Nomad Willy
Guru
HaHa ya got the message Codger.
Go easy on the old horse.
Go easy on the old horse.
Other than weather, why have a lower helm?
- Thread starter nowakezone
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
BruceK
Moderator Emeritus
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 13,347
- Vessel Name
- Sojourn
- Vessel Make
- Integrity 386
Seriously, (for a moment), what is the origin of the FB? My suspicion is it came into broader use for game fishing boats, for all round visibility in maneuvers and better forward visibility looking for possible prey. Did Hemingway`s boats have FBs?
Sailing ships had high observation points, the "crows nest" as it was called, early steamships had a semi enclosed post on the mast, both accessible by climbing.
I`m happy without one. My first power boat had a classic FB deck,ladder access,fenced, but no helm fitted. The IG has a proper FB with helm we rarely use it. If I swap the IG for something else, I won`t be concerned whether there is a FB, but would not rule out a boat with FB if the boat is otherwise good, though I`d miss the easy place for panels.
Sailing ships had high observation points, the "crows nest" as it was called, early steamships had a semi enclosed post on the mast, both accessible by climbing.
I`m happy without one. My first power boat had a classic FB deck,ladder access,fenced, but no helm fitted. The IG has a proper FB with helm we rarely use it. If I swap the IG for something else, I won`t be concerned whether there is a FB, but would not rule out a boat with FB if the boat is otherwise good, though I`d miss the easy place for panels.
They go back at least to World War I when they were on Warships.
capt jerry
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 323
When you are down below and look out the side door and watch the water going by it seems like you are going faster,when you are up top it feels a lot slower lol
O C Diver
Guru
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2010
- Messages
- 12,865
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Slow Hand
- Vessel Make
- Cherubini Independence 45
God, save me!
psneeld
Guru
its OK Ted.....came upon the same during my search...
And on this particular subject he was probably correct.
At least now we won't get 10 more pages of justification if someone disagrees wit bigger "facts"
The Keyboard Driven Ghost Appears, once again! - LOL
TimButterfield
Veteran Member
Neither are cabins, but I'm not hearing much comment on that weight and windage. Maybe you could convert Willy to center console to get even closer to the waterline. Even on smaller boats, whether a fly bridge may be an issue might depend on how aloft it actually is. If you can stand in the cockpit and look above the FB floor, that's not stretching the aloft factor much at all. And, a simple front shell and a few single seats like on a Camano 31 Troll isn't adding much for either weight or windage. Sure, many are higher and/or heavier, but they are not all to the same degree. Speaking of unnecessary windage effects, putting the kayaks or dinghy on top of Willy probably doesn't help with that either, yet that seems acceptable to you. The term double standard comes to my mind. It does make me think, though, but probably not entirely in the way you intended.
Cheers!
Tim
BruceK
Moderator Emeritus
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 13,347
- Vessel Name
- Sojourn
- Vessel Make
- Integrity 386
Not nice Tim. Plus it inspired another psn "post and delete" jab.
caltexflanc
Guru
Seems like someone has been channeling the boy recently.
Boats are by definition purpose built things. A boat not designed well for its particular purpose is poorer boat than one that is.
Boats are by definition purpose built things. A boat not designed well for its particular purpose is poorer boat than one that is.
ranger58sb
Guru
Didn't get me thinking much. I reckon if the NA has done his job and designed a flybridge (or not) into the boat from the git-go, no problem. "Features" (potentially higher windage, etc.) being different from "problems."
That only took me about a nano-second worth of thought; took longer to type.
-Chris
We have a Matriarch our grand kids (her great grand kids) sometimes call Nano... took her 93 yrs. to get where she is... and, she often comments that only feels like just a second too. Everything is Relative!!
:lol:
Bay Pelican
Moderator Emeritus
Fully agree, this concept is at the heart of so many of our discussions.
Nomad Willy
Guru
HAHA .... I was waiting for someone to mention cabins. Very good point but the necessity of cabins is way different than a FB. It could be said that many cabins are too large though.
Good point about the dink too. Well it would be a good point except I actually need some windage high as an alternative to stabilizers. Would like a steading sail at times. And my boat handling would'nt suffer unless I put the windage way fwd. For a 30' boat Willy has a big keel.
But I ai'nt giv'in up my cabin. Actually I'd like to make it bigger .. not taller though.
Mostly though I got you thinking the way I intended. All things that are negative like extra weight and windage aloft should be questioned. But if the ballance of plusses and minuses are objectively evaluated and it comes out positive then all is well and whatever the issue can then be fully accepted until new information becomes available.
But because a NA designed a boat does not mean it's unquestionable. Remember the big yacht that capsized at launch not long ago?
But no the "double standard" does not apply. As I've said at times I considered the fact that a PO removed the FB on Willy years prior to me was a plus. And I've not owned a FB boat. Considered buying boats that did have the FB though. One Chris and I really liked walking about on the FB and aft cabin so if I had bought that one I may have kept the FB. It was about the same size and design as a 36 GB or IG. But if the visibility was good from the wheelhouse I would'nt put a FB on any boat that I can think of.
TimButterfield
Veteran Member
What defines necessity of purpose that might exclude FB or tuna towers, but not cabins? Either can be necessary, though obviously not for the same purpose.
Some certainly appear ungainly. What defines too large for the purpose set by the NA? The cabin of a dock queen might might be too large for use as a coastal cruiser and also too small for use as a house boat. As a dock queen, it might be perfect.
Why is a dink acceptable for needed windage, but not an FB? If the dink were larger as many are, would it still be acceptable?
I think some of that is this:
I remember it. I'm in Anacortes and took pictures of it. From what I recall, removing the FB is not likely to have kept it upright given the other issues with implementing that design. Are you asserting/implying that removing only the FB would have sufficiently corrected those issues?
I certainly agree there are some designs I consider poor or at least not suitable for my purposes, but the existence of an FB is not the determining factor in every case.
I would not add an FB to a boat not designed for it, but the presence is not necessarily a negative either. Sometimes, it is there for a specific purpose as defined by the NA. Imagine trying to fish tuna without being able to look down on the cockpit and at the action behind the boat. How would Willy function as a tuna boat? Of course, it is easy to second guess anyone based on our own personal biases. That should not negate the valid purposes of others, whether we agree with them or not.
psneeld
Guru
Nomad Willy
Guru
OK I see you all just want to bait me and fight.
psneeld
Guru
Hey, I am just a lowly ice cream boat owner....to the tune of 2500 miles cruise every year....with flying bridge .....and have managed not to roll over.
Fight?
Naw, it wouldn't be fair anyway....just want people without our experience to know there are 2 sides to the coin.
....and what was already said but might have been missed from many posts back...
TimButterfield
Veteran Member
I don't want to bait or fight anyone. I do wish to clarify some claims that have been made to see whether they actually are valid or are just an expression of personal preference. Not having the experience myself, how else would I learn other than by asking questions?
Last edited:
We're actively looking for a boat to cruise around the great PNW waters. I'm not a semi-pro analyst of naval architecture, but every boat we've looked at has a nice flying bridge. I think these are better "boats" because of that. Grand Banks, Californian & our current favorite: the Bayliner 4788.
I really can't imagine being stuck inside all the time while operating the boat.
I brought this subject up with both my best friends; one is a container ship master, the other is a WSF master. They had a good laugh, and confirmed that these boats (GB, Californian, Bayliner) would be fine in virtually any weather we would encounter whilst motoring about.
The container ship master spent many years moonlighting, delivering new Hatteras' from NC to Seattle. He was amazed that there would even be a discussion along these lines. The ferry master, who spent the first 22 years of his career in Alaska running fishing trawlers ("real trawlers" he says...) agrees.
I really can't imagine being stuck inside all the time while operating the boat.
I brought this subject up with both my best friends; one is a container ship master, the other is a WSF master. They had a good laugh, and confirmed that these boats (GB, Californian, Bayliner) would be fine in virtually any weather we would encounter whilst motoring about.
The container ship master spent many years moonlighting, delivering new Hatteras' from NC to Seattle. He was amazed that there would even be a discussion along these lines. The ferry master, who spent the first 22 years of his career in Alaska running fishing trawlers ("real trawlers" he says...
) agrees.
