Trawler questions

[alrod]

I'm new to the forum and to trawlers in general, currently owning a 22 panga fishing boat and 24 foot Bayliner. My question relates to choosing the right trawler for short passages in the Caribbean area. I've read about the various designs, including KK, Nordhavns, etc. but would like something that will allow me to gunk hole in relatively shallow areas. Also, I like simplicity and the redundancy of two engines, as well as the fact that the hull design does not need paravanes.

Previously the issue of the Mirage Great Harbor 37 & 47 and their suitability for travel from East to West Coast through the Panama Canal was raised. However, I did not find a definite answer as to whether these boats were suitable for such passage which allows for many stops along the way. Neither have I found any information from the manufacturer addressing this matter as it pertains to the GH37 class trawler.

It is understood that the GH 37/47 are coastal trawlers not suitable for long passages, however, being that I'm considering upon retirement cruising primarily in the Caribbean, I'd like to know if a trip, for example from Key West to Isla Mujeres, and from there to Caiman would be feasable with any degree of confidence. We saw one of these boats at the Miami boat show couple of years ago and my wife likes how much they feel like a house.

Thanks in advance for any assistance in clarifying this matter.

[marshmat]

Hi alrod,

Welcome to boatdesign.net :)

The Great Harbour 37/47 are interesting boats, certainly somewhat unusual when compared to other trawler yachts. Where many of the competitors have a deep, slack-bilged hull shape that often seems to have offshore fishing ancestry, Great Harbour ( http://www.mirage-mfg.com/index.html ) uses shallow, hard-chine hulls that look to be derived more from coastal workboat forms.

We don't have any of either craft anywhere near here, as far as I know. I've never seen one in any of the nearby marinas, and they don't show up at the boat shows up here.

From the reviews and photos I've seen, they are very much house-like and I think the spaces are a bit too open for serious offshore use. But I would think Caribbean cruising is well within the realm of their capability, provided you keep an eye on the weather. I think a couple have crossed to Hawaii on their own bottoms, although that would probably necessitate waiting a while for the right weather window.

They seem to be very big on the complex, expensive mechanical and electrical systems. This is not an uncommon fault among large, luxurious boats. But keep in mind that all of this equipment that gives you modern landlubber luxury, is going to require a small army of mechanics and specialty technicians to keep it running.

They claim unsinkability- an iffy claim (see Titanic)- but being essentially unballasted and built of lightweight cored composites, one would probably have a decent chance of remaining afloat in a disaster. How those lightweight cored composites hold up over time is another matter, and one that calls for a thorough once-over by a really, really good surveyor before buying used.

They are, however, a long way from being inexpensive....

[alrod]

Thanks for the reply to my inquiry. I believe the Mirage Trawler that went to Hawaii is the N37 class Ho'Okele. See the following link: http://www.greatharbourtrawlers.com/html/hawaii02.html

The N37 has less windage although it does share the same hull as the GH37 class. It also has considerably less living space. One of the things I've read about these boats is the righting moment capabilities that are touted. It is said that they can literally right themselves up from 180 degree submersion - I can't find the link on this, I believe it was an article by Lou Codega. My concern is the GH37 class boat behaviour in ten plus foot seas during a short passage as described above. I have not found any literature in this regard.

[Tad]

Unballasted, lightweight cored construction, shallow draft, wide beam.....all these factors add up to a high sided box floating on top of the water. Motion in a seaway will be quick and exaggerated due to fast shifts of the center of buoyancy in a wide flat hull. These hulls are extremely comfortable at the dock or in flat water cruising, I doubt Lou Codega foresaw this boat being used for ocean cruising.

A deeper, narrower, round section hull will have more motion, but it will be slower and more predictable. Also a narrower boat will be faster (more efficient) in headwind or seas.

In my opinion there are far better boats available for your intended cruising grounds.

[Steve W]

For your intended purpose i would think a smaller displacement power catamaran would be well suited, 2 small diesels spaced far apart give great manouverability and about as good fuel economy as you can get in a powerboat,shallow draft, lots of bright airy accomadations and plenty seaworthy for your type of cruising,the PDQ 34 would be a good choice and has a kind of a trawler look.
Steve.

[alrod]

The PDQ 34 looks very interesting. I like the shallow draft although it is more fuel thirsty than the GH37 and with faster cruising speed. Wonder how it would work as a live aboard.

I would not consider the GH37 were it not advertised as the perfect coastal and Great Loop trawler, that can also take you around in the Caribbean. Any other trawler suggestions that meet the low draft criteria would be appreciated ?

Also, it appears that based on your answers, even though this is a coastal cruiser, no one would consider taking it around Central America and up the West Coast.

Thanks for your previous and future comments.

Al

[tranmkp]

a mild hijack, regarding trawlers - I have switched over from the sail side - however, I too would like to do some offshore cruising - just point to point, nor more than 50-75 miles offshore. However I am concerned about the dreaded snap roll that is not so nice. setting up booms and running fish seems dangerous... active stabilizers are out of my price range.

Seems that there is just no middle ground in hull form - trawler = very beamy for length. While a motor sailor is going to be much less beamy (living room).

Is there such an animal as a keel centerboard trawler???

[big-boss]

It always comes to tha same conclusion. There is no boat for the "little guys" that want to travel and explore the coastline.

I just want to go out of Morro Bay to Alaska. Stop along the way and be able to keep it in my 36ft slip. Seems like I am always reenventing the wheel but I am not it is just not out there. Fishing boats, Express cruiser, none of them are right. I am closer to what I want with the old Uniflite I have.

Where is that 35ft NOrdhaven for under $100K when you need it?

[Tad]

alrod....

Very experienced people can make remarkable voyages in marginal vessels. Sending noobs to sea in even very good boats is questionable. Stuff happens out there, it can turn out okay if you do the right thing quickly. Unfortunately situations that are not life threatening sometimes scare people (especially wives who don't understand what's happening).

The PDQ 34 is again a fine boat for inland cruising, it is not intended as a full time liveaboard or ocean cruiser. It has 1/3-1/4 the space of the GH37. Load carrying will be far less.

tranm & BB....

We're currently working on a small offshore capable displacement power boat, the Timbercoast Troller 22'. This design will be marketed by Bartender Boats. It's not a bartender though it does share the double-ended form. The hull is a deep vee single chine form with full keel. Power is a 3 cylinder diesel of less than 30HP for 7 knot cruising speed. A semi-production aluminum version is anticipated. The 22' will be followed by 27' and 16' foot models. Pic of the 22' below....
27501

27502

[FAST FRED]

There is no boat for the "little guys" that want to travel and explore the coastline.

I would look at the Ranger or other trailerable "cruisers".You can extend your range at low cost with a trailer hitch on your car.

The problem is not SEAWORTHYNESS , its comfort. Google ,Marne Marie (close?) an early transatlantic cruiser.1930ish.

Most folks want tiny boats to be as comfortable as huge boats , no chance.

The use of flopper stoppers CAN be very simple and is hardly a hassle on a many day passage.

Do not fear/dismiss what you have no experience with.

FF

[El Sea]

Alrod,

You currently have a Panga & a Bayliner, both are great for the right application. For going to the Bahamas you can choose from any of the trawlers from 32' to what ever you can afford. The point is, watch your weather window, your sea conditions and go for it.



El Sea,


"It's the voyage, not the vessel"

[joz]

Tad like your pics is the two extra poles are they for looks or are they for some purpose? Also I like the stay sail did you put that in for stability reasons?

[Tad]

joz....

The poles hinge outboard to run paravane stabilizers. These are tiny, 6-10 pounds, very easy to set and retrieve. The sail is for steadying, used with a jib the boat could sail (not fast but moving) across or downwind to get home should there be an engine problem.

[big-boss]

Can you put paravanes on a planing hul? Just keep it at hull speed? Or am I messed up? Thanks

[Tad]

Planing hulls are (mostly) quite stable dynamically, paravanes could react wildly at any speed over 8-9 knots and loads on the gear would be frightening.

The Timbercoast is a 7 knot boat, see the post above. While she is a deep-vee double-ender, she is a full displacement boat. The standard planing Bartender is a moderate vee becoming flat bottomed at the transom.

[joz]

Thanks for that Tad

[tranmkp]

still a nagging question in my head. Concerning long keels in trawlers. I am under the impression that one does not add ballast in the keel for stability. That the sability comes from the hull form and that the keel is there for directional stability. ok I can sort of see this and how it relates to semi-displacement hulls. But what is the difference in really heavy full dilplacement hulls? They have keels too but because they are immersed so deeply that the actual hull gives it the stability? I am becoming befuddled as I know that sailboats are displacement hulls and so are tugbats. Yes one is more shallower and uses external ballast and the other is way down there - but boat are limited to hull speed. Sooo, if a semidisplacement boat (sisu, duffy...) gets most of its stability from static hull form why not add ballast in the keel to control roll?

[Tad]

tranm...

Lot's of factors at work affecting the stability characteristics of a particular boat. Usually a conflicting requirement gets involved in limiting stability. In the case of semi-displacement boats, more ballast is not added because that's adding weight, weight limits speed, speed is more important than stability, and so it goes.

Transverse stability is not really related to whether a boat is sail or power, displacement or planing hull. That is to say that every hull (no matter it's form) is acted upon by the same factors. A key factor in transverse stability is the length of GM. Raising M means a longer GM and thus more stability, lowering G also means a longer GM and more stability. M is dependent on hull form (BM = I/V), G is dependent on the vertical CG of all items that make up the boat.

B is the center of buoyancy (center of underwater volume)
M is the metacenter (theoretical point about which the hull rotates)
I is inertia of waterplane (a barge has a different waterplane from a kayak)
V is immersed volume (displacement)

Change any of these factors, or change G, and stability changes.

In a shallow semi-planing powerboat B and I are high because the waterplane is wide and full (higher CP), V is low, but BM ends up fairly long as B is not far under water. If G is not too high (big deckhouse) GM is short (low ultimate stability) and roll is snappy.

In a modern sailboat (shallow canoe body) I is low (fine waterplane) and B is lower than the semi-planing boat, V is moderate and BM is not that long. But G is much lower than the powerboat thus GM is longer (Higher ultimate stability) but motion much different.