We have been stunned by the reaction t the FPB 112 (or Big Sister as we call her) and want to thank everyone for their kind words.
The first profile drawing shows a 19 foot /5.7m dinghy on the aft deck. As this rather detracts from the appearance, and would not be there if you were admiring your vessel at anchor (since you would be in the dinghy), we thought we should start the day with a cleaner view.
Over the next week we’ll upload a series of drawings showing different aspects of this design, along with comments on how we see the boat being used, its performance, and some of the unique features that are possible in this size of FPB. Right now, let’s give you the basic data.
The concept is to have a standard package of structure, bulkheads, tankage, and systems, into which a variety of interior layouts fit. This approach creates substantial efficiencies in cost and build time, and will allow us to deliver a very high standard yacht at a reasonable price. As is our custom, these yachts will come complete with all systems, spare parts, tools, and training.
So far we have developed three versions of the FPB 112:
- Owner operator where a husband and wife cruise the boat on their own, or with one hand or a couple aboard for help with watchstanding and to look after the boat when the owners are away. Although this might seem like a big boat for a couple to handle, between twin engines, big rudders, a powerful thruster, and six electric deck winches controlled from the helm, we expect her to be more tractable than even the FPB 83 Wind Horse.
- There is a fully crewed version, with a layout that encourages separation of crew and owner’s party. We have had the input of a number of very experienced professionals on this layout, so they can do their job with maximum efficiency while having minimal impact on the enjoyment of the owners.
- The third rif is a commercial build, suitable for charter, school ship duties, science projects, and survey work. The range, fuel burn, and sea keeping abilities should be particularly suited to the latter two functions
Now a few specifications, preliminary of course at this stage, but probably pretty close:
- Length on deck – 114 feet/35m
- Length waterline – 111.5 feet/34.2m
- Beam max – 21 feet/6.44m
- Draft – 5.5 feet/1.7m
- Cruising speed – 12.5 knots
- Top speed – 14 knots
- Fuel capacity – 5000 US gallons/19,000 liters
- Range at 12.5 knots – 5200 nautical miles
- Range at 11 knots – 6875 nautical miles
- Fresh water capacity – 2000 US gallons/7500 liters
- Power – two John Deere six cylinder 300 HP diesels
In terms of structure and security the basic allowance in our weight budget is for framing and plating to twice the Lloyds Special Service rule stiffness requirements, with 12mm bottom plate. There are three full and two partial watertight bulkheads, a double bottom throughout the interior, and a massive bow girder. As with all FPBs this design will right itself from a full capsize. Both prop shafts are faired into and supported by full propeller depth skegs.
Stay tuned… Lots more coming in the near future.
Posted by Steve Dashew (November 10, 2010)
November 10th, 2010 at 9:39 am
I’ve been following your boat building and great adventures!! What do the three boat models cost?(64, 83,112) and what is the delivery time?
November 10th, 2010 at 9:51 am
Wow. Those are impressive specs. Will there be full headroom in the basement? I can only imagine how cool the engine room would be.
This is beyond cool. Once again you have raised your own bar in design.
Thanks in advance for the visual treats so far and those to follow.
–raj
November 10th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
Raj:
Headroom in the basement is 4 feet/1.2 meters ( a foot more than the 64 and 83).
November 10th, 2010 at 9:55 am
Steve,
What is the logic on the fuel capacity being relatively low?
November 10th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Scott:
Re fuel capacity, we don’t need a lot because the boat is so efficient. There is 50% more than Wind Horse yet the fuel burn at eleven knots is almost the same. And 5000 gallons does seem to give us enough range to go a quarter of the way around the world.
November 10th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
It looks great, and the specs are impressive. Are you going to build one for yourselves?
November 10th, 2010 at 3:38 pm
Ward:
We would love one – maybe in a few years. Right now we have to be content with little Wind Horse.
November 10th, 2010 at 10:21 pm
Just curious. Would you build an 83 if someone wanted one or have you decided not to build any more 83’s?
–raj
November 11th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Hi Raj:
At present we do not have the capacity to do an 83.
November 11th, 2010 at 7:48 am
This is looking very interesting, Steve. I’ve been wondering when the FPB concept would start to catch on among larger yachts. I don’t think I’ve ever seen or heard of a 35 metre motor yacht with “only” 600 hp; the usual suspects in this price and size range all seem to have far more power (and, therefore, less efficient running).
What displacement range are we looking at here? (I’m guessing somewhere in the 90-tonne range loaded, but it’d be great to hear the actual value.)
The styling is a nice change from “generic swoopy jellybean-cross-airplane” as is often seen in this size. It will certainly be mistaken for a navy vessel on occasion (IIRC, this has already happened to Wind Horse) and will draw admiring looks from Coast Guard crews.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:44 pm
Hi Steve,
I’d like to read your comments about using a jet drive on a boat like this. You often mention the need to protect props and rudders. In magazines like Showboat, I read of 400 ton superyachts with jet drives. How would this boat perform or not perform with a jet drive?
January 13th, 2011 at 2:34 pm
Hi Max:
To date jet drives depend on inlet pressure – boat speed – for efficiency. At our speeds they are simply too inefficient for long distance voyaging. You are right we are concerned with prop protection. The system we use with the full skeg has done a good job so far.
January 27th, 2011 at 1:35 am
Hi Steve,
What are the displacements of the 64, the 83 and the 112?
January 27th, 2011 at 7:36 am
Hi Max:
The full load displacements are as follows:
FPB 64 – 88,000 lbs/40,000 kg
FPB 83 – 92,000 lbs/41,700 kg
FPB 112 – 165,000 lbs/74,800 kg
February 10th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
Hi Steve,
Thanks for upgrading the images on the FPB112 page. I love having the specs bullet pointed for the 112,but would really love to see a spec page showing a comparison of the 64, 83 and the 112. Please add displacements into the specs.
Cheers,