Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 08-28-2014, 02:41 PM   #41
Guru
 
Tad Roberts's Avatar
 
City: Flattop Islands
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Blackfish
Vessel Model: custom
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRC58Fan View Post
Thanks for the pointer to Elling. I was not familiar with them. Very nice to see that they are actually demonstrating the self-righting ability:

Self-Righting E4 To Be Tested Publicly | | PassageMaker

Self-righting (from 180 degree capsize) for pleasure boats is a marketing red-herring. If there was a epidemic of pleasure boats rolling over it would be a concern. Reality is that an intact (un-flooded) pleasure boat capsize in a seaway is almost unknown. Occasionally pleasure boats will heel 70-80 or even 90 degrees, but they pop back upright immediately, even when damaged.

Small open boats flip at high speed, but even that is rare. In larger closed cabin boats the buoyancy of the house really prevents a complete capsize. Note that Elling had to haul the boat upside down with the crane.

Survival to carry on after a actual 180 degree capsize in a normal pleasure boat is unlikely. Go get a tour of your local Coast Guard 47' cutter. These are true self-righting boats, able to survive the rollover and continue. There is not one single loose item anywhere on or in those boats, not even a pencil. And the crew are strapped in. In the average in-use pleasure boat 100's of pounds of stuff will land on the roof as the boat rolls, ballasting it upside-down. It's quite likely the loose stuff will break a window, flooding the interior, and making flat-water marketing videos a joke......
__________________
Advertisement

Tad Roberts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 02:42 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Billyfeet's Avatar
 
City: Jupiter, FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: JOHN D. MACDONALD
Vessel Model: FAIRCHILD SCOUT 30
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 178
I'm wondering why anyone that has any off shore experience is even considering long trans-ocean passages in boats like these. Unless the driving force is to do something that either has not been done or spend lots of money to have a weird looking boat anchored in an out of the way place. There are plenty of well constructed, beautifully appointed, easily operated yachts on the market for long distance cruising short handed in luxury. Look under AUXUILIARY SAILBOATS! Instead of having a silly tangle of poles, lines and "birds" they have an easily controlled stabilization system consisting of a ballasted keel and a mast with a sail or two or three! Plus most are designed to handle the kind of seas state that you WILL encounter if you venture 1,000 miles from land. Perhaps take a ride on one........turn off the engine and see how nice it is when the wind is blowing 35 knots, the sea is running 15-20, and you haven't slept for 4 days.........
__________________

Billyfeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 03:03 PM   #43
Guru
 
City: NC
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
...
If anyone doubts his creds on prowess or experience read his books. A must for the serious blue water travelers of today IMHO.
Agreed. I have read 2.5 of their four books that I know about. The 1/2 book is their Encyclopedia which is rather, errr, ah, large.

The Dashews know how to build a comfortable, fast, and efficient ocean going boat. The thing is almost anyone can design a decently fast boat, you just need to go long which is what the Dashew boats have done for both their power and sail boats. The difference between their boats and others, there is one other boat that I know of similar to ArtNautica that is built in Europe, is the fit, finish and details.

The Dashews spend quite a bit of effort nailing done the details. Given their experience they really know what works in a boat for them. The problem with anyone else copying their idea, which is what ArtNautica is doing, is that the hull is not easy to copy nor is it the whole package. The design details inside the boat are just as important as the look of the boat. Steve ain't sharing all of the design specs on the hull either.

Aluminum is a tricky material to work with. The designer has to know the material and its limitations and the welders danged well better know what they are doing and do it. If you don't weld aluminum correctly with the right material and specifications you can have a big problem. I like aluminum for a boat, it does have certain advantages, especially when drying to design a boat to cruise at 10 knots, but the builder and designer better have the act together.

The Dashews really want a boat that can cruise 200+ miles in 24 hours. Their power boats do it and so can their sail boats if they have the wind. That design speed sure is nice to have that is for sure.

Check out the ShowTime thread. If Richard was able to go another 50-100 miles in a day he would have been drinking Guinness in a pub instead of fighting a low pressure system.

Later,
Dan
dannc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 05:39 PM   #44
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tad Roberts View Post
Self-righting (from 180 degree capsize) for pleasure boats is a marketing red-herring. If there was a epidemic of pleasure boats rolling over it would be a concern. Reality is that an intact (un-flooded) pleasure boat capsize in a seaway is almost unknown. Occasionally pleasure boats will heel 70-80 or even 90 degrees, but they pop back upright immediately, even when damaged.

...
I agree. Similarly to unsinkable which put Boston Whaler on the map. But just saying that it's easy to make the claim and a lot of other claims as to what a design will do. Dashew has a track record. Artnautica is just a design on paper until it proves itself. Trying to ride on Dashew's coattails. And here we have someone just pops in to promote Artnautica and try to push the idea it's just the same as a Dashew, only cheaper. Let's at least see some sea trials, allow some to test and review the boat, check it out thoroughly.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 05:41 PM   #45
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billyfeet View Post
........turn off the engine and see how nice it is when the wind is blowing 35 knots, the sea is running 15-20, and you haven't slept for 4 days.........
Sorry, there is nothing nice if I haven't slept for 4 days.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 06:35 PM   #46
Guru
 
Tad Roberts's Avatar
 
City: Flattop Islands
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Blackfish
Vessel Model: custom
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by BandB View Post
Trying to ride on Dashew's coattails. And here we have someone just pops in to promote Artnautica and try to push the idea it's just the same as a Dashew, only cheaper.
If you look at that way every boatbuilder is riding on someone's coattails....

But I think the Artnautica boat is very different from the FPB 64. Artnautica states a "Heavy Displacement" of 31,000 pounds, the Dashew 64 is 90,000 fully loaded...That's three times the boat. The Dashew is 4' wider and 6' longer, that will also make a huge difference.

One of negatives of lighter weight boats is their motion in a sea is quicker and this fatigues crew. Is the Artnautica too light? I don't know and it's a subjective concern, everybody will have a different answer. Quick motion is a common complaint and the designer must balance waterplane against displacement and stability to try and slow her down.....The Dashew's set up a system to strap themselves in, which seems bizarre to someone used to the slow motion of a 100 ton Romsdal.
Tad Roberts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 07:29 PM   #47
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tad Roberts View Post
If you look at that way every boatbuilder is riding on someone's coattails....

But I think the Artnautica boat is very different from the FPB 64. Artnautica states a "Heavy Displacement" of 31,000 pounds, the Dashew 64 is 90,000 fully loaded...That's three times the boat. The Dashew is 4' wider and 6' longer, that will also make a huge difference.

One of negatives of lighter weight boats is their motion in a sea is quicker and this fatigues crew. Is the Artnautica too light? I don't know and it's a subjective concern, everybody will have a different answer. Quick motion is a common complaint and the designer must balance waterplane against displacement and stability to try and slow her down.....The Dashew's set up a system to strap themselves in, which seems bizarre to someone used to the slow motion of a 100 ton Romsdal.
Yes, they are. But I'd never buy a designers first boat. And as to who would be building it, I have no idea. You just look at the numbers, the claims. Most builders have some form or heritage that leads them to where they are. They were key people in another proven builder and started on their own building similar boats. A lot of that in SF. A lot of yacht builders in the US were previously involved building commercial boats. Or they buy an existing factory. Or bring in a proven team.

They don't make claims to be the equal of boats weighing three times what they claim theirs will weigh. They might claim 10% or 20% less in weight. When you make claims that sound too good to be true, they probably are. From the web site it really doesn't look like he's trying to sell boats but just designs. He says it's "available as plans and cutfiles." The boat supposedly closer to being built, he shows only one photo. I know I'm a skeptic but we also need to not encourage people to jump into seriously problematic situations. Boats that are paper designs only. Engines that will save the world and supposedly were tested 7 years ago but not even one actually exists. Builders who have partially finished boats sitting on their lot, multiple suits and now launch their latest and watch it tumble over on the ramp, then throw up their hands and say we're closed.

You put the numbers in your post that show how flawed this all is. Where is anything on his site telling how he achieves these unbelievable numbers?
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 07:50 PM   #48
Guru
 
City: Hotel, CA
Country: Fried
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,960
You do know it is a self build project right? May only be one picture on his website but he has several years worth on his Facebook page. Including some creative ways to hold a wrench on one side of a hull while he turns the bolt from the other side.

He may have plans for sale on a website but this is very much a personal build for him. Any one of you can message him direct and he will likely answer you. He is quite aware of this thread and finds it to be funny.
__________________
Craig

Society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.
CPseudonym is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 08:12 PM   #49
Guru
 
Tad Roberts's Avatar
 
City: Flattop Islands
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Blackfish
Vessel Model: custom
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 701
This is not his first boat.....Mr. Harjamaa states his background here

Dennis Harjamaa -Designer of yachts, fuel-efficient boats, sail boats, cruising boats.

And there are dozens of pictures of the boat under construction here

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Artna...002724?fref=ts

Why are the numbers unbelievable? A smaller boat is a smaller pile of stuff. There are perfectly seaworthy 70' sailboats that cross oceans and weigh 25,000 pounds, half of which is ballast. The numbers are achievable, but you can't take a lot of stuff with you. And you must remain disciplined about adding goodies.....

We have a 40' minimum displacement coastal cruiser under construction now, and keeping weight in check is continually challenging.... But I think, when she's launched, I'll have a new benchmark in how light is possible.

Dashew is selling to the Mercedes mentality, everything is over-engineered and over-built, where one pump will do he installs three, etc, etc....The real minimum is somewhere else, and it's great to see someone working towards it.....
Tad Roberts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 08:15 PM   #50
Guru
 
City: Hotel, CA
Country: Fried
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,960
Thanks Tad, never saw that link just the Facebook.
__________________
Craig

Society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.
CPseudonym is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2014, 09:04 PM   #51
Guru
 
Capt.Bill11's Avatar
 
City: Sarasota/Ft. Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 4,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPseudonym View Post
Including some creative ways to hold a wrench on one side of a hull while he turns the bolt from the other side.
If he had just used a Vicegrip like most of us do he wouldn't have had to waste so much tape.
Capt.Bill11 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2014, 06:30 AM   #52
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,915
>One of negatives of lighter weight boats is their motion in a sea is quicker and this fatigues crew.<

This is the biggest hassle with cats , if built and operated light the motion can be severe.

To my mind flooding is more of a hassle than being rolled over.

A watertight bulkhead fwd and compartmentalization is easy to do, only hassle is WT doors are not inexpensive.

Aluminum boats could have interior materials selected from the low burn pile, but GRP , unless commercial or military grade fire retardant resin , is almost impossible to put out .

Boat builders dont bother to spend a few cents a pound in FR resin because sadly owners do not demand it.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2014, 12:32 PM   #53
Senior Member
 
City: SanFran
Country: USA
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
For decades, Dashew designed and built boats have been in high demand, both new and on the resales market. For good reason if one chooses to cross oceans safely and quickly. They are the Porsche of the boat market.
You are absolutely right - I don't think anyone would disagree on the point that Dashew boats seem very well thought out and implemented. I've been reading his Blog on Setsail.com for years and you really get an appreciation for his thought process from the ongoing discussions and postings.

But as you say - its the "Porsche" of the market. I have to believe that there is a larger market for the "Toyota Corolla" of the long thin cruiser market - and I'm hoping that the Artnautica boat is it. We'll see.
LRC58Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2014, 12:51 PM   #54
Senior Member
 
City: SanFran
Country: USA
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billyfeet View Post
I'm wondering why anyone that has any off shore experience is even considering long trans-ocean passages in boats like these. ... There are plenty of well constructed, beautifully appointed, easily operated yachts on the market for long distance cruising short handed in luxury. Look under AUXUILIARY SAILBOATS!.
I'm not familiar with Auxiliary Sailboats, but Sailboats as a class are a very common option - and well proven for distance cruising/blue water passage making. And I've read that something like 4,000 to 5,000 people a year do this.

But from my perspective (and I'm sure many also on this forum) the sailboat is not ideal. While I love sailboats and have owned a number of them for local cruising, my issues with sailboat for longer cruising are:

1. You feel like you're in a tunnel if you're inside the cabin - I like lots of glass so I can view the amazing outdoors, when I'm cooking, and relaxing inside the boat.
2. You're usually exposed to the weather - being forced to hang out at the back of the boat in the elements all the time (or most of the time) is sub-optimal for me.
3. The sailboat is difficult to manage as you get older - my parents, and many others eventually sell the boat (much like Steve Dashew has done) when they get older because they can't handle them.
4. A sailboat, by its very nature, is actually a "Hybrid" solution - with all the complexity of both sails and an engine. More complexity means more potential problems when long distance cruising.
5. A big part of the time you're probably under power, even on a sailboat. But you're dragging around a huge ballast and large sails that make it a less efficient powerboat than something like the Dashew FPB or Artnautical 58.
6. I'd like to take my parents on the boat - but with something that is frequently sailing at a large angle - it makes it very hard and dangerous for older people that have trouble walking and standing up.
7. Even the sailboats with the hard dodger that get you out of the elements when you are sailing - wall you off from the rest of the activity in the boat - so you're alone battling the elements. I would much prefer to be in a larger cabin with my family when cruising in bad weather.
8. Sailboats can't take a direct route to where you want to go - you have to follow the winds - which in my mind is suboptimal.
LRC58Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2014, 01:00 PM   #55
Senior Member
 
City: SanFran
Country: USA
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by dannc View Post
Agreed. I have read 2.5 of their four books that I know about. The 1/2 book is their Encyclopedia which is rather, errr, ah, large.

The Dashews know how to build a comfortable, fast, and efficient ocean going boat. ...

The Dashews spend quite a bit of effort nailing done the details. Given their experience they really know what works in a boat for them. The problem with anyone else copying their idea, which is what ArtNautica is doing, is that the hull is not easy to copy nor is it the whole package. The design details inside the boat are just as important as the look of the boat. Steve ain't sharing all of the design specs on the hull either.

Later,
Dan
Dan,

You are completely right on the "Details" issue. I think that this is the biggest potential issue with the Artnautica design and the Designer's "go it alone" approach right now. Steve Dashew has had a lifetime of cruising experience so you trust his decisions when it comes to his FPB design.

From what I understand the designer (Dennis Harjamaa) has some good boat design experience but very little long distance cruising experience. This scares me because I don't know if he'll be able to get the details right for this boat - at least until he has year's of cruising experience.

The hull shape I'm less concerned about because he's had years of work experience in boat design - so I wouldn't be surprised if he has more knowledge than Steve Dashew on that issue.
LRC58Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2014, 01:08 PM   #56
Senior Member
 
City: SanFran
Country: USA
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 166
Artnautica

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tad Roberts View Post
The numbers are achievable, but you can't take a lot of stuff with you. And you must remain disciplined about adding goodies.....

Dashew is selling to the Mercedes mentality, everything is over-engineered and over-built, where one pump will do he installs three, etc, etc....The real minimum is somewhere else, and it's great to see someone working towards it.....
Tad - I'd really like to understand better this issue you bring up. "disciplined about adding goodies..." makes me wonder... from your experience, what exactly what are you trading off when you go to a light design like this. From his the Artnautica Facebook page it sounds like he's got room for a genset in the production boat - but I'm wondering about AC, onboard water desalinator, a flying bridge, no double bottom of boat, thinner Aluminum hull and window glass spec compared to the Dashew FPB, etc.

Are these all something you can't add to the Artnautica without a complete redesign? What else are you trading off when you go to the very light boat design?

I'm totally happy with the "Toyota Corolla" of long, thin cruisers - but what I don't want is the bare-bones "vw bug" of the boat world - with no radio, etc.

Any tips greatly appreciated.
LRC58Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2014, 01:24 PM   #57
Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 741
Here's a coastal cruiser design by Ed Monk Jr who focused on efficiency...relatively light weight, relatively long and skinny. At least one was built by Nordlund.

Express LT 57 ...Different for the right reasons!
Underway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2014, 06:28 PM   #58
Guru
 
Tad Roberts's Avatar
 
City: Flattop Islands
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Blackfish
Vessel Model: custom
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRC58Fan View Post
Tad - I'd really like to understand better this issue you bring up. "disciplined about adding goodies..." makes me wonder... from your experience, what exactly what are you trading off when you go to a light design like this. From his the Artnautica Facebook page it sounds like he's got room for a genset in the production boat - but I'm wondering about AC, onboard water desalinator, a flying bridge, no double bottom of boat, thinner Aluminum hull and window glass spec compared to the Dashew FPB, etc.

Are these all something you can't add to the Artnautica without a complete redesign? What else are you trading off when you go to the very light boat design?

I'm totally happy with the "Toyota Corolla" of long, thin cruisers - but what I don't want is the bare-bones "vw bug" of the boat world - with no radio, etc.

Any tips greatly appreciated.
There isn't an either or answer for boats, there are a thousand shades of grey. Which is why boats are so fascinating, we can all create the perfect boat, and it will be different for all of us.

Almost every boat will be improved by unloading the 1000 pounds of unused junk that's stashed away aboard. That's the first step.

I see it as a mindset, one person can't survive without AC, but people do actually live in hot places without AC. Watermaker? Do you really need that? And do you understand the cost, not just to you but to the surrounding environment. I would not be interested in cruising if I entered every harbour and ran a generator 24/7. The otter who came by and talked to us this morning would not be seen or heard if we were running an engine. It's raining so we harvest some fresh water, the wind is blowing so we harvest some wind energy, if it doesn't blow we conserve....
Tad Roberts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2014, 10:06 AM   #59
Senior Member
 
City: Doha
Country: Qatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 496
Fuel Efficiency

Quote:
Originally Posted by skidgear View Post
Here's a coastal cruiser design by Ed Monk Jr who focused on efficiency...relatively light weight, relatively long and skinny. At least one was built by Nordlund.

Express LT 57 ...Different for the right reasons!
So what sorta savings are we really talking about? What percent less horsepower is required to push an ultra skinny boat (like those discussed, or a Dashew) versus a "normal" cruiser??
makobuilders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2014, 01:23 PM   #60
Senior Member
 
City: SanFran
Country: USA
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 166
Long Thin Hyper-efficient Trawler - Artnautica 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by makobuilders View Post
So what sorta savings are we really talking about? What percent less horsepower is required to push an ultra skinny boat (like those discussed, or a Dashew) versus a "normal" cruiser??
Well - here are some example numbers.

First - for the Artnautica 58 Long Range Cruiser (a thin design currently in production): Long Range Cruiser 58: a fuel-efficient boat. - Dennis Harjamaa Yacht Design, Elegant Yachts, Aluminium, Fuel-Efficient, Sailing, Cruising Boats.

"A reasonable estimate of the LRC58′s thirst in typical wave conditions would be a fuel burn of 7 to 8 litres (1.8 to 2.1 gallons) per hour at an 8-knot cruise. Dennis’ site mentions 3800 L of fuel for a six thousand mile range (5.7 L/h or 1.5 gallons), probably calculated at 6–7 knots)."

Source: Artnautica 58—Design Analysis

For the Dashew FPB 64 the information is as follows:
"At 8.6 knots we are burning 11.8L/3.12 gallons an hour which gives smooth water range of over 9000 nautical miles.
At 9.7 knots fuel burn is 18.9L/5.0 gallons per hour with a range of 5700 miles.
Top speed at full load is 11 knots, not bad from a 236 HP engine."

Source: SetSail» Blog Archive » FPB 64 Introduction – Basic Specs

Nordhavn:

Here is a summary image comparing Nordhavn vs. Dashew FPB:


Source: SetSail» Blog Archive » Fuel Burn, Range, and Margin For Error

Nordhavn 40:
Nordhavn's fuel consumption improved dramatically when throttled back slightly from its normal cruising speed of 8 knots. ''If you run it just shy of 8 knots you'd be burning a little under four gallons of fuel per hour. At that speed, with 920 gallons of fuel on board, it doesn't have huge range, maybe 1,500 or 1,800 miles,'' he said.
Source: THE BOATING REPORT - 40-Foot Trawler Makes a Long, Productive Trip - NYTimes.com

This said - fuel efficiency is just part of the benefit of this type of thin design.
The other benefits are:

1. Speed - these boats with their narrow design are typically 50% to 100% faster for a given fuel burn

2. Sea Keeping/Pitching - the thin design makes for a much better ride in rough weather - cutting through the waves instead of bouncing up and over them.
__________________

LRC58Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012