change electronic etc. Cost of tubes say a fiver - the charge £300.

This is what I mean the boats are compromised in their maintainance for the sake of a bit mor wow factor.

I frankly love my boat and have it about as perfect as it can ever be. It all works down to the last detail and is a great gin palace. It will be interesting to see where I end up on this pligrims progress I am on.

A lot is going to depend on how comfortable some SD boats are at say 14 to 18 knots.

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Gludy]

Re: More confusion

Kim
I am working very late because of my forthcoming trip to see the Marlow etc.
I will post a report and photos when I get back. in the meantime I am doing some research and will publish a table showing the efficiency of the different boats.

Does anyone know anything about the lastest Tarquin Traders? The new 64 looks a nice boat.

What did folks think of the Trader 575 at SIBS? That had 2 700hp cats in it - more powerful than my twin 600hp on my boat!

Range on one engine with 700 gallons on board, displacement speed 10 knots is 1100 miles that is 1.57 mpg and it is Class A. That requires about 5 degrees of helm to keep a straight boat and it can dry out with legs.

There must be a crossover point where its worse consumption than the planing boat. I will shortly be posting figures on this and other boats.




<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

If your boat is near as perfect as can be, what is your problem? What are you looking to achieve? What are your goals?

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[Gludy]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

My goals are:-

1. Having everyone enjoy the getting there as well as the arriving there. Modern SD boats with the advanced stabilisers fitted are apparantly so good that you take it easy, walk round, make tea etc whilst in passage. SWMBO is keen on this.

2. Larger boat for many reasons... larger cockpit for entertaining, better flybridge layout, larger bedrooms with a decent double bed for guests.

3. Ability to travel long way between fuel fillups and so offer flexibility on where and how often fuel is picked up. etc

4. Greater efficiency on fuel.

5. Improved sea handling in even heavy seas lifting the conditions a bit by which we can venture out.

6. Ability to dry out - this extends our ports of call about ten fold.

7. Ability to cruise economically at slower speeds whilst having the power to push her on the odd occasion.

8. Preferably a boat that will minimise snagging on ropes etc (The Marlow offers this)

9. A hull that can take the impact of a log etc without damage - the Marlow offers this as well.

10. A boat that still has a good wow factor and looks nice.

11. A boat that can take live aboard for long distance cruising.

12. a boat where vibration and noise are minimal and its hard to hear the engines.

13. A boat that is easy to maintain, good engine room access, easy cable runs etc etc.

14. A boat that can fit into my marina - 70 foot is about the limit and even that means I have to stay in the middle of our first lock with small boats either side of me because its only 66 foot wide at the sides.

15. A boat that will take less of a hit if the red diesel goes.

I think thats about it. .. not asking much really

PS please let me know when you find one!





<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

Suspect you may have to be happy with 7 out of 15 as a realistic compromise.

That number plucked out of air, no spreadsheets involved!

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[Gludy]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

I suppose I will have to compromise but I think I can iachieve more than 8 points and to some extent I think I can better myself on most of the points.

I have just looked into more detail at one SD boat and it was using 60% more fuel at its top speed than my Squadie and only using the same at 13 knots!!! A lose all the way situation. There seems to be a huge variation between boats. However its early days of researching yet.

I think if I was based in the Med and did not want to do long distance cruising then my Squadie would be about right. As soon as you start to look at long distance cruising range, comfort of passage , sea worthiness requirement the equation changes.



<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[jfm]

Re: Ease of running woires vs yak to your mates

Gludy:

I would say the marlow has massive wow factor. The trader doesn't have anywhere near as much. It's a complex thing this wow factor!

You have already mentioned this in a previous post but ride comfort at displ speeds is a big issue. you can be at sea for long stretches. I have done longish trips in my brothers displacement boat (11knots) and fronkly I dont like it (the motion, not the boat). He has vosper stabilisers (vosper minifin i think they're called) and these were refitted last winter with new fins and hydraulic drives and stuff, so quite up to date. They help, but the horrid motion is still there. So take care, get a long seatrial in rough weather!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kimhollamby]

Out of interest...

...has your brother played with the set-up of the stabilisers much yet?

I have a theory that upping the wick on them too much actually makes everyone seasick faster. Situation gets acute if also using autopilot -- rudders alone can induce roll if working hard, especially downwind and if the autopilot and stabilisers get into a fist fight can be very counter-productive.

I think a lot of people focus on roll when thinking displacement but comfort is also very much about how stiff the boat is (ie how quickly it steadies up). If it rapidly snatches to a halt before swinging back you might as well prepare a spot on the rail in advance for all those aboard for whom sickness is the first word that comes to mind when you say sea. Over-egged stabilisers can cause this, in degrees, depending on efficiency.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jfm]

Re: Out of interest...

I dont think he has a huge amount of adjustment Kim. In any stabiliser system of this size/spec the fins and hydraulics are much of a muchness and the clever part is the control box that tells the fins what to do in any given circumstances. I don't think my brother's boat has top of range gear in this regard, so that's a problem. But I do feel that even if he did have the maximum spec gyroed bells/whistles gear, the boat would still move a lot and people would still line up to reserve places on the rail

Big stabilisers on a 60m feadship are one thing, where the normal rough seas are smaller relative to the boat than in a 60footer say. I agree your comments about fine tuning set up, but if you look out of the window of a 60foot boat when you're in a big sea with breaking crests etc, common sense tells you that 2 stabilser fins not much bigger than the screen I'm now typing into just aren't gonna keep the boat anywhere near still. Hence I'll take the 28 knot planing boat and already be home please!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gludy]

Re: Out of interest...

Apparantly the latest stabiliser control systems that anticipate are a huge generation leap on SD boats but I have not experienced them ... I will soon.

I am taking the advice on rough sea trails .... its the only way to find out.

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Gludy]

Well I have some surprising info.

Independent boat test show that the 78 ft Marlow compared to the 74 foot Squadron both have about the same fuel consumption with 1400hp engines right throughout their range up to 36 knots!!! No loss in having the SD boat.

Another SD boat can do about 1.7mpg at 10 knots but does 0.6mpg at 23 knots - this equates to what A squadron 59 does overall with most cruising between 24 and 27 knots - so there is not crossover point until you go past 23 knots and the top speed of the SD hull is just 26 knots.

Thus on the figures presented The SD hull design of at least one boat offers me not only much improved sea going etc but the option to save fuel right up to 23 knots cruising .... its an all win situation. I could decide to take it nice and easy and cruise at ten knots using 1/3 of the fuel or go faster and use more until I get to 23 knots. the SD boat actually weighs in 3 tons heavier than the Squadron.

Looking at the wake of the SD hull at speed it looks like a distinctive planing boat wake.

However nothing compares to the over 6mpg of a Nordhaven 47 with its 8000 plus mile range at 8 knots! You would only need to fill up every few years!



<hr width=100% size=1>Paul