Offer: true go anywhere Trawler to build "side by side"

[apex1]

[quote=Ad Hoc;293701]

I wont get into the ally v steel debate, as it shall take over the thread.

Thanks..............

aluminium's notch toughness is unaffected by temperature

True but it is already below steel.

Interesting point about the ballast tanks....worth taking note Richard.

I do since 3 decades, solution described above (I never had to bunker "Rotterdam water" and never have a problem to trim my vessel)

Since unless you're running at the exact speed for some 90% of the time, is it worth it?

I was living on board my last boat for 9 consecutive years. After nine years of continuous cruising, going three times round, and clocking 112000 nautical miles, I found out that I had done a mere average speed of just 9.17kn. On a vessel capable of 17.4kn! We just calculated engine hrs. vs mileage. Less than 0.5% of the voyage was in canals or other speed restricted areas and less than 1% of the time we had really adverse weather conditions.
Despite the fact that I was at the helm for about 40% of the voyages and therefore had a first hand "knowledge" of our speeds, I would have guessed we made a average of above 11kn before our calculation was done! So, even if you know you made several poor 24hr runs you can have the impression of being relatively fast over a long leg.
For that reason a 12% gain in efficiency still attracts me when thinking about a bulbuos bow. (that was the result of a tank test)

Some 30%-ish of the capitol shall be for engines alone....so how much bang can you get for your buck?![/QUOTE

]

Much BANG John, very much. And I get the engine faaaaar cheaper.

[dskira]

It's true that I have tendency to comment where I am comfortable with the material, and I don't know enough of the progress made of aluminum and the latest progress of aluminum construction. I have a "thing" for steel, I am comfortable with, no secret quite simple.
Of topic, I saw at the maritime museum in Bath Maine an interresting design by Starling Burgess for a fast destroyer made of aluminum.
Just to have in my mind a idea of the vessel, do you have allready a desision made about the horizontal distribution? will be a three decker or a two decker with raised pilothouse? I compt the lower deck on top of the bilge the first deck. Perhaps it is early, but it will give an idea.
You comment about the very complete workshop inboard, so your intention is to have quite a powerfull genset, and perhaps a small one for the night? Do you think to have all the engines with the exhaust dry, or you favor the wet exhaust.
As for the cooling, do you consider a box cooling, if the vessel is in steel, or a built in keel cooling?
And now an other question, please nobody blast me for this one: Do you intent to put some kind of sails, for help in case of engine failure, if you have to hove to, or keeping the vessel from turning around the mooring?
Daniel

[apex1]

[quote=dskira;293722]

Just to have in my mind a idea of the vessel, do you have allready a desision made about the horizontal distribution?

Its not early to talk about that. It is a three deck vessel (the third is wheelhouse only) Maybe I will post a picture next week.

You comment about the very complete workshop inboard, so your intention is to have quite a powerfull genset, and perhaps a small one for the night?

No, the gensets are quite small, I am planning a "battery" ship not the typical "generator" ship. No night genny! Workshop has a separate, cheap, crappy chinese diesel gen of 12kva for real heavy loads (two in fact), they cost less than the paint on a good genny and last only some 750 hrs. but that maybe ten years??? And if they fail, they fail, not worth a single thought, just loosen the bolts, heave them out and dump them (leave it at the pier overnight in the "right" port).
At anchor, AC is off during the night (I am not used with having a sniff all year round), cold room is off during the night (in fact there is just one tiny fridge in the galley, but a walk in fridge / freezer room with a vacuum panelling between foam sheets. That holds -18°C for 24hrs min. without "refuelling" at 28° ambient temp. Read: the vac panels are paid within three month by saving the fuel.
Lighting is LED throughout the vessel, wiring is a bus system. (two)

Do you think to have all the engines with the exhaust dry, or you favor the wet exhaust.

Wet! Only amateurs fear to have seawater inside the ship. And amateurs do´nt know how difficult it is to make a proper dry stack setup. On top of that, a dry stack engine room is a real hell in tropical temp.s. All secondary cooling cycles like AC compressors, hydraulics have to be raw water cooled too, to be efficient. (saves fuel again)

And now an other question, please nobody blast me for this one: Do you intent to put some kind of sails, for help in case of engine failure, if you have to hove to, or keeping the vessel from turning around the mooring?

No, no sails. I would like some steadying sails (and a "get home rig"), but that is not possible on the planned vessel. (again: my avatar has nothing in common with the vessel planned)
To engine failure: as mentioned above, the main issue is fuel related, have a clever fuel polishing and be paranoid on filters (here its both). The second reason of failure is a fouled prop. Icegoing vessels have protected props (single), they are unlikely to fail. And if you catch a net in the Antarctic, go diving with a good dry suit (better to have it aboard), or take it with dignity that we all have to face our last moment sooner or later. We are going to sea, some risks remain, we just must not search for them.

Richard

here a reply on a mail I got today bringing the bow question and the engine CPP issue up. The latter was called good but expensive....

good solution yes, expensive NO. In fact its cheaper than a comparable quality twin engine setup with fixed prop / gearboxes. Only drawback is, you have to be able to manage a single prop ship! Joe sixpack is unable to manage even a twin prop boat, he needs bow AND sternthrusters, and then calls his insurance twice a year though. I never had a thruster on both my Museum ships or my yachts, I know thrusters only from my production boats. (and dont need them)
This boat will be the first to have a bow thruster, due to the high windage at the front section.
As I mentioned, the hull was tank tested in Wageningen but there are some variables one cannot test. How about slamming, or how will pitch be decreased, increased? We both know, there a several points we only find the answer in true life operation (yeah if I spend another 40.000€ I will get closer results). The 12% gain of course attracts me, on the other hand I get a better ice performance without the bulb and save money and complexity in building. I once lost a boat halfway between Mallorca and Bonifacio strait, hitting something (still dont know what), so I know why I go for a ice strengthened hull. And I am willing to sacrifice everything on a yacht except a true engine ROOM with inboard access, a CPP, a real wheelhouse with 360° view, and a ice hull.

Richard

[dskira]

About general shape, perhaps you mentioned it allready and missed the post, it will be hard chine or round bilge, if round bilge do you have in mind a cruiser stern or a transom?
You mentioned one prop is more esy to protect, if you go for a round bilge do you intent to have reverse curve built down and a hull plating fairing to the prop?
About engine failure, I think a low speed engine large displacement is less prone to fail due to fuel quality than a high speed small displacement.
it is true that a good engine do not fail by itself just for the sake of failing, it is the anciliaries and the fuel make it fail.
You are a airplane pilot as you mentioned, so you know how to rely on one engine, and how to take care of it with great caring. Up there an engine failure is not a option.

but a walk in fridge / freezer room with a vacuum panelling between foam sheets. That holds -18°C for 24hrs min. without "refuelling" at 28° ambient temp. Read: the vac panels are paid within three month by saving the fuel.

I didn't know this technologie. Sounds very great.

due to the high windage at the front section

Do I detect a a high flared bow like a Norvegian Research vessel?
I will wait for the picture, I am just making wild guess.
Daniel

[apex1]

[quote=dskira;293752]

About general shape, perhaps you mentioned it allready and missed the post, it will be hard chine or round bilge, if round bilge do you have in mind a cruiser stern or a transom?

You will see soon, I`ll post some sketches. Transom

You are a airplane pilot as you mentioned, so you know how to rely on one engine, and how to take care of it with great love and caring

Was Daniel, I did not renew my annuals last year!

Do I detect a a high flared bow like a Norvegian Research vessel?
I will wait for the picture, I am just making wild guess.

You may look as dumb as some, but you are not as stupid as many.

I didn't know this technologie. Sounds very great.

You know that the best insulation is provided by a vacuum. Now there is a German company making vac. panels for the construction market. I protect the panels against intrusion, abrasion by covering both sides with a common PU foam of some 8cm. The panel itself is just 2,5cm. The overall K value is unbelievable high (do´nt have the figure at hand).
edit: here we are (just for the vac panel)


Richard

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by apex1

Only amateurs fear to have seawater inside the ship. And amateurs do´nt know how difficult it is to make a proper dry stack setup.

Up here it's just the opposite.. only some amateurs having wet exhaust.. (rarely in some southmade boats) And a bit of warm inside is allways wellcomed here.. also during summer.. right now it's 5C outside, winter and king crab season coming you know..

[apex1]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

Up here it's just the opposite.. only some amateurs having wet exhaust.. (rarely in some southmade boats) And a bit of warm inside is allways wellcomed here.. also during summer.. right now it's 5C outside, winter and king crab season coming you know..

Ja Teddy, and I said "fear seawater" did´nt say all amateurs have dry exhaust.

Otso, Kontio, Sisu, Sampo, Hanse, Njord (Sverige) and so on, all dry exh. Did you know Hanse? I made my tickets on them. Was cool, well really cool sometimes. Had just to sign for a ice campaign and got my next level, some winter we were done after 8 weeks.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by apex1

Ja Teddy, and I said "fear seawater" did´nt say all amateurs have dry exhaust.

Otso, Kontio, Sisu, Sampo, Hanse, Njord (Sverige) and so on, all dry exh. Did you know Hanse? I made my tickets on them.

Ja ich weiss Hanse. Glaube es wird gebaut bei Wärtsilä zeit fünfzig jahren oder?
Got a feeling that's full of mistakes.. should take a trip to Germany sometime ein bishen praktisch zu haben
Anyway waiting to see the pictures of your boat..
Don't you happen to have a place for a third boat aside those two.. Not any sister ship.. more like a 26' "leftovers" steel sjark Thou I propably can't afford even that

[apex1]

1966 Wärtsilä, 3750 tons, 8000hp. Burned in 1998 in the Med, wrecked then.
Your German is better than tämä on minun soumen?

A third boat is not a real problem Teddy and 26 is fine, cm of course. Just send me a drawing then.

[M-Sasha]

Interesting offer, impressive data, extremely attractive price! And quite obvious a boat not attracting any boaters. That is no surprise what do they know about a well engineered and thought out passagemaker, they know better about the interior designer who is hip today. I doubt you will find a true old salts who builds with you side by side, boaters will not, a shame. But nevertheless good luck!
Sasha

[Ad Hoc]

Apex

The vac-pac looks mighty impressive. BUT, you need to get it type approved, unless it is already type approved?? Otherwise the construction wont be passed, for all the usual rules/reg's reasons...

[apex1]

Originally Posted by Ad Hoc

Apex
The vac-pac looks mighty impressive. BUT, you need to get it type approved, unless it is already type approved?? Otherwise the construction wont be passed, for all the usual rules/reg's reasons...

Good point John, did not think about that so far. But I´m sure I´ll manage. TÜV and CE approval is there, and the foam (backing) has GL cert. If not......it is completely hidden under the foam. (question of assembly shedule you know)
But it is fire retardant (better than the foam) so we manage.



Thank you Sasha. I hope you are not right in this case!

[dskira]

I will make some assumptions and guesses. Lets say she displace 90 tons which will make a displacement length of 152(imperial), and for a range of 5500 miles the bunker will be, let say, 31000 liters which will gave her an endurance of 17 days. But with the CPP these number can be very off.
We are talking something large and rather complex.
Building time will be 12 months and cost of the boat ready to sail (toothbrush will be on owner expenses ) 2 millions euros, its quite a achievement.
I would like to know, If its possible, the systematic to achieve this goal. For exemple I will guess a vessel that large will take aproximatly 33,000 man hours
so it will be a crew of aproximatly 20 boatbuilders, welders, pipers, mechanics and other. Without counting the back office for the accountant, the buyers, the stock manager and the secretary. I am perhaps completly off, it is just a guess.
This is a lot of people to supervise and to direct, and like a maestro direct his musiciens, no false note must be allowed to achieve the goal.
Can we know the naval architect who designed the hull? Will be the same person who will design the superstructure and the systems?
Daniel

[apex1]

[quote=dskira;293892]

I will make some assumptions and guesses. Lets say she displace 90 tons which will make a displacement length of 152(imperial), and for a range of 5500 miles the bunker will be, let say, 31000 liters which will gave her an endurance of 17 days. But with the CPP these number can be very off.

Hmm, your assumptions bear the hallmark of a professional.
Displ. is about right on DWL. Consumption has to be calculated with the CPP in mind, that is a lot less than average. 40x24x31= 30.000 ltr = 31 days @ 180kw cont. shaft output! But usual in nice conditions are 120kw cont. thats 46 days @ 11kn!

We are talking something large and rather complex.

Of course!

I would like to know, If its possible, the systematic to achieve this goal. For exemple I will guess a vessel that large will take aproximatly 33,000 man hours

No, much less than that! The yard is able to push 5 to 7 kg of boat through production, per manhr. The given price would otherwise be impossible to achieve. And not to forget, as I mentioned in the opening post, there will be NO profit, no overhead cost, no broker or sales or marketing cost!!! It is a boat for the boss, so has to be the very best they can do, but the most value for the penny too..........

This is a lot of people to supervise and to direct, and like a maestro direct his musiciens, no false note must be allowed to achieve the goal.

True, but I can.

Can we know the naval architect who designed the hull? Will be the same person who will design the superstructure and the systems

It is the same, but he will be not named here.

Thank you all for your constructive contribution. That is what I call a heartwarming way of treating a thread!!! Critical, constructive and with both legs on the ground of facts, professional, really. I like you.........

Richard

[Alik]

I think apex1 is on right track with dimensions. The boat is big enough to comply for ocean class (OK, it is not under ISO, but...) without excessive internal ballast. Use of wide hull and ballast (as for smaller and relatively wider boats) will definitely reduce roll period.

We did a study for one of our concepts - 16m trawler, steel/aluminium. For that trawler compliance with wind/wave criteria from ISO12217-1 without ballast was an issue, on other hand with ballast we have to introduce roll stabilizers.