Fleming yacht

[Scratchnsaw]

I am not sure where this fits on the board. But today I was out on my boat and there was one headed north on the ICW. I must say that while the boat is a very nice apportioned hull, that boat pushes the most water and the biggest sea at approx. 8 knots that I have ever seen. The water at the stem was being pushed about half way up to the rubrail.

So I was wondering is that the way those boats normally run, or is it possible that he was overloaded in the bow?

[BandB]

Here's a fairly typical look:

[Ken E.]

Every Fleming I've seen has looked clean though the water at displacement speeds, as in B's photo. Flemings are among the best in the trawler world IMO.

[Comodave]

We have passed a 55’ Fleming and it didn’t have any excessive wake

[Insequent]

In the ICW it may have been about 8kn SOG, but if it was against the current then speed through water could have been 1-2 kn more? At 10kn it will make some waves for sure. But at 8kn it is a very tidy SD hull that will not leave much wake at all.

[catalinajack]

We used to berth our boat directly across a fairway from the Fleming dealer on Selby Bay in Edgewater, MD. Caused a lot of boat envy.

[Scratchnsaw]

Well quality is a separate issue for a boat that plows thru the water. I have witnessed plenty of trawlers, even a couple of others headed north yesterday in the same ditch to compare the experience. One was the Nordhavn . Anyway, thanks

[bayview]

He was just going too fast and burning lots of fuel. probably bought the hull speed BS.

[Art]

Nothing wrong with hull speed if you can par the fuel bill and wake size is no bother to others. About 10% slower saves $$$ and greatly reduces wake. That’s why I like planing hulls. About same cost in mpg as “hull speed” but at twice or more the distance covered per hour. In my opinion more fun to pilot on plane too!

[Woodland Hills]

Originally Posted by Art

Nothing wrong with hull speed if you can par the fuel bill and wake size is no bother to others. About 10% slower saves $$$ and greatly reduces wake. That’s why I like planing hulls. About same cost in mpg as “hull speed” but at twice or more the distance covered per hour. In my opinion more fun to pilot on plane too!

But it's not a Trawler! Or so they might say......

Seriously we considered a displacement or semi-displacement hull, but considering where and how we planned to use her a planing hull just had more positives than negatives in comparison. Given how most of the trawlers I see are actually used a diesel motor yacht would do the same job in much the same fashion. For the coastal cruising most folks do, it's really a moot point what hull shape they have: you don't need ocean crossing features to cruise the AICW or our eastern bays and sounds......

[Scratchnsaw]

Originally Posted by Art

Nothing wrong with hull speed if you can par the fuel bill and wake size is no bother to others. About 10% slower saves $$$ and greatly reduces wake. That’s why I like planing hulls. About same cost in mpg as “hull speed” but at twice or more the distance covered per hour. In my opinion more fun to pilot on plane too!

Funny you mention planning hulls. While I will not be traveling on a floating condo like many of the boats here, boating in the coastal areas as another member spoke about is about getting from one place to the other with so much of the waters being open water.

And I do have mini creature comforts though, maybe a bit more primitive. But our intent is to travel and visit areas that we have not visited. Its not about being on the boat, kind of like being on a sailboat you know.

But anyway speaking about fuel mileage versus speeds. Since I have almost finished my custom hull, the efficiency is real, versus most of the production models in a similar size and fits on a trailer.

I am using a 115 hp four stroke and this is the results of my current hull speeds on top of the water. My boat is wheeled at 5,800 top end and as it stands now, with it almost fully loaded with work gear to similar weight, a comfortable cruise is around 4,200 rpm. I am running 22.9 mph and burning 3 gallons an hour. At 5,000 rpm I am running 27.3 mph. and burning 4 gallons an hour.

I can cover some ground with my mini condo in those open water as long as the elements are decent with my modified vee hull and still stay on plane when pulling it back to around 3,500, which is in and around 20 mph. given my 15 hours of break in running tests to date. And when my boat is in shallow water and the ditch, it actually picks up some speed with the harmonic lifting from the banks and bottom.

[Art]

Originally Posted by Scratchnsaw

Funny you mention planning hulls. While I will not be traveling on a floating condo like many of the boats here, boating in the coastal areas as another member spoke about is about getting from one place to the other with so much of the waters being open water.

And I do have mini creature comforts though, maybe a bit more primitive. But our intent is to travel and visit areas that we have not visited. Its not about being on the boat, kind of like being on a sailboat you know.

But anyway speaking about fuel mileage versus speeds. Since I have almost finished my custom hull, the efficiency is real, versus most of the production models in a similar size and fits on a trailer.

I am using a 115 hp four stroke and this is the results of my current hull speeds on top of the water. My boat is wheeled at 5,800 top end and as it stands now, with it almost fully loaded with work gear to similar weight, a comfortable cruise is around 4,200 rpm. I am running 22.9 mph and burning 3 gallons an hour. At 5,000 rpm I am running 27.3 mph. and burning 4 gallons an hour.

I can cover some ground with my mini condo in those open water as long as the elements are decent with my modified vee hull and still stay on plane when pulling it back to around 3,500, which is in and around 20 mph. given my 15 hours of break in running tests to date. And when my boat is in shallow water and the ditch, it actually picks up some speed with the harmonic lifting from the banks and bottom.

Photos of the boat and hull please!

[Scratchnsaw]

I don't have any real good shots right now of the boat in its current form and on the water. But this is a building thread for the boat on the forum.


http://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s...ser-28517.html

[Pgitug]

Newer Flemings have a bow “bulb”

[Art]

Originally Posted by Pgitug

Newer Flemings have a bow “bulb”

Such as older men and women sometimes acquire??

[Art]

Originally Posted by Scratchnsaw

I don't have any real good shots right now of the boat in its current form and on the water. But this is a building thread for the boat on the forum.


http://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s...ser-28517.html

YO! S n' S - TY so much for sending me to that thread. I scrolled all photos and watched the "bag" steam video. Great work!! You and Matt form Australia should be in touch. Again - Thanks! Nice boat!! - Art

[bayview]

There is enough posted elsewhere about the poor use and understanding of "hull speed"

[Scratchnsaw]

Originally Posted by bayview

There is enough posted elsewhere about the poor use and understanding of "hull speed"

So? I do understand hull speed, efficiency and what to expect after being in the trenches for 42 years wearing an assorted number of hats from the transition of wooden boats to plastic fantastic hulls and oriental junk..

Thanks Art, its still a work in progress, but not something that stops us from putting saltwater under her keel.