Victoria 34 and 38

Grumpybear said:
The way I heard it, the design of Team Philips was OK but the quality control of the fabrication may have left something to be desired e.g temp and humidity fluctuations during layup etc. there is more to building and operating any structure, not just a FRP boat, than just designing it
Click to expand...

Didn't they use non- waterproof glue?
 
Javelin said:
I wondered if the forum thinks there is a market for new 34 and 38 Victoria?
or is the market too congested already.
Click to expand...

Sailed in company with a 34 once . I was single handed in my 31ft AWB & reefed to slow myself up but still had to keep waiting for the old dog to catch up
Such an old design should be consigned to the bin- ( Design not necessarily the boat as it still has some life in it)

Modern AWB's are far superior to some ( but not all ) old designs
I also feel that from my experience the " slamming" debate is just a myth generated by those who do not have an AWB
My AWB slams no more than my last 40 + year old boats. In fact rarely does so, except in really adverse conditions that all boats would slam in if they were actually going forward & not just wallowing
 
TimBennet said:
There may be a little more real use of FEA in the latest designs of the bulkhead -less yachts, but generally there is little concern about 'strength' with regular sized boat - the issue is stiffness and finding an economic scantling that meets ISO 12215 will be done with a program like HullScant from the Wolfson.
Click to expand...

FEA is good for stiffness as well as strength! I would expect it to be particularly useful for design with load-bearing frameworks incorporated into the hull.
 
JumbleDuck said:
FEA is good for stiffness as well as strength! I would expect it to be particularly useful for design with load-bearing frameworks incorporated into the hull.
Click to expand...

But to do so you need a comprehensive and accurate load case. Could you model every load a boat is subjected to whist bashing through a storm? It's why the FEA excitement of the 80s and 90s didn't last long. There certainly are some specialist firms that consult on the engineering of hulls, but in my experience they don't get much work engineering production cruising boats.

You say Team Phillips had a good FEA model. Well this is highly debatable! Although the first disaster with the bow falling off was attributed to a build error with the longitudinal stringers, the boat ultimately broke up and was lost when the aft cross member failed in a storm. No one had imagined that the large flat aft facing surface of this member would be subject to high impact loads from breaking waves. It was always imagined that the boat would be 'out running' any seas. But when for various reasons they had to slow right down, the impact damage was devastating. No FEA program can model what the operator hasn't imagined to be 'the case'.

For cruising designs and most production boats, ISO 12215 via HullScant does a predictably reasonable job by keeping the inputs as known and provable entities. In contrast FEA on boats has a track record of generating lovely images of questionable value because of the uncertainty surrounding the quality of the load case.
 
TimBennet said:
But to do so you need a comprehensive and accurate load case. Could you model every load a boat is subjected to whist bashing through a storm? It's why the FEA excitement of the 80s and 90s didn't last long. There certainly are some specialist firms that consult on the engineering of hulls, but in my experience they don't get much work engineering production cruising boats.
Click to expand...

The dynamic load case will certainly be a wee bit more involved than the static one, but not intractably so. I am quite sure that a substantial amount of analysis goes into the design of modern mass produced boats, and with current systems that can very easily be done in-house.
 
JumbleDuck said:
The dynamic load case will certainly be a wee bit more involved than the static one, but not intractably so. I am quite sure that a substantial amount of analysis goes into the design of modern mass produced boats, and with current systems that can very easily be done in-house.
Click to expand...

I bow to your superior knowledge of yacht design houses.
 
roblpm said:
Ok i am not an expert but just went on a sailing course on a sun odyssey 37 which was nice but bounced up down to windward.

My understanding is that some boats don't slam as badly?

So am i just wrong? Or is there a niche for a boat that doesn't slam but doesn't cost 300k for a 37 foot boat??
Click to expand...




We are reliably informed that the boat was only slamming in a mythological manner.
 
doug748 said:
We are reliably informed that the boat was only slamming in a mythological manner.
Click to expand...

And also my current boat, a Parker 275 while pretty fast for a 28 foot boat is pretty light and bounces on waves.

Im sure weight must have something to do with it????!!! Or is that just being silly??
 
doug748 said:
To be fair, it may have done better if anyone had felt able to take it on in GRP.
Click to expand...

Possibly - but would it have been very different then to a Victoria 38 classic?

It's slightly shocking to realise that whole design process and debate about the YM38 started nearly 25 years ago.

Back then, the issues that fuelled that design all seemed so pertinent and important. It represented the zenith of cruising design and thinking. Comparisons with other cruising boats could only serve to highlight their shortcomings. Everything about it seemed to make so much sense.

Strangely, one of the most compelling illustrations that maybe not everyone agreed, was when Andrew Bray had Firefly built. Here was someone who (IIRC) had been party to designing the YM38 as the 'perfect boat' who shortly afterwards went and spent his own money on something quite different despite aspiring to go Bluewater cruising.

And ever since, 'vive la difference' has seen the notion of what makes a good cruising boat, with each to their own.

So as I said earlier, unless there is another 'disaster' to prove the superiority of one type of cruiser over another, personal choice will probably continue to favour value for money, at anchor comfort, ease of handling, space and style. The Victorias at any price will remain a niche product at best.
 
"And also my current boat, a Parker 275 while pretty fast for a 28 foot boat is pretty light and bounces on waves.

Im sure weight must have something to do with it????!!! Or is that just being silly??" Roblpm




It is also very nippy upwind which adds to the mix.
 
All it has already been said but the Mystery 34 is the modern incarnation and it is under £200K. The problem is that even if you could mass produce say a 38' version I don't think that there is a mass market for it. Most people want the space and only go sailing when the sun shines so none is going to mass produce a boat that won't slam. Having said that does the Moody 41 slam that is well under £300K and quite traditional in appearance but is not as slim as older boats.

People do buy British boats Rustler, Mystery, Oyster , Discovery, Gunfleet and until recently Southerly. Southerly seems to have built quite a few boats even after their first demise so demand was there.
 
Seven Spades said:
All it has already been said but the Mystery 34 is the modern incarnation and it is under £200K. The problem is that even if you could mass produce say a 38' version I don't think that there is a mass market for it. Most people want the space and only go sailing when the sun shines so none is going to mass produce a boat that won't slam. Having said that does the Moody 41 slam that is well under £300K and quite traditional in appearance but is not as slim as older boats.

People do buy British boats Rustler, Mystery, Oyster , Discovery, Gunfleet and until recently Southerly. Southerly seems to have built quite a few boats even after their first demise so demand was there.
Click to expand...

I think it's the 35?? Opinions??
 
Daydream believer said:
Sailed in company with a 34 once . I was single handed in my 31ft AWB & reefed to slow myself up but still had to keep waiting for the old dog to catch up
Such an old design should be consigned to the bin- ( Design not necessarily the boat as it still has some life in it)
Click to expand...

We were alongside a 34 in Dungarvan some years ago, had come down from Iceland doing a round Ireland trip. He made the point that it felt safe in F10s trailing an old tyre or two and day sails for them were often around F8. No way would he consider any modern high volume boat for his sailing area. When I politely suggested he was off his rocker going out in those conditions, he replied that if he waited for calm seas he would rarely go out. His day job was on a trawler.
 
Twister_Ken said:
Mystery 35. Looked at one quite seriously but it is small inside, and it has (had?) some horrid mock tongue-and-groove bulkheads below. Nice in parts, but not nice enough all the way through.
Click to expand...

Precisely what I thought of it. A lot smaller inside than a V34 and the tongue-and-groove is a real let-down - as it is in the CC26.
 
JumbleDuck said:
Precisely what I thought of it. A lot smaller inside than a V34 and the tongue-and-groove is a real let-down - as it is in the CC26.
Click to expand...

The T&G is I think GRP following a trend started by Blondecell in the later Tradewind 35s. Typical example of trying to get the traditional appeal without the associated cost of the real thing.
 
Tranona said:
The T&G is I think GRP following a trend started by Blondecell in the later Tradewind 35s. Typical example of trying to get the traditional appeal without the associated cost of the real thing.
Click to expand...

I think it's plywood with router-cut grooves in it, and that the PBO articles on the CC26 showed them making it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

EugeneR
Help with getting sold boat data
Replies
8
Views
543
Tranona
T
R
Brokers.
Replies
6
Views
487
Irish Rover
Irish Rover

Share this page

Top