How does he do it? Dashew's new 77 foot powerboat cheaper to run than Beowulf.

If you look at their respective fuel consumption in relation to the accommodation available, it comes into perspective. Idlewild has the interior of your average 38-40' cruiser. Windhorse has the accommodation of perhaps a 55' cruiser. Both have initial construction prices far higher than the accommodation might warrant, and marina berth costs would be a continuing problem.

 

never thought of it this way Tad, but I never use marinas when I cruise, try to live on anchor although that is becoming very hard here and in lotsa places
But these boats, the old way was longer and narrower and more efficient, length means comfort at sea

 

By far most of the places we visit don't have marinas. Even when marinas are available, we very seldom use them!

Then again, we are part of that %.05 market that actually cruises aboard our boat abroad full time.

 

You are (as usual) right on the spot! ........... but........
Passagemaking is usually that sort of adventure done by a couple (with proven ability to enjoy the partner), so performance is ahead of accommodation. If you outweigh.
Marina, by the way, (I know her) is not allowed to berth during the passage! That is in sharp contrast to the harmony aboard!

Kindest
Regards
Richard

 

Does this make sense to anyone else?

 

If decisions were based strictly upon interior space and cost we would all end up with mass produced houseboats.

You need to weigh performance and comfort (at sea). The FPB offers performance and comfort (at sea) far beyond the typical "cruiser". Durability and serviceability are also key issues for an offshore cruising vessel. It is no coincidence that the FPB and Idlewild chose aluminum construction, and it wasn't for cost savings or appearance!

 

its kinda nice in this, where are my pts rich, and why are you not sleeping, Gosh someone who actually lives on a boat!!
dunno why the Dashews dont sand the boats with first orbital, instead of grinder sander, then acid and then alodyne, stops that grubby oxided look

oh PKOKEN
What a great website you have congrats, reminds me of my cruising days
, when My net is going faster may I suscibe?

 

Touche'

I'll be exactly the same when I go in

 

you are obviously an exp web designer, with too much time on your hands)
can you do a (paid ) one for me please,
can you email me direct at hearnyacht@gmail.com
thanks Stu

 

For me, a marina is a place to keep a boat... when I'm NOT on it!

Interesting comment Tad, given your enthusiasm for lean and light boats I thought you'd be all for boats of their ilk....perhaps styling aside.....
Personally, I like Windhorse. Not quite so convinced about the styling of the Ducks, but horses for courses as they say...

 

When multihulls first started to get popular (Piver or SKC catamarans) the marinas on the US west coast simply stared to charge slip rental by the square ft, instead of loa.

If Tad and others with a love for efficient skinny boats , produce enough newbuilds , the pricing will catch up with reality.

I would imagine the marinas would simply divide the boats in two areas.

In one section would be the roomarans , the condo boats 3 -4 stories high , stored as during a boat show , really tight , as no one moves during a season anyway.

The other slips would be about 10 -12 ft wide , enough to handle a cruising 50 -80 ft boat.

THe condo pack would have 240V @ 50A , as many lines as needed.

The cruisers would probaly be oversupplied with 15A 120V.

FF

 

As it stands now, the new marinas I see being built are putting in WIDER slips.

 

Hummm.....apparently I have lots to answer for...I'll try.

Yes, I firmly believe longer/narrower boats provide some attractive characteristics. Comfort at sea is one of them, speed is another. I guarantee Windhorse is considerably more comfortable in a sea than the 55' I mention above. At 81' LWL and 11 knots Windhorse is cruising at a S/L of about 1.22. Thus equivalent speed for my 55' (53'LWL) would be 8.8 knots. A difference of about 50 miles per 24 hours. That's a lot! In 4 days Windhorse has covered 1056 miles while the 55' will manage that distance in 5 days. An additional 24 hours at sea, running the engine and burning fuel.

But there is a cost for this comfort and speed. My PL56 displaces about 50,000 pounds at half load. She carries about 1/3rd the fuel that Windhorse carries. This is half the weight of Windhorse and about 1/2 the initial cost, say $1.5m for the shorter boat. There's 28' less moorage to pay for each month, less tax and insurance every year, less bottom paint, and on and on....

The tiny marina in front of my office currently has 21 boats tied up in it. Only one of these boats goes out each day...that's my boat because I live aboard our big boat at anchor. Perhaps 2 other boats in the marina get used once a month year round. We have boating year round here. The others get used 4-6 times in the three summer months, otherwise they sit. Perhaps half the boats in the marina have not (to my knowledge) moved in years.

It has been 6-7 years since I originally proposed a series of longer/skinnier passagemakers (see Passagemaker Magazine August 2002 and PBB #81). Also see http://www.passagemakerlite.com In all this time I have received a steady stream of inquires from potential buyers, all of them asking to see a boat in the water. I have never received any interest from builders or yards. One boat is finally underway in South Africa, but it will be some years before she is out cruising.

One can only conclude that speed, efficiency, and comfort at sea are of interest to few if any buyers. Nordhavn tells us that there is no downside to making boats higher and wider, and as long as they still fit in the marina berth this is apparently true.

 

Steve Dashew

Join Date: Jan 2009
Rep: 10 Posts: 3
Location: Arizona

Even though Steve has only been a member of this forum for nine days, a reputation of only 10 is an injustice . I will try to figure out how to add points but in the meantime, all you senior members need to give this man the credit he's due.
I saw Wind Horse at a local harbor and got so excited, I almost walked off the dock trying to get close to it. I was up and down the dock, looking from every angle,at every detail, and was simply amazed.
Now keep in mind this was not a yacht basin, I was not wearing deck slippers... a fishing town in southeast Alaska, I was dressed as a mechanic, Steve came on deck and engaged in friendly conversation, I showed him a picture of a model / prototype design that I am working on ( the model is 28 feet by 4 feet) and Steve invited me aboard. He graciously shared his time and knowledge and I had more fun than a kid could have in a toy store.
I got the full tour from stem to stern, I fondled a Web frame in the engine room, the flat bar on top, the lightning holes in the web, had had a router run over them, the attention to detail, the execution of design philosophy is phenomenal.
I have since found his website and check in regularly, Steve readily shares his knowledge and experiences in the finest tradition of the boat design forum.
Thank you for your time Steve.
Gerald

 

Sorry Tad - I wasn't having a go at you - just surprised by your apparent support for the fat brigade. But you are quite right - as we've both said many times before: 99% of the boating community are well served by short, fat, heavy boats. They effectively go nowhere, so why go to the added expense of making them efficient....?