Striking New Power Cat Design

[brian eiland]

...I also posted this subject matter over on another
forum, "Power Catamaran List" . It elicited a few responders that may not join in this discussion here, but they are noteworthy responses.
Cheers, Brian


H2X: Wow, what French flair! I just love what they do with accents!
We built an 86 footer 4 years ago, Pacific Harmony
http://www.adventurebay.co.nz/pacificharmony.htm so I'll throw in a few views to fire up some wake up discussions:

Impressive colour scheme and very daring to go Waterjets on what looks to be a displacement hull converted for the jets. Still looks to be squatting in the running shots however. Tunnel clearance shortage gives away what looks
to be a little of a weight problem. Watch out for an attempt at a set of foil fixes to get lift and send her up and away along with some hard chine add-ons.

Our full displacement canoe body 86 x 28 footer turned out around 60 tons VS 74 tons for their 84x34 footer and we thought we were heavy. Their designer states 64 on his site and the builder 74 on his so it is 10 tons overweight which is an issue, even with its beamy hulls. We still managed 25kts on half the power (Caterpillar 800hp/side) despite design suggestions of 28 kts, which I have since learned are a little out of reach on canoe body pure displacement hulls of most lengths. Our speed to power performance I rated as quite good for multi's this size, but I was never happy with the super skinny hulls and zero space engine rooms.

Sliding underneath a hot engine mid-Pacific to reach the other end for an alternator repair was not my idea of serviceable. The bilge oil helped lubricate my 85kg frame up there but removing the alternator with it jammed in your stomach on an 86 footer has to be questioned!

I since learned other designers were getting the same figures as us with generous hull width, walk around engines, and less blue water pitching. Hence our new boat has widened up considerably.

I also gave up on the double barrel tunnel effect, 2 much smooth area and a cupping effect when trapping the waves. Nic De Waal and Peter Brady's theory looks sensible now with hard chine multi-ridge tunnels to break up the spray. Nic's hulls certainly turn the roughest water into toast (with honey!)

JETS: With the H2X, MAN 1300cv'S they would probably have liked 5 more knots, and on a foil assisted planing hull they would have got it with very little difference under 10kt in fuel. If you are throwing over 3000hp in a boat, you wouldn't be concerned over a few litres per hour extra fuel at 10 kts.

Range figures on the builder site are around 1/3 the Yacht Forum site posted and lower than I'd expect in this power-rig, 1000 miles with 7000 litres@10kts. (30 kts- here to the first tanker?)

Jets are always going to give poor economy in the 10-20 range, but usually quite good performance over 25, unbeatable over 35 if you have the right hull shape- lifting on foils with reduced drag to let her fly. Under 10kts foil/jet powercat owners tell me they are still quite good, especially on one engine (no prop drag), so the above numbers don't quite stack up.

The attraction of ultimate anchoring spots in shallow waters and unlimited docking moves give the jets a strong argument if you like a fast cruise speed. We are staying with displacement/shafts on our next cat and then going foil-planing/jets the following one for some white knuckle passagemaking. (The kids have to be a little older first!)

Don't you just love the creativity of the French Interiors? Island berths for the guests on this size would be nice, but usually island guest berths need to creep across the wing deck and make a multi-level interior, some don't like that. The chic interior design really looks sharp! (Perhaps a little sharp if you land on it one rough day) Style is all about minimalism and square these days.

www.adventurebaypowercats.com

[brian eiland]

...some more from that other forum...


Thank you for forwarding John Winters comments on the MCAT 88. I certainly agree with his comments on the MCAT 88, but there are a couple of comments that he makes about the Pacific Harmony that need clarifying. He says "I have since learned (28 knots) are a little out of reach on canoe body pure displacement hulls of most lengths".If this is what he has been told then it is incorrect. If John goes to our web site he will see the 1992 design Red Diamond II. This 17.5m Loa design used our typical CS hull form and did a certified (by NKK the Japanese classification Society) 31.5 knots over the measured mile using 450hp per side. 30 knots can be achieved relatively easily by a pure displacement power cat with a CS hull.

It also needs to be recognized that the "super skinny" hulls of the Pacific Harmony are not a function of the original design, but were caused by the increasing of the LOA from the original designs 72' to the final 86' without increasing the hull beam. This resulted in a hull beam of around 1.4m/4' 6" (depending on where you measured it), whereas if it had been designed from scratch to be 86' it would have been at least 1.8m/ 6' in beam. So any problems ascribed to the ultafine hulls are actually attributable to the increase in length, rather than the basic design. We certainly do not usually use such an extreme fineness ratio as all our data indicates that it is just as counter productive as making the hulls too wide. We have yet to see any published, and certified, data that indicates that there are currently any better (fuel use wise) hull forms than our optimised CS shape over the speed range where our designs usually operate (see graph concerning fuel consumption on our web site).

The 22m x 10m current design previously mentioned has island berths with all the [4] cabins located up in the wing.

Regards,

Malcolm.

MALCOLM TENNANT MULTIHULL DESIGN LTD

[brian eiland]

Brian Eiland has posted a posting from the Yacht Forum concerning the
MCAT 88 which they say is certain to influence the "new generation of
naval architects". I must say I disagree. It may well influence the
stylists, but its naval architecture does not appear to be too
impressive.

They do not quote the full load displacement so it is
difficult to make any real judgements. However, looking at its
attitude underway, Vaton, in keeping with most French power catamaran
designers would appear to be using a sail boat hull form. This is to
be expected as one of the previous forays into multihull design from
this predominantly keel boat designer was the spectacular foiler
"Charles Heidsieck IV".

We are currently designing a 22m x 10m power cat with a pretty
substantial full load displacement of 48 tonnes. Its performance
parameters are the same as those of the MCAT 88. Including the 1000nm
at 10 knots. The interior fitout appears to be of a similar level of
opulence but we are only using 37% of the power!

Regards,
Malcolm Tennant. ARINA MA

[brian eiland]

...from the other forum....

Hi Malcolm,
My comments on CS hull forms are from other CS hull type owners I have contact with, who have a normal weight for a boat their size. The Red Diamond is around half the weight of cruising boats her size so I stand corrected, make anything half weight and of course it will fly.
The same 450 horsepower in your New Yorker is quoted to deliver 24 knots, that's around the norm for the most HP that will fit in the hull for boats that length.

Our new hull is expected to be around half a knot slower with that HP, but plenty of walk-around engine space and enormous volume and load carry capacity for long range fuel capacity makes the small trade off worth it. The cost of 2 percent in efficiency can be lost in many other ways. Other areas of life and boating can leave a larger carbon footprint than the 2 percent of our fuel bill, how often one scrubs the hull will have more effect to the fuel bill.

I know Craig Loomes use to use the CS hull form, and to get wider has since moved away from it to a form more like Crowther's of Australia, Apollonio of US, Jutson of Canada, Roger Hill of NZ, Given of NZ and so on. I think you and Kelsal and the Manta guys are the last ones using it. It probably is one of the most efficient around, and the protection to props is a nice feature but those 2 features aren't everything in the big picture, so we won't use it again.

We are seeking better fuel capacity and better rough water ride so will have to trade a little economy. Talking with other globe trotting CS hull Powercat owners and delivery captains they also rate this highly and are happy to trade half a knot for them.

We are up to monohull number 6 from our Asian builder who has built 500 in the past 30 years and it staggers me how people still buy a monohull that needs twice the power of a Cat. But they have their reasons too.

Most will never burn enough fuel to warrant the extra cost, development effort and loss in re-sale for a one-off to buy a Powercat. Under 60ft production cats fare better in re-sale I've noticed but the one-offs are hard to sell, especially in the larger sizes.

Rod Gibbons, you are keeping quiet over there, lets hear your thoughts on re-sale from a brokers point of view!

Best Regards, John Winter
www.adventurebaypowercats.com

[brian eiland]

...from the other forum....

Dear (PowerCat) Forum,

Well..."bold and virile" the MCAT 88' may be. But new? No. And does its functionality appear to equal it's "hunk-iness"? Alas, definitely not!

The MCAT 88's design's lines/exterior smack closely (albeit with perhaps greater elan) of the "Sophie," a 60-plus cat project, whose drawings were first presented to the public about 5 years ago. (And I believe the first one is launching -- or has just launched -- at an Asian yard.) This MCAT design also appears to be but an aesthetic refinement of a design that Kurt Hughes created a couple of years ago. (Who was actually first off the boards, I don't know.) Not that that makes the MCAT 88 "bad"....but it's not a new profile/configuration. (Having said that, I quite like its appearance.)

Unfortunately (and this is a MAJOR "unfortunately"), a hot exterior sometimes reveals a less than stellar layout. Such, alas, appears to be the case here. And, as a cat dealer who is forever fielding the questions/complaints of would-be buyers, as soon as I saw the interior photos of the MCAT I saw some things that are considered by would-be-buyers as at LEAST a nuisance -- in some instances, outright deal-breakers -- among smaller cats.

So, if there's deal-breakers in smaller, MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE cats, such items should NEVER (IMHO) be present in so much larger-and-costly of a yacht. There's simply no excuse for it.

In no particular order:

GALLEY -- whew...."where's the beef"?
It seems so small. And accessing a hot oven at a right angle like that? BAD ergonomics. (which is probably my biggest complaint about this boat ... of course that's based on simply my quick, cursory 5-minute view of the various photos. The ergonomics may, in fact, be better than these photos suggest....or worse!)

UNEVEN SALON SOLE .... PLEASE!,
When underway, the presence of steps is a major drawback in any yacht. (i.e., the nine (!!) steps separating the galley from the dinette on one of the Hood power cats...similarly, the multiple staircases in most of the power cats currently being exhibited at Annapolis and Miami powerboat shows, etc. BAD DESIGN!) These different "platform heights" seem no problem in the calm setting of a boat show. But underway, in a seaway, they're a CONSTANT aggravation.

KNEE-&-SHIN-BUSTER bed frames. PLEASE!!!
Nine-year-olds have no problem climbing into or out of hard, wood-framed beds. But past about that age, such solid and unyielding perimeters are nothing but an aggravation. Oh sure, they LOOK great, with all that fine wood trim. But either have the mattress overhang the bed's base by just a 1/2" or so...OR have well padded/upholstered frames around the mattresses. But these wood perimeters will elicit a never-ending string of epithets during any entrance into, or exit from, said wood-framed beds..especially during the dark of the night.

SINKS WITHOUT FIDDLES:
Yeah, yeah, I know...cats are "stable." Nonetheless, in my experience ANY counter that houses a sink on a boat should have fiddles. One need only spill a bit of water while washing ones hands or face, or rinsing off the mornin's shaving cream...or whatever...and suddenly, that ounce or two of fluid that's so innocuous on a stable, shoreside countertop, becomes like unbridled mercury, flowing every which way, but INVARIABLY over the exposed lip and onto the floor, AND the front of the clothing of whoever's standing at that counter lip. A small fiddle (raised lip) secured along the counter's edge keeps the liquid on the countertop for just those few seconds while you grab for a towel. And while attaching fiddles to a counter's edge, PLEASE leave a 1" or 2" cut away somewhere along its length so crumbs or particles one is trying to wipe from the counter top can be flitted into a dust pan, open palm, whatever. Those who fully fiddle a countertop should have their own particular substrata in the acquatic version of Dante's levels of hell.

MAJOR DEAL-BREAKER!
What's with the windows waaaaayyyy above the site lines of anyone sitting on the salon sofa or at the salon dining table??? YIKES!!
Sure, I see there's a boffo/humonguous fixed port along either side of the salon....apparently just dandy for a second or two while someone's climbing or descending the open staircase. But I tell clients that any "small" cat (i.e. 35' to 60') that doesn't offer EASY, and UNIMPEDED visibility to the surrounding sea and scenery from the sofa AND the dining table should be considered a non-starter from the get go. So, to see that that apparently NEITHER of those seating areas offers "an EASY and UNIMPEDED" view outside of the yacht....well, if that's the case, then this is a PRIME example of creating a gorgeous yacht, which is nonetheless "bust" in terms of interior ergonomics.

But again, I must stress: the above observations are offered as simply random comments about a design of which I have no first-hand experience, and only these half-dozen or so photos from which to make any observations. However, unless I'm mistaken on some of the aforementioned points, this (again!) is just one more power cat for which the designers have listened to their "inner design voice" with great precision....but have seemingly disregarded the all-important buying public's (seldom wrong) "purchase-voting" voice.

And until cat designers DO pay attention to that public, we will continue to have the current crop of less-than-excellent power cat designs (ergonomically speaking) that currently leave that public -- and yours truly -- both annoyed and dismayed by the inherently BAD DESIGN CHOICES nearly all represent. (Given that I sell catamarans, that's a dismal reality to be faced with!) The good news? There are some really GOOD power cats (i.e., with smart, thoughtful, sensible ergonomics) now on the horizon. It'll be interesting to see if their launchings, in another year or so, reveal that their designers have LISTENED to what cruising power sailors actually WANT!?!)

Cheers,

Rod ("the design curmudgeon") Gibbons
Cruising Cats USA
Seattle - Portland - San Francisco - Hawaii

[brian eiland]

Dear Rod,

Interesting comments. The one that really gets me is not being able to see out the windows when sitting down. This is particularly galling on sailing catamarans because this is an area where they have a major advantage over keel boats where you are stuck below decks down in the hull.

Regards,
Malcolm Tennant.

PS: As a designer I will be particularly interested to hear your 10 must haves.
_________________________________________________
Brian added:
I'm appalled at this one as well. From my motorsailer discussion;
"The catamaran configuration is exceptionally adaptable at merging all these areas at one raised level which provides for a panoramic view of the yacht's surroundings. This single attribute is one I much admire about a cat. I truly disliked my old 47' ketch's 'basement saloon', where I was forced to either stand up or climb topsides to see what was going on outside. I can sit at anchor with a mornings coffee and watch all the wildlife, or duck in here while underway in nasty weather and still maintain a cautious watch."

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

...We built an 86 footer 4 years ago, Pacific Harmony

...for a few interesting photos of Pacific Harmony's hulls. have a look at this posting a few surrounding it
http://www.yachtforums.com/forums/12074-post49.html

[eponodyne]

"Striking" is a word. "Butt-ugly" is another. So is "Abomination."

[yipster]

i find this numero uno much more tempting http://www.sail-the-difference.com/index.php?id=2&L=1

[BWD]

I think what's funny is this, despite its well formed curves all over, looks more like a battleship, maybe with a tophat/tank turret...than Dashews' recent cruiser, which to me manages a sort of rough elegance with simpler shapes above sheerline, and what look like nearly purely functional curves below. Would not call either design pretty.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by yipster

i find this numero uno much more tempting http://www.sail-the-difference.com/index.php?id=2&L=1

SEXY!

VMG (velocity made good).........I never heard that one before.

Is that something like "True Air Speed"?

[lewisboats]

Originally Posted by kach22i

SEXY!

VMG (velocity made good).........I never heard that one before.

Is that something like "True Air Speed"?

More like true ground speed...speed relative to a fixed position rather than through a moving medium...not that a point on the ground isn't moving at a thousand mph but you know what I mean .

[Willallison]

Course Made Good, or Speed (velocity) made good are both quite common navigational terms.
The former refers to the 'average' direction a vessel is travelling in, after the effects of tide, wind waves etc are taken into account. VMG is the same, only it refers of course to the speed, rather than the direction

[boatsource]

Am I the only one who thinks the hull looks like a lego block, specially with the roundness of the superstructure to highlight it?

I don't think the design is all that bad. I think at first glance she stands out and looks quite presentable. After spending a little time looking at her there are some things you can pick apart, as with any vessel.

She looks tough and beefy from the straight aft shots (yes, that's good) and looks fast and mean from the straight bow shot (again, good). But I can see some of the mushroomy look as someone mentioned.

The interior is fairly clean looking, not overly elegant or bad. In the pictures I find the ceiling looks a bit cheap where the panels join. The master bath looks a bit dated and I don't care for the puffy walls and planked look in the guest bedrooms.

I really like the looks of the entertainment area in the salon. Nice curve and lines, clean look, bright and open. Looks comfy!

That is my 'professional' opinion... and now back to the design experts...

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by Nojjan

.... On the other hand taste is individual, so maybe someone likes it. Attached is something I find more pleasing.

I thought that Sophie Cat was an interesting vessel as well. Wonder want happened to their big plans?

They made big spashes a number of years ago about their new 63', then 51'. I imagine they had some scale models in the Monaco Show as they were so close by.

"Welcome to SophieYachts and prepare yourself... to live life on a large scale. Headquartered in Monaco-Monte Carlo, with shipyards in China, SophieYachts designs, produces, and markets innovative CATAMARAN MOTOR YACHTS"

...their website is still up
SOPHIE YACHTS-Catamaran Motor Yachts : Powercats : Multi-hulls : Power catamarans : Power Cats

But the last news was their first vessel (a 63') was launched in China, and was to be delivered to an American client....that was a few years ago?

Any word on this vessel,.... or company??