Bulbous Bow changes

There was (and partly still is) a tendency to build ships with large rake of stem, because it looks "cool". One of the side results are very large waterline entrance angles, which lead to large bow wave. For very long ship, when wave making is only small part of total resistance, this do not really mater.
In your case, when ship is not that long, you know the problem.

It is not that easy to suggest anything precise from just photos, but the following bow add-on should improve the maters. This way we win:
*a few meters extra length of waterline, what shifts all the resistance curve to higher speeds slightly;
*waterline entrance angle is about halved, what cuts down on bow wave magnitude dramatically;
*extra volume forward, what will help with a bow-down trim problem.
Both effects together, can make a ship go a little faster and/or burn a little less fuel.
In this sketch i did set a special restriction to avoid any modifications to anchor housings.
If cost of anchor gear modification is acceptable, LWL could be made both longer and sharper.

In any case, it would be wise not to expect more as a few % of speed increase.

 

Thank you all for the answers so far.

In any case we would be more than happy if we gained 0.7-1 knot.
We would consider that a great success!

 

Might this be the reason why all new builds tend to have very long and large bulbs?

What your sketch suggests couldn't be achieved by extending the current bulbous bow and making it taller so as to be at or above the water line, when cruising?

 

I think so. Long large bulb kind of extend the real waterline and keep that nice raked stem in place. As already mentioned, this take enormous amounts of research to get just right.

I did mean the same style add-on as present bulb. First guess was to remove the bulb.
"...couldn't be achieved by extending the current bulbous bow ..." The question is too precise to be answered from just photos. Lines drawing is necessary. Stability book (it contain load cases and trim at each load case) would be helpful, too.

Do you want to preserve the looks? The Length between Perpendiculars for regulatory reasons (SOLAS, LLC, etc.. )?

 

So your suggestion is that the new bulb should be somewhat like your sketch?

We do not care about looks and there are no regulatory issues whatsoever.

 

What I show in sketch is not a bulb, strictly speaking.
It is more like a hull extension, carried out at waterline level.