The new Fairline Squadron 58

[Illusion]

Sadly and a sign of the times unfortunately, I wonder really how many people on this forum really now care and can relate?
For me one of the key take aways from SIBs 2023 is the cost of anything new particularly 40 foot plus. All seems pie in the sky for most folk I speak to and I suspect the bulk of UK boaters now. But I guess manufacturers will say their order books are full so someone, somewhere must think for example £800k for a 45ft day boat is value for money!

 

[jfm]

The side decks - Princess use a very protective and high stainless stanchion / pulpit rail in combination with full length hand rails on the boat.

Yes they do, to compensate for the fact that (comparing F55 and Sq58) the Princess side decks are meaningfully narrower than the Fairline's. Nothing wrong with either approach; I was merely correcting your incorrect/misleading statement that the Sq58 side decks are narrower than Princess f55's.

 

[henryf]

Yes they do, to compensate for the fact that (comparing F55 and Sq58) the Princess side decks are meaningfully narrower than the Fairline's. Nothing wrong with either approach; I was merely correcting your incorrect/misleading statement that the Sq58 side decks are narrower than Princess f55's.

We’ve spent a lot of time this season running up and down the side decks this being our first boat with proper step through seating, Sharon more so than me as she does the ropes and monitors the anchor, at no time have we felt vulnerable. We both felt uneasy on the S58 in the relative safety of a marina and without 3 glasses and a bottle of fizz to carry.

it was a significant reason for not buying the Manhattan 55 which also pushes you out with a styling bulge at one point.

I do take onboard and hadn’t considered the potential differences in internal space usage in warmer climes although I like my shade and A/C which by all accounts means I’m destined for a much bigger boat…..

 

[jfm]

I wasn't talking about your feelings. Of course you're free to decide that an actually bigger thing feels smaller to you. I'm talking only about dimensions, which are not feelings. You wrote in post #4 that the Sq58's "side decks were ...narrower" than the F55's and I'm merely pointing out that that is factually incorrect .

 

[henryf]

I wasn't talking about your feelings. Of course you're free to decide that an actually bigger thing feels smaller to you. I'm talking only about dimensions, which are not feelings. You wrote in post #4 that the Sq58's "side decks were ...narrower" than the F55's and I'm merely pointing out that that is factually incorrect .

Fair enough. Unfortunately I can’t edit the post.

The side decks felt narrower and maybe the fact they aren’t explains why the saloon also feels narrower on a wider boat.

How is that definitely wider boat of yours coming on?

It must be starting to look like a boat now.

 

[Moonstruck]

Fair enough. Unfortunately I can’t edit the post.

The side decks felt narrower and maybe the fact they aren’t explains why the saloon also feels narrower on a wider boat.

How is that definitely wider boat of yours coming on?

It must be starting to look like a boat now.

Completely agree. Whether they are wider or not, there was no head level rail to hold and the rails are too low in my opinion. We both felt very vulnerable and found ourselves leaning into the boat as we walked. Easily resolved I would think by increasing the height. Might be one of those cases where the designer has gone for looks over practicality and safety. Still liked the boat though, although I think it’s very pricey when fully loaded.

 

[MapisM]

We both felt uneasy on the S58

Mmm... Seriously?
Good luck for when you'll have to board a 12 feet Highfield at sea, if you felt uneasy walking on that majestic deck in a marina!

In fact, I'm wondering if you weren't just deceived by the memory of what you are used to in your boat.
I mean, even from the pics alone, it's clear that the steel pulpit as such is rather low in the Sq58, BUT!
That is obviously because it's placed on top of a substantial gunwale, which BTW is far from common on this size of boats - in fact, there's practically none in your P55. And gunwales are by definition safer than open pulpits: it's no coincidence that in larger boats you often have closed gunwales only, with no steel pulpit at all on top of them. Or sometimes, one rail running just above the gunwales top, with stanchions a couple of inches high, if that.

Now, I can't tell from the pics if the total height (gunwales+pulpit) in the Sq58 is lower than the P55 pulpit-only protection, and if it is, by how much.
If you say it's lower, I take your word for it.
But pretty sure, in your pics the total height doesn't come across as unusually low, vs. the lady standing nearby. Just a thought: if your pulpit really is much higher, didn't you possibly specced the boat as meant to be coded, hence they fitted a higher than normal pulpit?

 

[MapisM]

Might be one of those cases where the designer has gone for looks over practicality and safety.

Why build the deck mould with a highish gunwale then - which BTW requires a more expensive construction?

Besides, folks, let's be realistic: it's not like we are talking of a commercial ferry here.
On all the boat we are taling about, bar none, side decks should be considered off-limits in heavy seas.
Or better said, we are talking of boats that should go nowhere at all, in heavy seas!

 

[Moonstruck]

Why build the deck mould with a highish gunwale then - which BTW requires a more expensive construction?

Besides, folks, let's be realistic: it's not like we are talking of a commercial ferry here.
On all the boat we are taling about, bar none, side decks should be considered off-limits in heavy seas.
Or better said, we are talking of boats that should go nowhere at all, in heavy seas!

I obviously haven’t measured them but compared to my 54 they “felt” low. The Gunwales were indeed very high. I think part of the problem may be that if you look at the bow pictures the rails seem to be angled outwards rather than go straight up.

 

[Portofino]

Wading back in on this to Henrys defence .

If this person can’t see out ….

And can’t touch the rails here , well proper grab not finger tips .

Or looks likes she’s could topple backwards here ….



= Then they are low , it’s obvious the pics say it all .

Also note pic 2 the vertical stnations lean / bend outwards .Maybe the competition also use that trick ? .But the point here is the hight and “ feeling “ of safety .

We all have the same deck of card preferences, just stacked differently.As a charter boat whereby punters ( often unfamiliar with boats ) will want to move Fwds and hostesses deliver services then the “ feeling “ safe card moving Fwds wether real or apparent is high up the pack of preference cards deck .

The rails ARE low on this Sq 58 .

 

[MapisM]

Porto, I'm well aware that many boaters are obsessed about pulpit height, and label a boat as safe or unsafe depending on that, regardless of watertight compartments, bilge pumps redundancy, hull stability, CoG - to name but a few of many other boat components that are as much MORE crucial to safety as they are much LESS appreciated at boat shows.

But out of all forumites that could complain about the rails height of that boat, this type of concern sounds bejond a joke from an Itama owner!

 

[DAW]

I've always thought that the railings on Princess boats were particularly good compared with other builders, and unusual in that they are relatively high and run all the way back to the cockpit. Take a look at the railings on most Sunseekers of a similar size to the S58 and you'll see that the stanchions are heavily raked forward, the overall height is not dissimilar to that of the S58 and in many cases the railings taper down to the gunwales and do not reach all the way aft to the cockpit. Just to make it doubly difficult, many current Sunseeker models incorporate a bulge in the superstructure right at the lowest point of the rail.

It seems to me that everyone has a different view on what constitutes safe when it comes to boats and boating, driven by a combination of personal preferences, experience, local custom and practice, and the conditions and manner in which they intend to use the boat. There is no right or wrong answer and what constitutes "safe" is usually a relative concept. Walk around a typical marina in the UK and you will see most people on boats wearing lifejackets. There was even a discussion on another thread about the need for children to wear lifejackets at all times, including in the marina to walk on the pontoons. In a typical Med marina or anchorage it would be a shock to see anybody (adult or child) wearing a lifejacket, and even when underway they would only consider wearing a lifejacket when on deck in heavy weather. Does this make Med boaters inherently more reckless, or are people just assessing the risks and adjusting their behaviour to the conditions?

Surely, the captain also has some responsibility for managing how the crew and guests use the boat. We do not allow guests to walk on the side decks when the boat is in motion, because they are exposed and there is a risk of falling. The only exception to this is if we are going really slowly, heading into an anchorage or marina, and even then only when the conditions are very calm. In heavy weather, nobody is allowed to leave the cockpit when underway and anyone going forward to manage fenders, lines, anchor, etc. has to wear a life jacket. Only experienced (and sober) people are allowed to help with fenders and lines. It seems to me the risk of someone falling overboard in the marina on a boat travelling at less than 3 knots with dry decks is low and can be managed without the requirement for compulsory wearing of life jackets and waist high railings. But that's just my opinion ... everyone is entitled to their own view

Obviously boats coded for charter need to comply with different regulations to cope with the potential for dangerous behaviour by uninformed guests.

 

[Portofino]

Porto, I'm well aware that many boaters are obsessed about pulpit height, and label a boat as safe or unsafe depending on that, regardless of watertight compartments, bilge pumps redundancy, hull stability, CoG - to name but a few of many other boat components that are as much MORE crucial to safety as they are much LESS appreciated at boat shows.

But out of all forumites that could complain about the rails height of that boat, this type of concern sounds bejond a joke from an Itama owner!

Not complaining, just being factual from what I can see and fully understand where H is coming from .
As DAW say everyone s got a view and I can clearly see H s view from the pics .
Or tuned around Mrs H s none view out from the lower helm

You have highlighted a “few “ other cards in the deck ( playing cards of buyers priorities ) We all have our top 10 .The forum knows pretty much where my priorities lie so I ain’t gonna bang on about them as this threads H s interpretation of the new P58 .
Which I well written and explained .

 

[henryf]

Our boat had no special construction on account of the coding - you can’t really deviate from standard with a Princess it has to be done retrospectively.

Interestingly we were able to obtain equivalency with the MCA based on the relevant ISO standard Princess confirmed to for occupant safety.

Bow seating has become pretty much a legal requirement now in the mid 50 foot arena and that means people are going to use it in anger which includes carrying food and drink there and back.

My crew is also my wife and the very last thing I want is to be fishing her out of the water in a busy port or harbour. We operate in areas of high traffic combined with substantial tides 4m plus is not uncommon.

Princess primarily build a boat to be used in all circumstances and operational requirements trump designer’s whims. That is not the case elsewhere. It doesn’t mean boats have to be ugly or industrial it just means the designers have to work a bit harder and sometimes full sized mock ups need to be built rather than relying solely on computer aided design. There’s no substitute for touching and feeling.

 

[DAW]

Our boat had no special construction on account of the coding - you can’t really deviate from standard with a Princess it has to be done retrospectively.

Interestingly we were able to obtain equivalency with the MCA based on the relevant ISO standard Princess confirmed to for occupant safety.

Bow seating has become pretty much a legal requirement now in the mid 50 foot arena and that means people are going to use it in anger which includes carrying food and drink there and back.

Just to follow up on a couple of those points ...

There are lots of Sunseeker Manhattans, Predators and Sports Yachts in charter use around the Med without any obvious modifications to railing heights for coding purposes. Presumably at this size, the regulations provide considerable flexibility around what constitutes an acceptable height for occupant safety. Also, I would have thought complying with RCD regulations and categorisation also means that whatever builders are doing is considered to be "acceptable" from a safety in expected use perspective.

I agree that bow seating has become a necessity on boats of this size and that brings with it increased traffic on the side decks. Perhaps that's why you see many of the more recent designs moving towards a combination of deeper gunwales and higher railings. Unfortunately, to achieve deeper gunwales without compromising interior accommodation on the lower deck, the builders are often increasing freeboard and overall height which brings its own challenges regarding usability and stability. While high freeboard is not a problem when med mooring, I guess it creates additional challenges when tying up alongside and trying to step on and off to the side.

 

[roa312]

Found a short clip of the boat underway and wanted to share. I really like the foldout bathing platform. I hope that the beach club concept also makes it's way to the smaller boats over time.

 

[henryf]

@DAW
The coding requirements here in the UK have changed somewhat in recent times as a result of various fatalities and accidents. No longer do surveyors have the free reign they once might have enjoyed.

The coding cycle is 5 years. An initial out of water survey and inspection for a new licence followed by annual inspections either by the operator or a surveyor. The problems will arise at the initial inspection only so it takes 5 years for any new procedures to work through the industry.

With regard side decks the simple answer is make all side decks out of bounds to passengers unless anchored or in port. The flybridge will bring problems as well though and that is harder to get round.

Regardless of MCA coding requirements I have standards which I won’t compromise for my crew. You will see they all wear life jackets for instance but that aside I don’t want an unsafe boat.

 

[MapisM]

H s interpretation of the new P58 .
Which I well written and explained .

I agree.
Well written and explained it definitely is, but also clearly biased - as honestly recognised by henryf himself, in fact.
Now, I wouldn't dare putting myself in his boots, neither in terms of his type of boat usage nor in terms of his boating grounds.
But having spent a whole life boating in the Med, I think it's fair to say that as a Med boat, in a nutshell, the Sq58 is better than the P55 in almost every respect. To the point that I suspect that's what FL was targeting, first and foremost.
Though I also guess that the Sq58 would be much more appealing than the P55 also in the US market, which I don't know as much as the Med, but still much better than the UK, towards which most if not all henryf comments seems to be geared.

 

[Elessar]

@DAW
The coding requirements here in the UK have changed somewhat in recent times as a result of various fatalities and accidents. No longer do surveyors have the free reign they once might have enjoyed.

The coding cycle is 5 years. An initial out of water survey and inspection for a new licence followed by annual inspections either by the operator or a surveyor. The problems will arise at the initial inspection only so it takes 5 years for any new procedures to work through the industry.

With regard side decks the simple answer is make all side decks out of bounds to passengers unless anchored or in port. The flybridge will bring problems as well though and that is harder to get round.

Regardless of MCA coding requirements I have standards which I won’t compromise for my crew. You will see they all wear life jackets for instance but that aside I don’t want an unsafe boat.

The MCA rule is 1m rails for anywhere passengers go which is why so many coded mobos say crew only on the side decks.

On boats with the dinette forward the side rails really should be 1m high however wide (real or perceived) the side decks are as you are going to want to let the passengers go there.

I’ve just coded my boat and as an older 46 ft boat my side decks are crew only. My flybridge rails were 1m as standard so that’s good and I had to add raised guard lines in the cockpit to pass.

Yachts only need 700mm as all pax are considered crew.

 

[MapisM]

Very interesting stuff Elessar, thanks for enlightening us.

I was indeed wondering about numbers, since the debate was purely based on impressions so far!
In fact, earlier today I checked the heigths in my own 56 footer (2004 vintage and originally designed in the late 90s, so very different in many ways, size aside), and the results are as follows:
In the cockpit, I've got a very high gunwale all around it (70+ cm), with a 30cm steel pulpit on top - total: 1+m.
Along side decks, I have close to no gunwales (aside from a tiny raised border, almost identical to the P55), but a rather high pulpit, raised by 85 cm astern, and then reduced to about 75 cm from midship to the bow.
Not because the pulpit goes downhill, but because the walkaround is a bit raised forward of midship, but that's irrelevant, of course.

Now, it would be interesting to know the equivalent numbers of the Sq58 and the P55.
But based on the pics alone, there's one thing I can safely bet on: neither are even close to 1m of heigth - anywhere, cockpit included!
Which is very funny, because implies that passengers (at least theoretically!) are supposed to stay inside while under way on both these very modern and expensive boats, while they could enjoy a bit of fresh air the cockpit of mine, which is 20 years older!