Stepped Hulls

The Hinckley fiasco is interesting because they haven't patented anything. They are claiming these things are part of their "trade dress" and therefore off limits to anyone else. I have been wondering about their new center console design, which obviously benefits from the years of development the builders of these boats have put into its development. Aren't they infringing on the trade dress of the numerous builders of center console boats? I guess only if these builders have attorneys on staff with nothing better to do with their time. The reason people may be building boats similar to the Picnic Boat is because Hinckley seems to be incapable of producing enough of them at a fair price to supply the market. I am not saying people should copy others designs, but the Picnic Boat is a gussied up lobsterboat, not a unique, new design.

 

trade dress

This sounds like they are trying to differentiate themselves from their competition by trademarking some of the design attributes that make up their boats. The chance of patenting the design is probably zero as the "look" has been around & in the public domain for a long time. A trademark battle may be all they have left in trying to separate themselves from the pack. I'm not a naval architect, but the Hinckleys look quite a bit like many other lobster yacht types. I'm surprised they are winning the argument so far. I can see trademarking a name like "picnic boat", but, as you say, it's a gussied up lobster/cape island hull.

As for the 'trade dress' of other center console mfgs...I'd guess that no one else has been concerned enough to attempt a center console trade dress battle. They may be more willing to slug it out the old fashion way...by offering a good product at a fair price and backing it up with customer service..novel approach.

I hope Hinckley loses their battle...all I see is a willingness to spend money to buy legal protection from their competitors rather than a real design infringement...if their products really are the best or unique, let the market decide.

 

The original stepped hulls were designed in the early 20's. They were also quickly banned from racing because they beat anything in the water. The idea was dropped for a long time because of that. They were called "shingle bottoms" then. Some of the old literature is very interesting.

 

What?

Apparently you have never ridden in a DDC HULL IN ROUGH SEAS OR A DDC HULL on a cat. Go to IBEX in 2003, stepped hulls and go to Schoell Marine.com next week.

 

What will you guys be showing at ibex? (if you can say yet)

 

IBEX-2003

Harry Schoell will be in an open Forum on the IBEX schedule on stepped hulls.

There could be rides on this hull design for those who book in advance.

Will also be in a booth.

Other than that, I can't say.

 

WWII

It works.

 

Tom & Stephen

Re Getting cats to lean into a corner.

Maybe this novel approach is the answer to your quest for a cat that leans into corners.

I'm led to believe this is a 32 ft alloy Fincat - Hysucat foil fitted cat, which has the two outboards mounted tilted (canted) outward each side.

Apparently - this thrust vectoring and the hull design / foil allow the cat to lean into corners like a conventional hull...

Like I said - so I'm led to believe - I may yet be corrected if anyone knows any different.

Cheers!

 

Very interesting trouty, and awesome pictures of the stern of that boat!

 

Yes

She's a very interesting vessel indeed.

Heres a couple pics of the interior.





To my eye at least she's as pretty as most Glass boats of her ilk i've seen.

With her light weigh, and unique foil setup, as well as the canted outboards - I'd be REALLY interested to here figures (speed / fuel) for what she runs with those twin 225 HP's.

My only "possible reservation" with the foil setup - is the chance in waters which have a large lobster fishing industry - of wrapping the double floats of lobster traps around the centre of the foil...

That appears to be the ONLY possible negative I can find and I conceed that in most waters that wouldn't be a consideration most likely.

Affording one might be the only other drawback - I don't know what price they run.

Cheers!

 

Trouty,

Now there are some interesting appendages. I wonder just how they all work. The vertical fin looks like it is only to provide support for the forward foil, and what is that for?

Tom

 

Tom

Take a look at this link,

http://www.hydrospeed.co.za/index2.html

Theres a lot of articles about the foil system and how it works as well as lots of photo's of larger Cat Ferrys employing the technology around the world.

Seems like a winner to all intents and purposes.

Cheers!

 

Yes, I can see how the foils work. About 35 years ago a friend had a pontoon boat that liked to ship water over the bow when in waves. I made a wooden "foil" and placed it transversely under the hulls forward. It did help to lift the bow but there was no instrumentation to tell if the speed was actually increased and insufficient power go very fast anyway. My original question was whether the aft foils were actively adjustable in incidence angle.

Like many other patented inventions, I wonder just how much of this one is actually novel. I expect that past literature holds some references to at least partially similar systems. It is an intrigueing system and from the test data, is very effective.

 

From

what I've read Tom, with the Hysucat system, the rear foil 'tabs' are fixed.

I'd imagine having them variable as in a set of trim tabs would be the "ultimate" but maybe a little expensive?.

The foil is placed just forward of the for / aft balance point of the vessel LCG (Longitudinal Centre of Gravity).

The idea being that as the foil rises up thru the water column like an air craft wing, it raises each of the pontoons upward which reduces wetted surface area giving increased speed & / or, reduced fuel consumption.

It's important to cant the OB's to generate a lean INTO the corners, because IF the vessel leaned outward, the inclined foil would have to be "dragged" around the corner against the water direction it wanted to go, rather than being "pushed" around the corner in the direction it does wan't to go.

Think of riding a towed surfboard behind a boat - it's planing on top of the water - when you wan't to turn you lean into the corner, and the water pressure helps to push you around due to the lean...

Now imagine trying to turn that same direction while leaning outward.

When you lean that board outward - it wants to go that direction, this is the "method wakeboarders use to steer their boards first one way then the other, to jump boatwake. I'd imagine we DON'T want our boat doing this - when we steer the helm one way - we wwan't the boat to lean into the turn (not out) and go the way we pointed it.

So - I believe the canted OB's are the reason this foil system turns well - without it I'd imagine it might be a beast to control.

Course this is ALL conjecture on my behalf. Again I'm quite happy to be corrected if someone knows different.

Now to my question...

Could two SMALL foils be fitted between the outside sponsons and central hull of a trihull vortex design to achieve the same results with the consequently reduced risk of fouling ropes and floats, while still gaining the reduced wetted area - fuel speed gains?

Cheers!