interior spaces on trawler types

[angus99]

"As far as flying bridges, pilothouses and all other space utilization....IT'S ONLY PERSONAL OPINION!!!!!!!!!!"

I get that. It's the rationale . . . and rationalizations . . . behind those opinions I don't understand. That's my opinion. : )

 

[BandB]

"As far as flying bridges, pilothouses and all other space utilization....IT'S ONLY PERSONAL OPINION!!!!!!!!!!"

I get that. It's the rationale . . . and rationalizations . . . behind those opinions I don't understand. That's my opinion. : )

But you don't have to understand. They don't have to explain. You try to understand and if you still don't, you move on.

 

[psneeld]

"As far as flying bridges, pilothouses and all other space utilization....IT'S ONLY PERSONAL OPINION!!!!!!!!!!"

I get that. It's the rationale . . . and rationalizations . . . behind those opinions I don't understand. That's my opinion. : )

Yep...this site is full of rationalizations based on things that I sometime wonder if its all a dream.

I must really live in Kansas and I have never been on or near a boat.

 

[Ted]

Two notable exceptions are Krogen, who very cleverly designed it as an element of the aft end of the raised pilothouse, and Fleming who did the same thing on some of their models.

If I recall from my younger years correctly, these were called "bridge decks" not "flying bridges"

Ted

 

[Marin]

If I recall from my younger years correctly, these were called "bridge decks" not "flying bridges"

Ted

The boat owners called them flying bridges so I assumed that's what the manufacturers considered them to be. If the correct term is "bridge deck" that's cool. But regardless of the name hung on it, it's a terrific idea for several reasons.

 

[Marin]

It's the rationale . . . and rationalizations . . . behind those opinions I don't understand. That's my opinion. : )

The bottom line is that whatever you happen to think about how another boater prefers to operate his or her boat, your opinion is 100 percent irrelevant.

My wife and I have easily definable and very tangible reasons for operating our boat the way we do. They make total sense to us (and to a fair number of other boaters we've met who do much the same thing). We do not understand why other boaters do what they do, but as long as they don't actually run into us, we couldn't care less what they do. We don't discuss it, we don't try to analyze it, we simply don't think about them or their boats at all.

We're interested in the why's of how we run our boat. We have no interest whatsoever in the why's of how you run yours.

If you don't understand why what we or anyone else does, it doesn't matter. We certainly don't care that you don't understand, and I doubt anyone else does either.

 

[angus99]

The bottom line is that whatever you happen to think about how another boater prefers to operate his or her boat, your opinion is 100 percent irrelevant.

My wife and I have easily definable and very tangible reasons for operating our boat the way we do. They make total sense to us (and to a fair number of other boaters we've met who do much the same thing). We do not understand why other boaters do what they do, but as long as they don't actually run into us, we couldn't care less what they do. We don't discuss it, we don't try to analyze it, we simply don't think about them or their boats at all.

We're interested in the why's of how we run our boat. We have no interest whatsoever in the why's of how you run yours.

If you don't understand why what we or anyone else does, it doesn't matter. We certainly don't care that you don't understand, and I doubt anyone else does either.

Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day. Opinions? I doubt there's anyone on this forum who's more assertive with their opinions--lecturing pronouncements actually--except maybe your dog. Whether it can penetrate your pomposity or not, opinions are what this forum is about . . . you've said as much yourself when you ridicule this forum and those who post here. I'm under no delusions what my opinions are worth . . . no more or less than anyone else's. You're welcome to disagree with anything I post, but spare us the hypocrisy.

 

[angus99]

But you don't have to understand. They don't have to explain. You try to understand and if you still don't, you move on.

Yes, I don't have to understand . . . but I'd like to. (And I don't require anyone to explain.) Understanding is why most of us frequent forums like this, no? I would think someone as intellectually curious as you seem to be would agree.

 

[markpierce]

As a former open-cockpit sailor and backpacker, I much prefer operating from within a pilothouse and don't miss the absence of a flying bridge. I've had my share of direct sunlight and biting/burning temperatures.

Not to mention, I disdain the exaggerated motion/roll and the 7-foot climb/descent of an elevated bridge.

 

[BandB]

Yes, I don't have to understand . . . but I'd like to. (And I don't require anyone to explain.) Understanding is why most of us frequent forums like this, no? I would think someone as intellectually curious as you seem to be would agree.

Yes, understanding is a large part of being here. I try to understand. Some things then I just have to accept. Sometimes I can hear the words and intellectually understand but I can't feel what the other person is feeling, I can't put myself in their place, I can't empathize. So, different levels of understanding.

 

[Marin]

You're welcome to disagree with anything I post, but spare us the hypocrisy.

What hypocrisy would that be? I don't expect anyone to accept any of my opinions and I've never said as such. In fact I'd think they were fools if they did accept them. By the same token if I disagree with something I'm going to say so even though I know full well it's simply my opinion and is irrelevant to what the other person does or believes.

You say you'd like to understand why people feel about flying bridges the way they do. Can you not decipher what the posters on this thread have been writing? They've been telling you why. If you have failed to comprehend what they've written, whose fault is that?

If you don't agree with their "whys" that's fine. But warbling on about how "you just want to understand why" in the face of all the posts that have been telling you why is a little weird, wouldn't you think?

 

[eyschulman]

Aside from the radiation exposure-accentuation of roll and pitch-the remoteness from the boats interior and deck level and the need to scurry up and down steep ladders the real game closer for me is that my boat would not fit in its covered slip with a fly bridge.

 

[BandB]

Not to mention, I disdain the exaggerated motion/roll and the 7-foot climb/descent of an elevated bridge.

Now both of those I appreciate but also can say that the well done flybridge that fits with the boat will not give it exaggerated motion and roll and the climb and descent can be minimize both in distance and in discomfort with proper stairs instead of ladders. The best to me is a Pilothouse with a bridge and the distance from the main deck to the pilothouse is much the same as going from the pilothouse to the flybridge.

What I'm saying is that there are boats with bridges that I wouldn't consider ever. The bridges are clearly an afterthought and just stuck up there. You look at a boat like Eastbay and you know it wasn't designed with the bridge in mind. Perhaps they thought it might one day happen, but in my opinion it just doesn't look right and the size of it just doesn't work. One of my things about bridges is wanting them to extend far enough forward that I don't feel like I'm driving from the back seat. The right bridge has excellent vision when you're out on the water. Some of them you just cannot see what is immediately in front of the boat.

 

[Marin]

What I'm saying is that there are boats with bridges that I wouldn't consider ever. The bridges are clearly an afterthought and just stuck up there.

I agree with that assessment. The boat American Marine used as its inspiration for the Grand Banks line they launched in 1966 was Spray. Spray was not built by American Marine (for many years I thought she had been) but her hull design by Kenneth Smith was used for the first of the Grand Banks line, the GB36, and all the models that followed except the most recent ones.

Spray did not have a flying bridge but for obvious reasons American Marine elected to incorporate one in their new Grand Banks line. I don't care for the look of GB's flying bridge, placing it in the "just stuck up there" category described by BandB.

However I would not be surprised if the inspiration for the Grand Banks flying bridge came to a degree from the open flying bridges used on many northwest fishing boats that were in use in the 1960s.

These I actually like as the ones I've seen have all complemented the design of the boat. One of my favorite vessels of all time is illustrated below and has this type of flying bridge.

I've ridden on Gikumi's flying bridge and it is indeed a nice feature of the boat. Gikumi was constructed in (I believe) Vancouver, BC in the 1940s specifically to be the workboat for the Telegraph Cove Mill, replacing an earlier boat of somewhat similar design. Many years later after the mill closed and the boardwalk community was purchased by Gordie Graham for the creation of a fishing resort, Gikumi became the first commercial whale watch boat on the west coast, operated by Stubbs Island Whale Watching out of the cove.

I will have to check my photo reference books but I'm not sure that Gikumi was built with a flying bridge. It may have been added later, perhaps along with the other modifications that were made for whale watching. Regardless, whoever designed it did a great job of complimenting the rest of the boat.

While not a fishboat herself, Gikumi's pilothouse and flying bridge are typical of those found on all manner of commercial trollers, seiners and gillnetters that worked the Washington and BC coasts.

The second photo is our PNW boat and the awkward clunkiness and bulk of it's "stuck on" flying bridge is very obviously different from the beautifully aesthetic (in my opinion) lines of the Gikumi's

 

[markpierce]

Aside from the radiation exposure-accentuation of roll and pitch-the remoteness from the boats interior and deck level and the need to scurry up and down steep ladders the real game closer for me is that my boat would not fit in its covered slip with a fly bridge.

Now that's a man I can agree with.

 

[BruceK]

The bottom line is that whatever you happen to think about how another boater prefers to operate his or her boat, your opinion is 100 percent irrelevant.

My wife and I have easily definable and very tangible reasons for operating our boat the way we do. They make total sense to us (and to a fair number of other boaters we've met who do much the same thing). We do not understand why other boaters do what they do, but as long as they don't actually run into us, we couldn't care less what they do. We don't discuss it, we don't try to analyze it, we simply don't think about them or their boats at all.

We're interested in the why's of how we run our boat. We have no interest whatsoever in the why's of how you run yours.

If you don't understand why what we or anyone else does, it doesn't matter. We certainly don't care that you don't understand, and I doubt anyone else does either.

Accepting your premise, no one should give a rats arse about yours either.

 

[Marin]

Accepting your premise, no one should give a rats arse about yours either.

I would hope not. As I said earlier, anyone who acts on anything I say here is a complete fool as far as I'm concerned. Hell, half the time I don't give a rat's ass about my opinions.

 

[healhustler]

I had to look back in the archives to find the GB36 sans the flying bridge Marin talked about. Hard to argue that it really is a good looking vessel, especially if the roof was done right.

 

[Sailor of Fortune]

I'm not a fan of flying bridges but would never try to sway others from having one. My preference is personal only.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
WAY off the original topic but our "home" boat is 23' with a FB. Silly you say? Perhaps and that particular model was offered without the FB but after 4 years looking I was unable to find one sooo... after having run her a bit, I really don't mind it. Everything's a compromise.

Sistership to this one but ours is more purdy...

 

[angus99]

What hypocrisy would that be? I don't expect anyone to accept any of my opinions and I've never said as such. In fact I'd think they were fools if they did accept them. By the same token if I disagree with something I'm going to say so even though I know full well it's simply my opinion and is irrelevant to what the other person does or believes.

The hypocrisy that compels you to pontificate ad nauseum on any subject, belittle and insult those you disagree with and squeal when you perceive . . . in this case wrongly . . . someone's doing the same to you.

You say you'd like to understand why people feel about flying bridges the way they do. Can you not decipher what the posters on this thread have been writing? They've been telling you why. If you have failed to comprehend what they've written, whose fault is that?

Condescension is kind of intoxicating for you, isn't? Actually, I do understand why people say they don't like flybridges and I completely respect their reasons. (Try re-reading post 81 and strive for some comprehension yourself this time.) It's just that some of their reasons don't mesh with my experience. Hence, I'd like to understand where they're coming from. Any problem with that?

If you don't agree with their "whys" that's fine. But warbling on about how "you just want to understand why" in the face of all the posts that have been telling you why is a little weird, wouldn't you think?

13,000 posts and I'm warbling on!? I appreciate having your permission to disagree. The bottom line, I think, is that I did disagree with some of the negatives put forth about flybridges . . . no disrespect, no expectation to change anyone's mind . . . just disagreement. But this conflicts with your own typically adamant position on flybridges and you seem to have a hard time with anyone you think might be challenging your rigid, intractable worldview. I doubt very much this is the first time you've heard that.

 

[Northern Spy]

Sistership to this one but ours is more purdy...

Is that a Penn Yan?

 

[AusCan]

What I do like about flybridges is being outside and in touch with the elements. What I don't like is the added windage of most flybridges.
In my opinion, a totally enclosed "oxygen tent" as FF puts it, minimizes the advantage and maximizes the disadvantage.

The 'Gikumi' which Marin posted, is one flybridge model that I would love to own.

 

[Marin]

Greetings,
WAY off the original topic but our "home" boat is 23' with a FB. Silly you say?

Not necessarily. The boat I fished on in Hawaii for a number of years was a 28' Uniflite. It had a flying bridge which one could say was somewhat pointless on a boat that size.

But...... the flying bridge was essential for the way we fished over there, which was to be constantly looking for birds. Open ocean seabirds like tropicbirds and boobies and such-- there are no seagulls in Hawaii.

The birds followed the fish, particularly mahi mahi which brought the highest market price at auction every morning. So the birds followed the fish and we followed the birds.

You need pretty much unlimited visibility for that sort of thing so trolling in swells that would drop the boat out of sight of the horizon made a flying bridge a requirement.

Another very popular small boat in this region is the 26' Tollycraft. It, too, has a flying bridge. There are a couple of them in our boating club and the owners enjoy having the flying bridge a lot.

 

[Marin]

Actually, I do understand why people say they don't like flybridges and I completely respect their reasons..... It's just that some of their reasons don't mesh with my experience. Hence, I'd like to understand where they're coming from. Any problem with that?

No. I'm just amused by the fact that even though they've already told you, you still don't understand it.

However.... if you want to carry on about why I write the way I do and what I might or might not think of this forum and the people on it I'll be happy to give you my point of view but ask the question over on Off Topic which is where this kind of thing belongs. Thanks.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. NS. You know your classic boats. Penn Yan indeed. 1978 PY 23' sport.

 

[Marin]

I had to go to the GB owners forum archives to find these but here are the shots of the GB that had its flying bridge removed. Much nicer looking boat in my opinion than the stock GB32 which I have always thought looks very chunky and too short for its height.

 

[angus99]

No. I'm just amused by the fact that even though they've already told you, you still don't understand it.

However.... if you want to carry on about why I write the way I do and what I might or might not think of this forum and the people on it I'll be happy to give you my point of view but ask the question over on Off Topic which is where this kind of thing belongs. Thanks.

Thanks, but the drier lint needs emptying.

 

[Northern Spy]

I had to go to the GB owners forum archives to find these but here are the shots of the GB that had its flying bridge removed. Much nicer looking boat in my opinion than the stock GB32 which I have always thought looks very chunky and too short for its height.

Much nicer looking.

 

[Marin]

Much nicer looking.

It is, isn't it? It would be interesting to know if American Marine had made the flying bridge an option on their Grand Banks line how many buyers would have opted to leave it off. Probably not many but with the glass boats it would have been an easy option to offer.

It might have been a popular option in colder climates plus it would have made for a lighter boat with less windage.