Vision of future boating - design competition

I cant say I really liked any of the designs

Design 2 was reasonable, but once the initial deep forefoot is passed, you end up with a very flat bottommed boat, not good for ride in any seaway

One thing that they all had in common was very snazzy graphics, nice 3D modelling software and rendering programs. Is that what makes a good boat, because someone has the ability to use the latest software to make it look good on the computer

 

What I find amusing in these concepts is they talk about being environmentally sensitive but one look at the finishes and lightweight materials used to construct the boats and they are the opposite. The requirement of raw materials and energy that would be required to make some of these boats is staggering not to mention the practical problems with maintaining all those shiny finishes.

I agree with Sabah though that the houseboat idea is interesting I think the shore power input would be significant though because people would want all the comforts of home. A sensible addition would be an airdock to lift the boats out of the water and prevent fouling.

 

#3 reminded me of http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/slickest-folder-ever-41318.html#post518173

But is the displacement enough to float it for entry #3? It must rely on a weight-less energy storage of the future.

 

I love this appended note to the award for #3.

The jury pointed out some technical challenges as well:
“Preliminary data on hydrostatic are not presented and this makes it difficult to assess the correctness of the stability and accessibility of the boat which appear to be critical points, as well as the protection from water of the driver who seems to be very close to the waterline.”
“How about the floating capability of this design?”

We have our priorities all wrong, guys.
1st - look cool
2nd - incorporate a tablet PC
3rd - use words like "sustainable"
"will it float?" is a question to be addressed later.

I do like the idea behind #4.

Speaking of the slickest folder, I saw an article in the latest PBB about an early version of windrider which had the amas fold pantograph-style (one ama rotates forward and the other aft)

 

The boat powered houseboat concept is a larger version of Personal Watercraft powered boats/party barges. http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/pontoon-powered-sea-doo-jet-ski-34586.html or http://www.dockitjet.com/ Not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

Winners of prizes more or less what I expected from the apparent makeup of the panel, 3 art and industrial design, 2 marine design, 4 manager and money types, apparently zero seagoing experience . . .

 

I didn't see anything that made sense from a marketing point of view. For instance in the near future many retirees will be trading in their sport, speed boats...then what ?

 

Boating needs to find a new marketing angle.

Cars were on the downturn.
Now cars have "gone green" and have excitement about small, efficient, and electric. The electric cars even work now for city driving.

Electronics, iphones, etc. have the public's wallet this decade. In cars, that works for hands-free control, automatic parking, collision detection. For boats, we already had chart navigation and depthsounders for decades. What else do you need?

To 'get on board' with the "green" movement hype, electric doesn't work for most boats - not enough power storage yet. Green is sailing, but people don't have much time to commit anymore.

Boats don't fit into people's lives as well as they did in the 50's, and haven't 'gotten on the bandwagon' of the current social trends.
Can marketing make boating fit into people's lives again?
How can real boats create new excitement about boating again?

 

Very interesting, not only the winners, but alo some of the comments. There are three aspects to boating as I look at it. Commercial aspects from tankers to canoe rentals, recreational or sport boating and personal utility boats. The recreational boats are owned privately taking in all aspects of being on the water for the joy of it. The utility boater uses the boat to accomplish a particular life style, small fishing craft, delivery needs to remote areas and probably those liveaborads meeting the needs of a chosen lifestyle. Certainly all privately boats can take on any of these aspects but primarily someone owns a boat for a purpose.

I like the houseboat idea, even though it is not that unique. It addresses more versatility, a utility function as well as recreational aspect. I have wondered why some newer yachts were not designed with a break-away hull, like an ama on a tri or the stern section that could be used as the tender instead of hauling another boat around, or using a smaller craft as the power system for a mothership. Seadoo came out with that years ago.

Marketing, IMO, will not intergrate more people into boating unless they are made aware more possibilities there may be on the water. Most people who may be good canidates for a liveaborad lifestyle are not really aware that such is really an option for them, especially the younger generations. Most college types near those waterborn opportunities, unless they have been exposed to boating, probably don't even consider that a yacht (or any old floating tub) might be more economical than an apartment. Marketing could address such populations, the same holds true for the baby boomers who may rekindle an old dream.

Nothing will evolve in the market as long as those who council the mariner public to adopt old ideas. Insisting that technological aspects of design will always trump form or function will always keep the solution for any client within the existing pages of the design portfolio. (Hmmmm? Here is your retirement plan Mr. Smith, specifically designed for you!...Says the inusrance agent). That houseboat with a garage may slam, it may have windage issues, there may be difficulty in attaching the smaller craft and keep it steady in motions, but those are trade offs for the bigger picture and, IMO, many marine technician types (N/As and Designers) refuse to grasp what might be acceptable by the client. Certainly explain it and advise, but meeting the client's needs is paramont. So those marketing design services might consider that there is a larger target market who aren't really that interested in nautical perfection. Imagination and acceptance of new ideas, practical solutions to social demands will need to be more appropriately viewed by many professionals. That incluse banks as well, LOL.

There are only two designs that I see having a "business chance" in the near future, the houseboat and the folding craft, conventionally powered. The yacht with the side entry is pretty cool, the side hatch is probably a vacume sealed hatch that is many times stronger than the hull structure. That pop top cat yacht is also doable I'm sure but probably not as to the bang for the buck, not unless they are cranked out of a factory.

I think some Cubans made it to the States attaching innertubes to an old pickup truck! Some guy built and sailed a tri made of beer kegs across the Pacific, from what I read. Maybe design should begin with more of an eye toward problem solving and creativity first and then look to the technical issues that makes it a reality.

Lastly, I'm not sure what my opions are based on or why I was promted to verbalize them, because I appreciate and respect all you guys! It was just a design contest!

 

I think it is good to re-examine new design potentials from time to time, but it is inevitable that in a mature field such as boating it is unlikely that genuinely new and ground-breaking ideas will emerge frequently.

Compare boats to automobiles; sure over the last 30 years or so they have added micro-cars, minivans, SUVs, electric vehicles and crossovers to the standard offerings of sedans, wagons and pickups, but what’s actually new there? EV’s go back to the start of the last century, micro-cars emerged in Europe at the end of WW2. SUVs are all rip-offs of the venerable Land Rover and what the heck is a crossover anyway? Back in the 1950's there were proposals for amphibious cars, two piece cars with a detachable front end for shopping, steering at both ends for parking, and retractable wings and propeller for flying, but none of those have survived the test of time because they were not practical. I am not denying that there has been huge progress in automobile design, but they amount to incremental evolutions not revolutions.

I thought there was a lack of practical, genuinely new concepts that offered something we don’t already have. Are we less naive about novelty than we once were, or did I just grow old and curmudgeonly?

The minivan is about the only truly revolutionary concept since the automatic gearbox that has had commercial success on the roads since the station wagon, and yet it is merely a van with seats. Contrast that with boating developments; we have had the multihull revolution, personal watercraft, the home-built boat and kit boats. I think our favorite field of endeavor has been holding its end up pretty well . . .

 

I keep thinking about all the energy stored between your legs in #3.

quote "it is driven by Magnetohydrodynamic drive(MHD) and powered by an electric
double-layer capacitor (Super-caps). This MHD drive accelerates the vehicle by pushing
the seawater out with no moving parts, using magnetohydrodynamics, which is quieter and creates smaller wave action. The electric capacitor will wirelessly be charged automatically during parking. The major advantages of the double-layer capacitor are a much higher power density and faster charging time than conventional batteries."

These take a lot of energy to work, all stored between your legs. And so what happens when some sea water seeps into the contacts or power controls? All that energy will discharge all at once, right between your legs. this is not only not practical, it is dangerous and a lawsuit waiting to happen.

And how can this kind of drive "creates smaller wave action?", that is a function of the hull design and speed. A slow rotating prop would be more efficient, lighter and cheaper. Or even better, how about a kayak paddle, that would be more "green".

 

- take the amount of energy it takes to propel a boat for a reasonable days work on the canals of Venice, multiply by the monumentally lower efficiency of a magnetodynamic drive, now multiply that by the low efficiency of power transmission by wireless and run it all through an onshore antenna in the general direction of the boat and anyone in the vicinity will be lucky to survive being cooked, if an exploding over-charged supercapacitor doesn't get them first. Expect cancer rates to shoot up if this idea catches on. Safer and simpler to use a trolling motor, and about as fast. And since when have boats been “parked” . . . but maybe that’s a gondolier's technical term.

 

I fully agree with you, however I have been a liveaboard for 22 years and it is still very difficult to get approval from marinas to live aboard as well as from authorities.

 

Since most marinas are in cities and city authorities tend to be land-oriented it creates potential taxing difficulties. Do we tax the person living on his/her boat as a resident to provide support for the services he will use and how do we justify that when the neighbour's boat is simply parked? If the city figures out a system it will create difficulties for the marina operator since each marina berth may have a different charge and tax basis to its neighbour and either may change anytime. There's questions like mail handling and deliveries on top the load on the sewage etc. all potentially changing from day to day for services that are based on building needs and designed for a constant level of load. Much simpler to ban residence and keep things simple.

There's also the consideration that residents can - in theory - move their boat and thus are by definition transients with all the bagage that often goes with that status.

In these changing times, for a country criss-crossed by canals and rivers houseboats can be an ideal solution for a population that must relocate to suit job obligations, but in most cities the waterfront is far from the industrial and developing areas.

 

Something very wrong with the scale of these drawings.
It is quite amateurish to declare this a winner. Are the jury naval architect?