Need your advice !

You know we change our boat now we have something more "trawler" but if we keep her may be we will change something


- First actual silhouette

- second just hull lengthened to the end of the actual platform, arch shortened and the fins reduced to the level of the propellers


-third lleeengthened and I let my wife cut ALL on the fly


Witch solution you prefer ?

Number 3 is my choice

Jesus !! The same than my wife and witch one with the maximum job to do

Positive point lremove hundreds kilograms in the "wrong" place

Number 2!

I can see getting rid of the fly-bridge, but I'd keep the dinghy crane up top.

Number three.

After you pay for the extension everything else seems to be more or less free.
But in the design one must IMO consider the extra flotation aft. If she was a bow down boat the extension would make her hard to steer perhaps. #1 has a hook in the bottom aft. Not something I'd want on a boat this size or SL ratio hull. So I'd say #2. But if she was heavy aft back to #3. But that's not likely. But w the CG far enough aft .. #3 definitely. W/o that .. #2.

I see the choice as related to the climate that you will spend most time in. The folks in higher latitudes are saying #3, because you would seldom use an open fly there. I can relate to that from cruising in PNW/BC a number of years ago.

But now, in a sub-tropical home and cruising into tropical waters there is no question that #2 is preferred. Wind chill, even in such areas, can still be a factor but you can use the area a lot. I her no engine noise at all when up on the fly, and the quietness is amazing. More importantly, when in coral reef areas the extra visibility from up on the fly is very comforting.

Insequent said:

I see the choice as related to the climate that you will spend most time in. The folks in higher latitudes are saying #3, because you would seldom use an open fly there. I can relate to that from cruising in PNW/BC a number of years ago.

But now, in a sub-tropical home and cruising into tropical waters there is no question that #2 is preferred. Wind chill, even in such areas, can still be a factor but you can use the area a lot. I her no engine noise at all when up on the fly, and the quietness is amazing. More importantly, when in coral reef areas the extra visibility from up on the fly is very comforting.

Click to expand...

Excellent point. I use my flybridge maybe a half dozen times a year. Likely that would be different if I wasn't in Washington State.

h,
i bonjour ca va ?
number three

Number two. I live on the flying bridge. I should never had a lower station installed on my boat. Note I live at latitude 25. We can actually go outside without freezing to death.

The extend of the N° 3 could be used to extra diesel tanks and in this case tank at mid level the boat will stay in their lines.
And in the same time We are thinking to pass one of our anchor chain from 14mm to 12 mm but in grade 70 : save around 150 kgs in the bow.
thanks all for your advice

It means remove that :

I'm not a bridge fan but understand it's a very location and owner preference.
I saw a Marlow on one of our cruises that had a bridge hardtop that hinged down and was more or less a cover for the bridge at the lowered position. Had low air draft and nice looking lines. I'm wondering if something similar could be done here instead of a complete removal. I would think it would ADD versatility and future value instead of detracting from it, at least for some?
I never saw it going up and don't know if it was electric or hydraulic. Radar, etc were on the aft of the top and also hinged for lower air draft.
Maybe try a #4 design w bridge "capped" to see if DW approves.

Hinged arch is not to complicate to do, it was only screwed, and we remove it by our self, (with help of chain hoist !)
Put it back in line weld plate...and lift again will not be difficult but put a total rigid cover even if we could lowered it with , for example hydraulic, forget my boss ...oups my wife don't agree

Number three looks nice but extra lift aft may put the rudders less deep in following seas.

It all depends on how and where you use the boat.

The most important rule in design is that form follow function.

Now you know

I still be crazy (who said "it is worst now !?)
I put below some "evolution" we could done if we keep this trawler.
Because actually she is far above the perfect consumption of our ex LC62,
and may be if lengthened m aft (not expensive we will doing that by ourself ), lengthened the bow with a bulb (more expensive if we want nice profile need professionals), save some kgs every where for a total of 1000kgs, put a small mast like we had on LC62 (in 15kts wind just with big jib we reached 3.5 kts wind by the side), may be we will recover on this trawler some advantages of our former LC62...or not

#3

My vote is for number 2 or leave as is now.

Bonjour.
M. l-c. It hasn't been said yet but why alter what you have? Why not move to what you REALLY would like?

It is the main problem

RT Firefly said:

Bonjour.
M. l-c. It hasn't been said yet but why alter what you have? Why not move to what you REALLY would like?

Click to expand...

We had what we really like !!

But my old mother said, during month, she want come with us on boat... but what we really like is the LC62, as you can see here (Trawler long-cours - Génèse, construction et navigation(s) d'un trawler ou passagemaker de 19 m en aluminium.)
more simple rustic boat not comfortable enough for old people...
We sold her and bought this trawler more comfortable, more volume, nice cabins etc
And my mother after 3 hours on board she want come back home ....and in the afternoon she lost brain...
We have three possibility :
- sold this one and ...built a new LC62 but my wife said we are already too old for built a boat again
- sold this one and find a second hand like our former LC62 ..but the buyer of our LC62 already try during ...3 years and don't find !
- keep this one and try to change her ...until we win at the lotery we have not another choice

We would never own a boat without a flybridge. But we live in the Deep South and are very much outdoors people. We boat to be outside.

Number 3! ��
(do not cut the fins though, protect props at all cost)

For the fins we will cut them at the level of the blades of the propeller and don't keep this 20/25 cm below the blades
Again the 3 my wife will win !!

My vote is to win the lottery and buy a one or two year old boat that is what you want.

Full disclosure, I am an engineer. I spent a career in designing infrastructure projects. I hate it when the "Good Idea Fairy" comes to call. Leave the boat as designed. Leave the boat the way that the design professionals, the Naval Architects designed it. There is a reason why the boat is dimensioned the way that it is. If you monkey with it, the boat will not perform right and you will not get much back in the way of resale. If you don't like the boat the way it is buy a different boat.

As I wrotte

Bigsfish said:

My vote is to win the lottery and buy a one or two year old boat that is what you want.

Click to expand...

The problem I just know one boat who fulfill what we want ....and I sold her
And in France now they privatize our lottery .... and I don't try anymore.

I "like"

Exctyengr said:

Full disclosure, I am an engineer. I spent a career in designing infrastructure projects. I hate it when the "Good Idea Fairy" comes to call. Leave the boat as designed. Leave the boat the way that the design professionals, the Naval Architects designed it. There is a reason why the boat is dimensioned the way that it is. If you monkey with it, the boat will not perform right and you will not get much back in the way of resale. If you don't like the boat the way it is buy a different boat.

Click to expand...

when the first word of somebody, without any modesty , is "I am, I was,I hate"...
If you was, you must know : lot of boat or ship have big change during all their life : sometime lengthened (even few time !!) , sometime shortened, some times added buoyancy, some time change of superstructures, sometime converted from tug boat to pleasure boat, sometime converted from pilot boat to explorer boat, sometime from patrol boat to pleasure, sometime from small cargo ship to...square rigged sailing ship...
After read your message ?...may be you was ...but surely not in boatyard or shipyard

Exctyengr,
IMO, in this case humble, I submit that there is no perfect design. And a design is always aimed at a specific or fairly specific purpose. And any design is an “organized solution to a problem”. And there are as many problems as there are waves on the sea.
BUT ... You know there are many designs that exceed in marketing demands and in this day many lawyers design products to stay out of courts at any cost. Frequently the product is lost in the determination to succeed in court.
So often a design is at least lacking in it’s original purpose.

And regarding the above I doubt lengthening a boat hull is playing w fire. Several (or most) of the Alaska State Ferries have been lengthened ... in their midsection. The success of lengthening a boat depends on how it’s done. HaHa but the best way to lengthen a boat is to employ a NA to do it.

You are right , because the designer on this type of project must suit a potential demand.
For example on the Trawler 72 the designer put a fly bridge with heavy equipment , we know all it is not to increase the quality of the boat at sea but only to fit a potential demand. Put 500 or 600 kgs at 4 m above the waterline ...sure don't give a better stability
A boat, as we wrote on our blog and as you wrote with another words, is always a sum of compromise.
Lengthened the hull by less than 2 feets and adjust with the repartitions of the weight it will be peanuts for the "change" in terms of "degradation"...
But some advantages , we don't know why they fit the aft like that but it is potentially dangerous with the tube and bracket who overhang...
AN are not "good" I always asked to them when I want the hull line... but for boat built for a potential market they must stay with the normal choice "flying bridge" or Portuguese bridge are two of theme for this type of "trawler" are the boats more safe ? with all this weight above water line ?
The structure of the Trawler 72 was checked by Veritas and nothing to say she look, for me , perfect. Not , by far, the most economical to built but perfect.
But for example I like have steps in the "walls" on each side...but AN don't design that ..can I do ? Sacrilegious if I fit them ?

The "bollard" feel not strong enough in my point of view also sacrilegious if I fit stronger one ? I don't like the actual system for anchor, I want the same than we design on our precedents boats ...sacrilegious if I change them.
Teak deck also was fitted for the market (not on all for example some Nordhaven don't have) we remove it

Years after years I think we finally got some experience, but still make mistake

long-cours.62 said:

For example on the Trawler 72 the designer put a fly bridge with heavy equipment , we know all it is not to increase the quality of the boat at sea but only to fit a potential demand. Put 500 or 600 kgs at 4 m above the waterline ...sure don't give a better stability

Click to expand...

Have you asked your NA about stability changes if(when) you remove the Fly bridge? In my experience, some additional weight high on the boat, even aloft, may slow the period of roll, making a much more comfortable passage.
With stabilizers you may see less need to be concerned, but to get rid of the weight of the FB seems counterintuitive and you lose a nice place to lounge in good weather.