Power Trimarans?

[FAST FRED]

"but I dont kow if is good for an ocacional tripp to the Bahamas,I'm in florida."

The usual cruiser gang going to the Bahamas waits and waits for a good weather window , so the vessels offshore ability requirement can be (and usually is ) very limited .

The fish killers are happier to attempt a 2 hour passage in most weather , but 100GPH fuel flow , $6500 Stidd seats to keep their spines intact , and mere size helps them greatly.

FF

[TollyWally]

LOL,
a 100 gph fuel burn makes for expensive fish !

[Ricardo Ramalho]

Hi! I am new here, and enjoy very much all the rich information provided in this forum. I would like to warm up this thread:
Power trimarans seem to be one of the best alternatives for a low cost ocean cruiser. The capsize issue is not really a problem as power trimaran have no mast and a capsize would be extremelly hard: seriously. I am not afraid of multihulls I like them and used to have a Hobie Cat. The slender boat FPB (Dashew offshore) is great, but it is too sofisticated, with active stabilizers and everything. Power catamarans require two engines, at all times, so they are not so efficient. Trimaran can have a single engine (and maybe a spare one, to be used one at a time), good surfaces for solar panels, and reasonable good living spaces.

[Brendan]

Originally Posted by CatBuilder

You don't see so many power trimarans. Does anyone know of some example power trimarans that are either:

a) Built to plane with more efficiency

or...

b) Built as extremely efficient trawlers.

Hi,

It’s a great forum you have going here, I’ve been reading a lot of the threads with great interest and found them to be very professional and informative.
I’ve been building boats, for the past 15 years. The latest build I was lucky enough to be involved in was a 90ft Trimaran incorporating 4 retractable, active foils inside the tunnels, 2 either side. By active I mean hydraulically controlled as a ride control system. A couple of MTU V10’s and a matching pair of Rolls Royce jet units.

All but the exterior skin, tanks and engine bearers of the boat was built from carbon fibre. Every component was built from custom tooling, and vacuumed bagged for weight minimisation.

It’s probably a little way off being “efficient” as such but it was designed to plane with minimal contact and run on relatively small engines for this size and type of boat.

I think I managed to attach some pictures, sorry if I messed it up

[marshmat]

Welcome aboard the forum, Brendan

You're fortunate to be able to work on projects like that. Nothing makes engineers drool quite like a client with obscene amounts of cash and a thirst for extreme amounts of cutting edge technology.

Originally Posted by Ricardo Ramalho

Power trimarans seem to be one of the best alternatives for a low cost ocean cruiser. The capsize issue is not really a problem as power trimaran have no mast and a capsize would be extremelly hard: seriously. I am not afraid of multihulls I like them and used to have a Hobie Cat.

A well designed cruising multihull should be extremely difficult to flip; getting caught at a bad angle by a very large breaking wave should be the main concern. Hobies and their larger, over-canvassed racing cousins are, of course, a different matter....

The slender boat FPB (Dashew offshore) is great, but it is too sofisticated, with active stabilizers and everything.

I like the Dashew boats- arguably some of the finest pieces of engineering afloat anywhere- but I agree that they are probably too much boat with too many systems (and too large a price tag) for many people.

Power catamarans require two engines, at all times, so they are not so efficient.

Not necessarily. Look up the new Aspen boats, for example. They're a sort of asymmetric catamaran / tacking power proa type with a single inboard engine.

Trimaran can have a single engine (and maybe a spare one, to be used one at a time), good surfaces for solar panels, and reasonable good living spaces.

I tend to argue that a trimaran has these advantages in the smaller sizes, where an equivalent cat would have hulls too cramped to be usable as living space. From about 8 to 12 m or so, I'd call it a toss-up; above that, the cat's hulls are large enough to include fairly spacious accommodations, while the tri is saddled with large, expensive outriggers and crossbeams that do not contribute much to the living space.

[FAST FRED]

The ability of a really skinney boat to go off shore is really defined by not the boat , but by the motion the vessel has and the crews ability to stand the motion.

Artificial induced stabilization would be needed for a better (not safer) ride.

The gyro comes to mind , but there really expensive.

I still think the cure could be a wide centerboard with a lifting board , operated to reduce roll. This would not harm the boats beachability and could be fairly primitive and still work.

I think this is a place for compressed air , to be used for control of a trim tab on the stability center board.
One plus is the draft could be controlled , and the board would be no drag when not needed.

FF