Our approach to cruising yacht design is based on the concept that getting there should be as enjoyable as sitting at anchor absorbing a wonderful sunset. If you are physically and mentally comfortable, and instinctively know your vessel can deal with the sea and the odd bit of operator error, then you are going to go places, at the drop of a hat.
On the other hand, if you worry about the ultimate stability of your vessel in a dire situation – however remote those odds may be – or have to arrange for crew on passages because being at sea is otherwise too tiring, then passages are something to be endured. You arrive at your destination looking for a hotel room instead of refreshed and ready to explore the new destination.
This leads to the use of delivery crews and freighters to transport your yacht to or from her destination. The coordination of crews and ships becomes a logistical nightmare, you are beholden to the schedules and whims of others. Dreams fade.
Better to do it right from the keel up, making every decision based on the primacy of sea-going security and comfort. When you arrive at that distant port, you will have enjoyed the passage so much that it might be several days before you step ashore.
Posted by Steve Dashew (February 8, 2012)
February 8th, 2012 at 11:58 pm
Damn…it’s 32 meters LOA…
February 9th, 2012 at 12:19 am
Based on this picture, I’m going with 98′ LOA as my length prediction.
February 9th, 2012 at 2:09 am
I didn’t include the swim step, I’m still considering that to be a bolt-on…
February 9th, 2012 at 12:45 am
I’ll say LOA 29.9m or 98ft ?
February 9th, 2012 at 6:43 am
Hi Steve,
Hmmm…. If the Marquee deck helm (just forward of the masts) is on the projected pitch axis as you say, then from this image it would seem that the pitch axis is only about 1/3 rd of a boat length forward of the stern. Am I reading this correctly, or missing something?
February 9th, 2012 at 7:20 am
Pitch axis is a line projected from the axis about which we guess the hull rotates. The projection is angled aft in the direction (guessing again) of movement).
February 9th, 2012 at 9:39 am
It looks so good,
You should convert all FPB’s to the same model
February 10th, 2012 at 12:14 am
Thanks Johan:
But this is a special set of ingredients to allow it to work this way, and it won’t translate smaller.
February 10th, 2012 at 11:21 am
Sorry that I stick to it Steve,
But just correcting a few lines would do a great job.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:16 am
Is this project going to be in addition to the FPB115 or instead of?
February 10th, 2012 at 12:15 am
In addition to, Daryl.
February 9th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
I still think it’s 26 mtr / 87 feet. The house is longer than Windhorse but it starts further forward and extends further aft compared to windhorse. It might be a tad beemier but not by much.
–raj
February 10th, 2012 at 4:55 am
Looks fantastic, some of the 1/4, 3/4 angles you have been teasing us with make it difficult to appreciate the overall impact of the design. This side on profile looks amazing and dare I say perfect… My money is on a straight 30m.
February 10th, 2012 at 9:26 am
Like Matt L., I’ll say around 32 metres (105′), based on height of the deckhouse. I’ll also say that, good as this is bound to be, it seems to lack Wind Horse’s absolutely minimalist elegance. A pity, as far as I’m concerned.
But best wishes anyway.
February 10th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
Hi Steve,
One famous man in his area of knowledge (Aviation) has said long time before:
<>
I thing this one should sail well!!!
Regards
Alain
March 4th, 2012 at 7:33 pm
Hi Steve,
I just see part of the message got away…
One famous man in his area of knowledge (Aviation) has said long time before:
“When one Bird is nice looking, he can only fly well.”
I thing this one should sail well!!!
Regards
Alain