If Money were no object....

Discussion in 'Materials' started by MaddMatt, Dec 25, 2020.

  1. MaddMatt
    Joined: Oct 2020
    Posts: 13
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: buffalo ny

    MaddMatt Junior Member

    If money were no object, what material would you use?

    I've seen lots of posts about building economically but what if money were no object and you still wanted to build it yourself?

    I'm thinking multihull designs specifically...

    Curious to hear what you'd choose!

    Matt
     
  2. Eric ruttan
    Joined: Jul 2018
    Posts: 190
    Likes: 30, Points: 28
    Location: usa

    Eric ruttan Senior Member

    Carbon fiber Orbiter

     
    BlueBell likes this.
  3. TANSL
    Joined: Sep 2011
    Posts: 7,369
    Likes: 699, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 300
    Location: Spain

    TANSL Senior Member

    There are other variables that greatly influence the choice of material.
     
    MaddMatt and bajansailor like this.
  4. rangebowdrie
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 234
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Oregon

    rangebowdrie Senior Member

    Well, for me it specifically would not be a multihull.
    It would be a heavy displacement cruising sailboat with a metal hull.
    The backbone structure, along with the framing would be bronze, and the hull plating would be bronze.
    No chines,, fettled frames, rolled shell plates.
    TIG welded.
     
    MaddMatt likes this.
  5. Rumars
    Joined: Mar 2013
    Posts: 1,791
    Likes: 1,107, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 39
    Location: Germany

    Rumars Senior Member

    Will Gilmore and MaddMatt like this.
  6. rangebowdrie
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 234
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Oregon

    rangebowdrie Senior Member

    ^True enough,, CuNi would work.
    One might also choose what is kind of the opposite of CuNi,, Monel
    Monel is a a great material, tougher than bronze, and still able to be worked without special tools.
    Edit; thanks for those links.
     
    MaddMatt likes this.
  7. fallguy
    Joined: Dec 2016
    Posts: 7,598
    Likes: 1,674, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: usa

    fallguy Senior Member

    I built a mh with epoxy and corecell M; mostly.

    Money no object, I would do same, only switch to infusion. Wetbagging has too many stress events.

    The one I built is not for sailing, mind you.

    I'd probably build a 20 meter money no object. Category A. Maybe a backup sailing system, but diesel inboard power main.
     
    MaddMatt likes this.
  8. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 16,790
    Likes: 1,714, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    If money was not object, and I could afford to take as much time as I wanted, my choice is a wooden boat. Most likely a double planked skin over steam bent frames.
     
    DogCavalry, BlueBell and MaddMatt like this.
  9. rangebowdrie
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 234
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Oregon

    rangebowdrie Senior Member

    All right, someone with a streak of traditional/luddite in them.
    What about fairly thick strip planking with a couple layers of diagonal over?
    Wasn't double planking an early attempt to get some form of a monocoque structure, letting the skin carry some load, as well as adding rigidity to what is essentially a "wicker basket".
     
    MaddMatt likes this.
  10. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 16,790
    Likes: 1,714, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    I am not a luddite. Modern technology can produce a boat that requires less maintenance and repair. However, if I had infinite wealth, the smell of a wooden boat would be more important.
     
    MaddMatt and fallguy like this.
  11. rangebowdrie
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 234
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Oregon

    rangebowdrie Senior Member

    No offence meant,, :)
     
    fallguy likes this.
  12. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 16,790
    Likes: 1,714, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Not at all. I'm only explaining that if money is not an object, old technology can be affordable.
     
    tane, MaddMatt and fallguy like this.
  13. Derek_9103
    Joined: Oct 2019
    Posts: 25
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: Waterbury, CT

    Derek_9103 Derek

    Well, if money were no object...

    Gotta go right for the things that might make sense if they weren't so darn expensive.

    A hull that doesn't foul. 90-10 cupronickel.
    But wait, that's not very strong.
    Well, it is if it's thick enough.
    But if it's thick, it's heavy.
    Yes, that's right, and if it's heavy, it's comfortable, relatively, in heavier seas.
    Wow, that's expensive!

    Big. (25 meters sounds about right.)
    350 D/L at 82 feet? That's insane!

    Electric propulsion. Massive custom one-off OceanVolt motors. Regeneration. Big battery bank. Oh my, the cost of the batteries! Way beyond practical "in the real world".

    Rotating wing sails. Since the late 40's people keep saying if a designer can figure out how to reef them, they'd be a great advance in sail technology... quite a bit more driving power per square meter of sail area. Well, if money is no object, not sure how many million it would take to get that breakthrough, but hire enough engineers and somebody can figure out something. Sounds pricey, total cost unknown.

    SA/Disp at 18. That's a lot of sail! Because we can.

    Gotta go with a twin keel to balance on in a shallow anchorage when the tide goes out.
    Also gotta make those twin keels retractable, with the option to put the weight deeper for stability, or to pull them in to get into a shallower hidey hole. And of course they'd be designed to be bombproof even if hitting a shipping container at hull speed. The engineering and structure for THAT amount of strength for a retractable thing doesn't seem very reasonable, cost-wise, at all!

    Let's make it unsinkable. And heavy? Huh? Well... let's say you put little "nubs" on the inside of the cupronickel... and let's say you hire the University of Maine 3D printer to build a "diagonal cube skeleton lattice" structure attached to those nubs that's 6 inches thick, and has an inner skin of 3D printed material. Then you fill the space created by that lattice between the cupronickel and the inner skin with foam. It would be kinda like a composite sandwich... and for composite foam sandwich boats, stiffness is proportional to the square of the thickness. 1" foam is considered really stiff. This would be 6x... so 36 times stiffer than something that's already really stiff! (Tell the structural engineer to shoot for being able to hit a full submerged shipping container at hull speed ten times with less than 5% chance of hull breach the last time.) And 6" of foam provides quite a bit more floatation than all that cupronickel per square meter of hull area, so even with a hole in the hull this thing would be impossible to sink, and maybe even wouldn't sink deep enough to get wet above the knees even with a big hole in the hull and failed bilge pumps, if the foam was even thicker in the bilge. And insulation? This thing would be nice and toasty warm in the Southern Ocean or through the Northwest Passage.

    Beam at 8.55 meters, the 2/3 power of length, to maximize Brewer Ratio comfort. Put the keels in deep mode, and initial stability is still excellent.

    Not that it makes it more expensive, but I'd go with hull lines similar to the latest big Nautor-Swans or Oysters, 'cuz they're pretty - but heavier displacement than those already relatively heavy boats, because this is just intentionally the seagoing version of a tank that will plow through anything. Literally anything. If you're cruising tens of thousands of miles and statistically might hit a shipping container (or three with bad luck), being sufficiently heavier than that shipping container changes the math of what happens... to be way safer for the crew.

    Because we can. And because it would be a hell of a boat.

    Probably $20 million?

    Gentlemen don't sail to weather.
    Unless they have a boat designed by me where money is no object.

    Now, where to park it?
    Need an island to go with it.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2023
  14. Derek_9103
    Joined: Oct 2019
    Posts: 25
    Likes: 0, Points: 1
    Location: Waterbury, CT

    Derek_9103 Derek


  15. Will Gilmore
    Joined: Aug 2017
    Posts: 939
    Likes: 434, Points: 63
    Location: Littleton, nh

    Will Gilmore Senior Member

    BlueBell likes this.
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. jiggerpro
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    15,887
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.