Ok, Now What...?

[Portager]

Originally posted by Willallison
Well, Mike I would have to say that your 'raised pilothouse mini-express trawler' is a breath of fresh air. Something different - inspirational even!

Thanks. I'll take that as a compliment.

Alas, I still have a few darts in my box so.......
I'm concerned that at 9.75m (32ft) we may be getting a little on the large side to meet all our weight / performance guidelines. LWL for your boat looks like being about 30ft. And of course (even though you can't bring yourself to draw it!) that there will also be an outboard sticking out back (and probably a boarding platform) so the LOA will be closer to 10.5m. We could always lop 1/2 to 3/4 of a metre off the cockpit, I suppose....

My intent was to take the space for the swim platform and outboard out of the cockpit. You might be right about the weight getting a little heavy. I think the proportions might look a little better if it were a foot or two shorter.

Then there is the relationship between the living area(s) and the cockpit. Head and galley access will of course be excellent (no trapsing through the boat with wet, sandy feet to grab a drink or take a pee...), but conversation and sightlines between those in the cockpit and those sitting inside will be difficult. The trick with a small boat is to make it feel big - that means open plan wherever possible. By compartmentalising the boat as you have this is hard to achieve. Also with everything at such widely different levels, moving about may prove to be cimbersome.

This is a valid point and I think an unavoidable aspect of the design. Every design has it's advantages and disadvantages and this is a disadvantage.

Lastly there is the height - at just over 3m it may prove to be a problem for our CG.

Nothing an inboard diesel engine wouldn't fix O did I say that out-loud? Same comment I had on your previous design I think. Although in mine, only the pilothouse is raised and the galley and head, with their heavy contents, are very low. I think this should compensate for the height of the Pilothouse. The benefit is good 360 degree visibility and a multi-functional space i.e. pilothouse/salon. The fact that my design has evolved to look a lot like "Portager" wasn't lost on me.

Now, I've just spent 3 lovely days away on my boat - cool at around 14C during the day and 6C at night - but calm, sunny and generally rather pleasant! Inspirational conditions of ever there were some - so here is my latest bid. An "Extended Cab" cruiser.

Your not getting any sympathy points from the boat-less land-locked crowd. Although our temps were 26C highs and 20C lows, but I did yard work. I have accumulated a collection of darts, mostly extracted from my backside, and I dying to use some of them.

I like your "Extended Cab" cruiser much better than its predecessor, although it is a little too "Clorox bottle" for my taste.

I like the ladder access to the fore deck. I was/am trying to incorporate one into my arrangement, but it has to be taller. The angled hatch may be hard to seal. Could you make the seal surface flat? The head looks a little, um, little! What is the headroom in the head? Would I have to sit down to pee? If a head doesn't have standing head room, is it still a head?

I like the hardtop/sun roof. It makes the boat lockable and I like the looks better than a soft-top. You might have removable panels that get left on the trailer to secure the aft end.

It is nice to combine the helm galley and salon into a large open space, but... I find that underway, people seam to gravitate to the helm. I don't know if it is to distract the pilot or to see where you they are going or both. The Admirable likes to sit across from the me facing forward when it is just the two of us. Also, I don't like people swing pots of hot liquids too close to me when I piloting (we chartered a boat like that once). I guess what I am saying is, for the way I operate my boat, I like my arrangement better. I'm sure you feel the same about yours. In the absence of user inputs we tend to substitute our own desires.

It appears that the longitudinal CG will be about at the helm/galley location. Do you have sufficient space for the fuel tanks under the sole? It looks like there is lots of volume under the salon and cockpit but mass placement requirements may not allow you to use some of it.

The cockpit seams a little too small. I was trying to allow space for fishing and for two divers to gear up. I think my cockpit is larger than necessary, but yours seams a little too small to me.

I like the built-in stairs leading to the side decks. Have you thought about handholds yet?

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[Portager]

OK, here is my O-1 rev 7 with an outboard motor.

I added a swim step or boarding platform. I didn't want to shorten the LWL so I kept length and added the platform above.

I embedded the outboard into the stern to keep the classic look.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[Portager]

I know we voted on outboards, but it occurred to me that it would be quite easy to accommodate an inboard engine into the "'raised pilothouse mini-express trawler" so I had to see what it would look like.

The red striped boxes are fuel tanks. Shifting fuel between the forward tanks and the aft tank should provide adequate trim control as fuel is consumed. The blue tanks are water tanks.

The yellow blob is the Steyr diesel engine scaled to the scale of O1.

An with the outboard version, there are transom doors in the stern. There would be a rubber flap at the bottom that will allow the cockpit to self drain, but oppose waves that hit the stern from flowing in unimpeded.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[Portager]

As long as I drew an outboard I figured I might as well do a stern drive version.

I shifted the stern drive as far aft as I could to retain as much space in the cockpit as possible.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[8knots]

I have no darts to cast. only a few observations. I really have no right to post on this project, but I hope you all do not mind. I think she needs a little more beam up foreward She seems a little needle-like. I think at speed she will be a wet ride. This is a multifaceted + the added flair will create added interior space in the foreward cabin and reserve boyancy in a following swell. If you get cought in some ugly stuff! Back to the foreward cabin. I noticed the cabin sole is very close to the keel and ribs. Dont forget your structural elements. I have fought with this for years I have crammed everything down in the hull so far to keep good stability that I left no room for fuel, grey, black watertanks, batteries and so on! Let alone the very structure that will hold her together. I hope these observations are taken in the right context. Happy noodling! I like the profile and the Volvo DP Outdrive. 8Kts

[Portager]

Thanks for the comments and compliment. I think they are right on track. Constructive criticism is always welcome. Compliments are even better.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[Willallison]

Welcome back 8knots - far from being unqualified to speak on the subject we welcome your input - in fact we could do with a bit more....the more the merrier as they say.

In fact, how about a couple more of those lovely "1 hour sketches" of yours......

[Willallison]

Sorry to hear about your butt, Mike. I feel somewhat guilty that most of those little bruises were caused by darts with my signature on them....

I like the ladder access to the fore deck. I was/am trying to incorporate one into my arrangement, but it has to be taller. The angled hatch may be hard to seal. Could you make the seal surface flat? The head looks a little, um, little! What is the headroom in the head? Would I have to sit down to pee? If a head doesn't have standing head room, is it still a head?

I've achieved relatively easy foredeck access in 3 ways. 1st the freeboard up fron isn't as high as yours and the front cabin top is raised. 2nd I have included a forward 'cockpit' which also makes for a more secure foredeck (drains o/board). 3rd there is a step up before you get to the ladder. This means that access to the hatch is easier and would also allow you to poke your head out before venturing on deck. Sealing the fron hatch shouldn't be too much of a problem - some decent lips and a couple of clips to dog it down against rubber seals should do the trick.
Headroom in the head is about 1.7m - not exactly palatial I agree - hopefully I can squeeze a little more in when I (if) I do some more accurate drawings. And no - if it were any less, I think I'd refer to it as the 'shoulder'!

The Admirable likes to sit across from the me facing forward when it is just the two of us. Also, I don't like people swing pots of hot liquids too close to me when I piloting (we chartered a boat like that once).

At 1m wide my helm should accomodate two - though if my (now 20 weeks pregnant) wife gets any bigger, I may have to revise that!
With a cruise speed in the mid-twenties I don't envisage doing much cooking on the run, so I don't think having the galley helm-side would pose much of a problem.

It appears that the longitudinal CG will be about at the helm/galley location. Do you have sufficient space for the fuel tanks under the sole? It looks like there is lots of volume under the salon and cockpit but mass placement requirements may not allow you to use some of it.

I would expect the CG to fall somewhere near the aft end of the galley. At the centreline, there is about 0.5m under the galley sole and 0.75m under the lounge sole. Should be more than enough room for all the tanks (approx 1.5 cubic m under the galley alone). With O-1 meant to be a relative lightweight, placement of added weight will be an issue regardless of design. There is indeed a huge amount of space available for storage under both cockpit and lounge areas. There is also plenty throughout the rest of the boat - under lounges, the v-berth, helm chest of draws etc. It will always come down to the owner to ensure that it is placed sensibly.

The cockpit seams a little too small. I was trying to allow space for fishing and for two divers to gear up. I think my cockpit is larger than necessary, but yours seams a little too small to me.

The cockpit is a little on the small side. But for most people I thought that the extra accomodation would be a higher priority and you can only squeeze so much into 30ft. Actually, there is about 1.25m in front of the outboard, so whilst it might be a little tight putting on the scuba gear, it should still be possible and with storage under the cockpit sole, there is plenty of room to store the gear when it's wet without taking it inside. The length from the aft of the boarding platforms to the forward end of the cockpit is 1.75m
From my rough measurements your cockpit is about 2m long (2.6m including the platforms which are more 'external' than mine) and you have 1.4m in front of the outboard well, so whilst it is larger, there isn't that much difference between the two.

So far, between just the two of us we have shown at least 4 completely different variations on the same general theme. All have their pro's and con's - perhaps on a single hull, we could offer a couple of different arrangementts......

[Portager]

Originally posted by Willallison
Sealing the fron hatch shouldn't be too much of a problem - some decent lips and a couple of clips to dog it down against rubber seals should do the trick.

Don't under estimate the difficulty of sealing an angled surface. It has proven to be a complex task over the years, but for some reason we keep designing them into out designs and then crushing them after we are committed. Just a thought.

Headroom in the head is about 1.7m - not exactly palatial I agree - hopefully I can squeeze a little more in when I (if) I do some more accurate drawings. And no - if it were any less, I think I'd refer to it as the 'shoulder'!

I was think if it wasn't ahead it must be behind. Sorry, I'm a sucker for bad puns. The problem with the head forward is everything tends to stair steps up from there. If you raise the roof on the head it raises everything from there aft. If you move the head aft you have visibility and/or cockpit isolation problems. It seams to me that it all revolves around the head. I think I remember someone telling me that once, but it didn't register.

At 1m wide my helm should accommodate two - though if my (now 20 weeks pregnant) wife gets any bigger, I may have to revise that!

LOL. My gorgeous bride has at least 20 years and 2 kids on yours and we don't fit in a 1 meter seat either.

The cockpit is a little on the small side. But for most people I thought that the extra accommodation would be a higher priority and you can only squeeze so much into 30ft.

True.

From my rough measurements your cockpit is about 2m long (2.6m including the platforms which are more 'external' than mine) and you have 1.4m in front of the outboard well, so whilst it is larger, there isn't that much difference between the two.

Also true and I'm at 32'. My cockpit internal dimensions are 6.75' X 6' without the motor incursion. My cockpit shrunk after I wrote my previous post. Must have gotten wet.

So far, between just the two of us we have shown at least 4 completely different variations on the same general theme. All have their pro's and con's - perhaps on a single hull, we could offer a couple of different arrangementts......

True, although my first arrangement didn't have room for fuel and the second was UGLY! I think we are really left with a midget head (shoulder) forward or the head aft. I think it would be is possible to do multiple arrangements on the same hull, but every time we decide not to decide we compound our work load. Maybe eventually we could go back and do a variation if there is enough interest (internally and externally), but I think we need to focus on a primary design.

By the way, I like your hull form and I was hoping to use it for my arrangement, if it goes forward.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[tom28571]

Mike,

I had a suspicion from the first that you would try to sneak a diesel in under that pilothouse. If that is not your reason, why did you make the pilothouse so high? Excellent visibility can be had with a much lower profile and I'd personally need a really good reason to put up with the up and down of the fore/aft passage.

Speaking of visibility and heads, having the head directly behind the helm has minimal effect on steering visibility and avoids the problem choices being discussed. Having the head aft on the opposite side of the helm does have greater effect on helm visibility since the pilot can't stick his head out of the port side to look aft.

As mentioned by 8 knots, drawing the interior without reference to the hull shape and structure will surely lead to some problems fitting things in later on.

I am still concerned about hulls that are very fine forward and very full aft in following waves. Been there, experienced that , don't like it much.

And speaking of fine bows, by the way Will, the Wally boat got some mention in the latest Professional Boatbuilder that came today.

[Portager]

I wish I could take credit for making the pilothouse that high so that I could put the engine under the pilothouse. In reality, I did the UGLY version first and I needed the height to high to see over the head. When I moved the Pilothouse forward I decided to keep the height the same for visibility aft. You are correct, I could lower the Pilothouse a foot or so but then you couldn't see behind as well. At about 1.5' you would start running out of room for fuel and/or having to shift it some of it forward, which would cause CG problems.

As 8knots pointed out, I probably didn't make the pilothouse quite high enough to accommodate the diesel under the sole. I think I need another 6 to 8 inches to make it work. The other problem is the engine is a little too far forward so it is going to tend to be nose heavy. OTOH the outboard will be stern heavy, as would the stern drive.

As far as I am concerned the O-1 baseline is still outboard powered. I did the inboard and stern drive versions for my own edification and I welcome comments on them. If anybody objects to me posting them, then I'll delete them.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[Willallison]

I did the inboard and stern drive versions for my own edification and I welcome comments on them. If anybody objects to me posting them, then I'll delete them.

No objection on my part - indeed I admire your tenacity!
Of course, with the sterndrive you lose 1/2 your cockpit and with the inboard you've screwed up your weight distribution and no longer have room for any fuel - but then I've been trying to tell you that for ages! He, He, He.....

Tom,

Speaking of visibility and heads, having the head directly behind the helm has minimal effect on steering visibility and avoids the problem choices being discussed. Having the head aft on the opposite side of the helm does have greater effect on helm visibility since the pilot can't stick his head out of the port side to look aft.

True, if the head is aft (without a raised pilothouse) then the best place for it is probably directly behind the helm. But you still can't compare the visibility with that achieved if it is up fwd. It isn't only for berthing etc that being able to see aft is important - being able to keep an eye on people (and particularly children) in the cockpit whilst underway is an often overlooked safety issue.
And as I was saying earlier, it also compartmentalises the spaces, making the whole boat feel smaller. Personally - provided adequate headroom can be found without excessive overall height - then I am convinced that the fwd location is best.

As mentioned by 8 knots, drawing the interior without reference to the hull shape and structure will surely lead to some problems fitting things in later on.

I am still concerned about hulls that are very fine forward and very full aft in following waves. Been there, experienced that , don't like it much.

I can't speak for Mike, but I have based all my drawings on the hullform which I have posted previously. Though with the extended cab, I have altered the bow shape a little as the completely plumb stem didn't look too flash.

Incidentally, what did you all think of that hullform? Since I posted it, I've played around with the shape a little - giving the mid-hull-side-chine-thingy (which nobody has told me what to correctly call) a little more flare. This should make the boat drier and less prone to burying the bow in a following sea.

[Portager]

Originally posted by Willallison
Of course, with the stern drive you lose 1/2 your cockpit and with the inboard you've screwed up your weight distribution and no longer have room for any fuel - but then I've been trying to tell you that for ages! He, He, He.....

Not so fast flash! Although I am somewhat concerned with the forward CG of the inboard configuration, I am much more concerned with the aft CG of the outboard and even more concerned with that of the stern drive. It is true that the stern drive eats up a lot of space in the cockpit, but the outboard eats some too and the inboard has the best cockpit. As for fuel, I located the fuel tanks outboard of the engine so all configurations have the same fuel capacity (each tank is 60 US gallons) and water capacity (each tank is 30 US gallons). The outboard does have more storage space under the raised pilothouse though.

I think the main advantage of the outboard/stern drive configurations is the pilothouse could be lower. Tonight I'll try lowering the pilothouse on the outboard (don't think the stern drive is worth the bother) about 8" (one step) and see what that does to the looks. probably need to lower the bow too. The downside will be rear visibility and fore cabin headroom.

I can't speak for Mike, but I have based all my drawings on the hullform which I have posted previously. Though with the extended cab, I have altered the bow shape a little as the completely plumb stem didn't look too flash.

Incidentally, what did you all think of that hull form? Since I posted it, I've played around with the shape a little - giving the mid-hull-side-chine-thingy (which nobody has told me what to correctly call) a little more flare. This should make the boat drier and less prone to burying the bow in a following sea.

I was planning to use your hull form also. I like your hull form just fine, but that isn't my forte (I don't know squate about hulls). I was planning to use your hull form, but I need guidance.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[Portager]

OK, here is the outboard version with the lower raised pilothouse. The height is now 9' overall. I had to lower the bow to make it look better. Headroom in the fwd cabin is now 4' 4". There is also a torturous jog between the pilothouse side deck and the galley/head roof.

An unrelated change is I had to narrow the head. I hadn't left enough clearance for the curvature of the hull.

Cheers;
Mike Schooley

[Willallison]

Here's another variation on the Raised Pilothouse theme.
The main salon is of a wide-body configuration, giving excellent internal volume. However, it means you must climb a ladder from the cockpit and go over the salon to reach the foredeck. The raised helm is only a step or two up and contains nothing more than the helm and companion seats. The v-berth is in the bow, with the same foredeck ladder access as before.
The heghts need to be played with a bit - the whole thing could be a little lower - though as it is with the salon floor at chine level there is ample room for tankage beneath.
Whaddayathink?