Dreamboat - Matthieu Tarrit

That's nothing more then a classic example of a skilled CAD operator that has never been off shore or is even aware of what they need to worry about. Simply modernized foolishness.

 

yeah this kind of crap gets on my nerves.
Kids in design school will style a blob and then add 'innovation' in form of hyped trendy lip service. No real innovation on any level and every change 'from norm' is change to the worse.

 

However, I do like the interior styling of this boat. Minimalistic and with lots of natural light. Honeycomb-like window framing adds to this interior visual impact, much more than to the exterior appearance.
There would be an additional cost and weight due to impact-resistant glass or thick, surface-hardened polycarbonate, but the styling alone is not bad, imho. Perhaps could be ok for a catamaran hull, which could cope better with the increased CoG of windows and reinforcing frames.
I'm referring to these views:





I don't like this view, ok for a panoramic taxi-boat but impractical for anything else but going out for a picnic with friends:

 

This is not a design at all. Just a makeover with no connection to reality, drawn good enough to admire negligent virtual boaters and to be used in boating press for mass brainwash.

'Design is not just how the thing looks. It is about how it works' (c) Steve Jobs

 

We are at risk of entering again into that old discussion about difference between design and styling...

There's a very interesting reading here about design vs. styling topic: http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/3695468
This is imho the crucial picture in the slideshow, which very efficiently shows the main difference between the two:

 

Styling is what gets done after you have a functioning form that fits the SOR. If it's a spec job, then the SOR would be quite broad, to appeal to as many in the market as possible, especially if you're way out on the limb with the style side of things, which this is. I don't care what kind of glazing they use, I wouldn't be caught out in that glass topped bath tub in blue water. I've seen well designed ports stowed in by breaking seas, I can only imagine what would happen to that contraption.

It's a fat lady in a string bikini and some things, regardless of convention, just shouldn't done.

 

All true PAR, but you are applying considerations valid for blue-water boats to this boat, which is clearly not a blue-water boat. It is perhaps intended for bay-cruising of a group of partygoers, so if we consider this limited-scope usage then the form, particularly of the interior spaces, is not that much off-target. Imho.
If, on the other hand, the stylist wanted to create a boat capable of day cruises in the coastal or offshore waters, then yu're 100% right - it is just not suitable.

Remember this discussion: http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/form-vs-function-35383-2.html#post415890 ? The peacock analogy...

All the previous technical critics relative to the propulsion type etc. remain valid, of course.

 

daiquiri, in line with your thinking, the reason this stuck out was fresh water lakes ... the nearest "sea" or "blue-water" is a day or 2 away, where the nearest lake is 1/2 hour away ...

 

I liked the retractable full width stern steps, thought they might be revised to provide a variable hull shape say rolled up to improve low speed efficiency, or flattened out for more planing surface?
Other than that, I would have to concur with the majority of the postings so far, that it is quite an impractical vessel.

 

... there's PLENTY of yachts with this type of layout (forward cabin/wheelhouse) but with old school HARD square/straight lines that are NOT aerodynamic by any stretch ...

 

these are all examples that are not far off from this concept …

Fairline 55 Squadron - http://www.fairline.com/#/squadron/s55/images/
Jeanneau NC11 - http://www.jeanneau.fr/nc11/en/images.html
Bavaria Deep Blue 46 by BMW - http://www.bavaria-yachtbau.com/en/motor-boats/deep-blue-46-sporttop.html


I'm wondering if most of the critique of this design is knee-jerk regarding the H2 power plant and "eco"ness

 

I can't speak for others, but I think that the design fails on the false "eco" credentials and its impracticality as a boat. Leaving aside some of the missed off detail, like the lack of deck access, having a high super structure so far forward will make the handling "interesting", to say the least. Imagine the effect of a cross wind when trying to dock, or even manoeuvre down a narrow channel. The bow is going to want to blow off downwind all the time, making it pretty damned awkward to control.

Even if only used in sheltered, inland, waters this thing is going to be a handful.

 

Dreamboat?!

Is it a bird? ... NOOOOO!
Is it a fish? ... NOOOOO!
It is a floating peanut!

We know that art is in the eye of the beholder.
However, art and funcionality is in a major conflict here.

Any new and innovative boat design should be functional first and artsy-fartsy next, but within the confines of the functionality limits.

You guys have dealth with the outside, look at the interior picture. There is a giant wheel from a 50' sailboat, taking up all that space.

It is a twin water jet propulsion, not a mechanical rudder setup...
Even a small potmeter would do the steering! (Drive by wire.)

On the other hand, what do I know?

Stephen

 

I don't think your examples prove your point at all. The center of wind pressure and drag are drastically different - much more forward and higher on the dreamboat.
Also there is a significant difference in having helm inside right behind a windshield and having it 10feet behind a windshield.

Criticism is not a knee jerk reaction.

I write this on the automotto page:

"schools that let students get away with such foolishness should be punished. There huge fundamental flaws to the key points of the concept.
-aluminum is extremely energy intensive to produce - how is that environmental
-composite resins are not nice stuff and the parts are not recyclable
-jet drives are extemely inefficient
-huge volume high/forward would make a horrible boat and very high wind resistance
-big glass areas result in heavy (in boats huge impact to efficiency) and unstable balance
-how are fuel cells zero emission? how was the hydrogen created again?
-chosen hull design (planing) would need hundred+ kW for any kind of moderate performance - you need a lot of hydrogen for even modest range

Oh its just a styling exercise? Well then don't make absurd claims. What unique or smart did this design really provide other than changing number of features to impractical ones. "


And the list of obvious weird choices could go on. The roof deck you need to park our to?! etc. I do like the pseudo honey comb window.

Why am I so critical of this kind of things?
Well. I went to design school and I can tell you that it is very hard to come up with fresh solutions to problems, look good & fresh and be actually doable.
It is far easier to do a design where you ignore a few of those features (like doable, solves a problem). So its pretty common to see totally senseless 'spectacular' styling exercises that try to create substance by just topping it off with hype words.
this brick looking dumb car here is perfect for modern urban nomad - with built in facebook and twitter you can keep up with the world while you drive with your silent solar panel powered hydrogen fuel cell powertrain.
Then to make it stand out from 5 more concepts that had exact same features you come up with something whimsical:
The built in skateboard ramp takes your hobby wherever you go.

-seen it million times and its not a good job by the schools. Freaking 150w solar panel on vehicles that take 20kw to propel is not much of a solution - let a lone its been done so not fresh either. Yet you see that tagged on otherwise pointless designs.
I do not oppose off the wall concept designs either but they need to be sold as such. And have significant ideas to the styling to pull it off.


edit: re-organized

 

I'm starting to believe that mr. Tarrit, the guy who has done this styling exercise (that's what imho it should be considered), was somewhat inspired by art deco styling movement.
I love art deco, it was a period when people were thinking big and had a courage to create, innovate and take their risks, without need to first produce 500-page business plans for banks and financiers. Some really interesting architecture and design artworks were created in the art deco period. Like this, for example: http://www.bikeexif.com/art-deco-custom-motorcycle
or this: http://www.notechmagazine.com/2009/09/the-blackpool-tramway.html

As for the helm station, I can see some vague similarity between this picture:



And this view of the wheelhouse of 1930's Graf Zeppelin airship:



And, oddly , Zeppelin was also a product of the art deco era.

Cheers