fly bridge opinions

[Beaverlake]

We had a Tolly 44 cockpit aft cabin. Lower helm visibility was okay but the flybridge was only two sets of 4 stairs, the bridge had a 3 sided enclosure and the aft deck was covered. I drove from the bridge 90%+. On our current 4788 pilothouse the visibility from the pilothouse is great, there’s seating for crew/guests, and it’s comfy. 90%+ driving from the pilothouse. On an aft cabin I could do without a lower helm. On a pilothouse I like the upper helm for many reasons. As others have said, YMMV.

 

[ghost]

I’m in the PNW in Anacortes. I’ve had an open flybridge for about 14 years on the 48 Tolly. I single hand about 85% of the time. While My lower helm gets the most seat time, there is no trip where the flybridge does not get used. When docking, I always run from above. On the flybridge, I have maximum perspective. Quick visibility to all points of the vessel, a much better depth perspective and much easier to keep tabs of everything else moving around me.

On a longer passage, I’ll spend a lot of time out of the sun down below. If the weather kicks up, I should say if the waves kick up, the. The flybridge is where you will find me, rain or no rain. Again, the perspective is massively better. I can see. I can hear. If the waves are big enough to matter, it’s from the flybridge where you can see sets coming together, combining or diverging. Down below I’d be waiting for the windshield to clear, where above I’m already picking the sweet spot on the next one.

Docking in close quarters, again, nearly always from the flybridge. If I can see, I can put it right where I want it. I find the lower helm much more difficult to sense wind, current and my position against everything around me. It’s a slightly longer distance to my lines, but the boat is always closer to where I want to be when I get there.

 

[Spinner]

Ha ha Dave! Of course, that’s what friends are for!!!

 

[BruceK]

like the twins v single debate.
Maybe those with twins prefer FB and those with a single don't?

How about twin flybridges.........

 

[O C Diver]

As everyone knows, a pilothouse is the best of both worlds without the negatives of either. You have all the pluses of an inside helm and great visibility of an elevated helm. Add a docking station in the stern, and you have the ultimate setup.

Ted

 

[hunkydory]

Hello all
I was wondering about thought on flybridges. I am in the pacific northwest so more rain then sun. F
Do you find people use or not use the flybridge. If you don't have one would you? and if you do do you wish it wasn't there.
It seems to me that logically it would be handy and present good views but in reality is that an item that should be on my must have list?
Thanks
Rod

We are in the Sea of Cortez in Mexico and love our covered flybridge. It is almost a living room. During rainy days it definitely is not as pleasant however. We had quite a bit of rain this year, and really miss it on those days. We love it so much we are even considering closing it in with zippered fabric and eisenglass.

 

[mvweebles]

As everyone knows, a pilothouse is the best of both worlds without the negatives of either. You have all the pluses of an inside helm and great visibility of an elevated helm. Add a docking station in the stern, and you have the ultimate setup.

Ted

..... And the stairs of a lighthouse

 

[O C Diver]

..... And the stairs of a lighthouse

I can live very happily with 5 steps and a handrail.



I don't remember them being horizontal.

Ted

 

[firehoser75]

As everyone knows, a pilothouse is the best of both worlds without the negatives of either. You have all the pluses of an inside helm and great visibility of an elevated helm. Add a docking station in the stern, and you have the ultimate setup.

Ted

Ted is 100% correct, although I don't have the stern docking station.
Ted, it does seem strange that your stairway would be horizontal....but at least you do have the safety hand rail???


I find the diversity of opinions on topics like this and single vs twin, types of anchors (oh no, I didn't mention that did I? ) to be very, very interesting, and to me it just point out how different our various ways we use our boats can be. There is no "one size fits all".

 

[mvweebles]

I can live very happily with 5 steps and a handrail.

View attachment 102016

I don't remember them being horizontal.

Ted

I actually don't mind stairs of that magnitude either. Compared to the N47 and similar, that's nothing.

My biggest beef with PH boats is I just don't like the chopped up interior. Even though I like long passages, I'd prefer the open space at anchor thus am a Sedan guy. That and many bench seats in PHs are way too shallow and not comfortable.

Just depends on how you use your boat and what your priorities are. Willard 40s came in both Sedan and PH config. I greatly prefer the Sedan version even though the PH has a more manly feel to it.

Good discussion.

Peter

 

[rslifkin]

Continuity of layout is definitely a concern with some designs. There's probably a certain minimum size before you can readily add a pilothouse without interfering with the design of the rest of the boat (it probably needs to be a raised pilothouse). For lots of night running or work in heavy weather, a proper pilothouse of some form starts to become more important, I think.

As far as continuity, my layout basically has 2 living spaces (plus the 2 staterooms). There's the salon with galley, then up 6 steps to the bridge deck on top of the aft stateroom (helm, seating, wet bar, etc.). From the salon, it's 2 steps down to the forward stateroom and head, 3 steps down to the aft stateroom and head. So there's some division between sleeping space and living space, but the living space isn't overly divided, particularly for when you have guests (galley and helm aren't isolated from the spaces around them).

 

[greysailor]

To the OP......
Since you are in the PNW, a FB probably isn't as high on the desire list as a nice warm/dry pilothouse would be. Guess it depends on where you intend to cruise long term.

Down here in South Texas, I wouldn't have a boat without a flybridge. Although our DeFever 44 has a lower helm with fully replicated electronics/controls, we always pilot from the FB. Of course being retired, we have the benefit of not having to travel on stormy days. However, it's nice to know the lower helm is there in case of FB equipment failure or should an emergency require us to travel in bad weather.
All part of the fun of boat shopping! [emoji16]

 

[sunchaser]

Hello all
I was wondering about thought on flybridges. I am in the pacific northwest so more rain then sun. F
Do you find people use or not use the flybridge. If you don't have one would you? and if you do do you wish it wasn't there.
It seems to me that logically it would be handy and present good views but in reality is that an item that should be on my must have list?
Thanks
Rod

It would seem that the answer lies in the boats you are most interested in, particularly size, deck layout, FB access, enclosure (or readiness for one) and dinghy storage. After looking at a few dozen vessels the pros and cons will become obvious.

 

[FlyWright]

My FB perspective had varied over various times and locations with the same boat. When I bought the boat, it came with canvas sides and bimini on top and a snap on canvas cover for the FB helm and bench seat which protects the helm from weather. There is no isenglass. The PO stated that he hardly ever drove from the FB.

Early on, I eagerly embraced driving from up top for the enhanced view over the CA Delta levees and summer breeze. It was my helm of choice usually but my radar, autopilot and best chartplotter were mounted below.

As I gained experience and started venturing out into the dark and weather and exploring the SF Bay, I became more comfortable with the lower helm for its electronics , warmth and comfort...not to mention fridge, coffee maker, closer to head and good stereo controls. Also, I should note that my sight lines at my lower helm are excellent...even better that my FB due to the FB canvas below the rail.

There have been many times I have been able to verify a gauge reading or steering function by having redundancy on the FB. I have no genset so I use a Honda 2000 secured to the bench seat on the FB. The FB now serves primarily as my 'attic' for storage of generator, gasoline for generator and outboard, mops, brushes, squeegee, webster, water hose, shore power cord, bait cutting board and many PFDs.

Having a FB can be restrictive when covered slips are desired but it's not a problem here in the Delta with 15'8" FB clearance. To get the same storage aboard without the FB, I'd need a longer boat which would increase slip fees and may become more difficult to single hand which is another of my personal requirements.

So, for me, having a FB has been a blessing. Whether I use it for driving in the breeze or for storage, it gets used every day. Not having it would greatly limit my options and my vessel's useful functions.

To each his own...

 

[caltexflanc]

Another variable is flying bridge design and size. Some are pretty skimpy (Krogen 42 comes to mind), and many require a vertical ladder to access. When we were callow youths, neither was an issue, thus our enjoyment of our Tolly 32. Now? Fuggedaboutit

Most of out chartering had been on Grand Banks (various flavors of 42-46-49) and Mainship (350-390-430) which had those bases covered.

When it got time to buy, we were all excited about getting a Hatteras MY, but Ann took a look at the ladders on many (which I didn't think were all that bad, given the rails and angle) and her response was "how do we get the canapes and cocktails up there?" Then we found one where a PO had installed a beautiful stairway and all was well.

 

[Nomad Willy]

My opinion on fly bridges is sour .. as in don’t like.

From my point of view many and possibly most boats in the mainstream of trawler size would be better off w/o theFB. My own boat dosn’t have a FB but it came w one. A PO took it off and I wouldn’t have one w the FB. That was one of the reasons I bought the boatI did.
I have two big issues w the FB. One is the lack of visibility from the lower helm. And 2nd is the high CG and safety in a beam sea and unnecessary windage.
My favorite trawler is the NT 32. The PH visibility found there is a benchmark for visibility. Any less and I’m not interested in the boat. .. ownership that is.

Would I buy a bigger boat w a FB? I would. But I wouldn’t pay extra for it.
There is one aspect of a FB that I would enjoy. Hanging out in the evening at anchor. But that's about it.

I’m obviously a fan of Willard boats. And the best Willard hull IMO is the 36’. But I wouldn’t buy one because of the poor visability from the lower helm. It would cost me too much (mostly in time) to re-configure the house to provide my required visability.

So as others have said it’s a personal thing.

 

[ranger58sb]

I have two big issues w the FB. One is the lack of visibility from the lower helm.

???

-Chris

 

[caltexflanc]

Have been on a couple of the FB equipped Willard 40's of friends and thought the visibility from the lower helm was good. I liked the overall ergonomics of the boat, and they each had the little stairway folding leading to the foredeck which I think is very cool, especially of a single handler. The presence of a FB has zero to do with the lower helm design.

My old Hatteras 56MY had outstanding lower helm visibility and access. On the other hand, many of not most of the raised pilot house boats I've been on have poor rearward visibility from the PH, especially if there is a tender on the boat deck. I'd also fault a few Hatteras designs on that count as well, where the PH is sealed in.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Caltex wrote;
“The presence of a FB has zero to do with the lower helm design.”

Of course. The W40 has acceptable fwd visibility. But I’ll never own one as it’s too big, too expensive and I really just don’t like the boat. Mostly I don’t like boats that big. I want a NT32. I think the NT in my pic is a 42 but visibility wise = same .

Caltex and Ranger,
Here is a boat w excellent fwd visibility.

 

[ranger58sb]

Caltex and Ranger,
Here is a boat w excellent fwd visibility.

Looks better than a saloon-level helm...

What did you mean about a flybridge and "lack of visibility from the lower helm" in the same sentence?

-Chris

 

[Nomad Willy]

Chris,
What post?

 

[Nomad Willy]

Looks better than a saloon-level helm...

What did you mean about a flybridge and "lack of visibility from the lower helm" in the same sentence?

-Chris

“I have two big issues w the FB. One is the lack of visibility from the lower helm.“
You must mean this sentence.

What I’m saying is that if you have first an engine under foot in the pilothouse and have allowed reasonable headroom there. Then if you put a FB on top of the wheelhouse it would be WAY up there in the clouds.

That’s it.

 

[Rob]

I’m a PNW boater as well. Personally I don’t care much for the fly bridge on our Kadey Krogen 42. We’ve cruised extensively between Puget Sound and Prince William Sou d Alaska and have never been in the fly Bridge. But I’ve Got to tell you, after I removed the upper helm chair it makes for a great place to store our bicycles!

 

[caltexflanc]

Caltex and Ranger,
Here is a boat w excellent fwd visibility.

And the rear 180 degrees? In my opinion boats with excellent forward visibility are a dime a dozen. A lot of boats with that may only have a usable 120 degrees of visibility.

And Rob, as I mentioned in another post, the KK 42 has an awful FB, a weird thing on an otherwise very well designed boat. I can understand why you use it the way you do.

 

[mvweebles]

And the rear 180 degrees? In my opinion boats with excellent forward visibility are a dime a dozen. A lot of boats with that may only have a usable 120 degrees of visibility.

And Rob, as I mentioned in another post, the KK 42 has an awful FB, a weird thing on an otherwise very well designed boat. I can understand why you use it the way you do.

Huh. I love the "chariot" style flybridge on the KK42 (Nordhavn 57, Ocean Alexander 50s, Bayliner 45/47, etc). Alternative is the top-hat look of an incredibly raised flybridge such as Nordhavn 47, Nordic Tug 42, and other raised PH boats with a flybridge over the PH.

Beauty is the eye of the beholder I guess.

 

[caltexflanc]

Beauty is the eye of the beholder I guess.

Actually it's the functionality that I don't like. Especially for crew/guests and entertaining. Scampering up and down there wasn't so hot either.

 

[ranger58sb]

“I have two big issues w the FB. One is the lack of visibility from the lower helm.“
You must mean this sentence.

What I’m saying is that if you have first an engine under foot in the pilothouse and have allowed reasonable headroom there. Then if you put a FB on top of the wheelhouse it would be WAY up there in the clouds.

Yes, that's the sentence.

I think I don't get it. Using our boat as an example, our engines wouldn't be under either a saloon-level or pilothouse helm.

Yes, a pilothouse would sometimes raise the level of a flybridge deck, although sometimes not so much when the flybridge is located toward the after end of the pilothouse (Bayliner 5788 as an example, I guess).

But a flybridge way up there is exactly why I can see better from there.

Making up (and slightly exaggerating) numbers to illustrate: Saloon-level helm, I can't see water level closer than 100 feet in front of the boat. Pilothouse, maybe 100 feet in front of the boat. Flybridge, 20 feet in front of the boat. Our local crabbers like to set their pots in the "float free" channels (apparently a mere suggestion).

In our case, the helm is position aft on the bridge, which mostly means I've got better visibility aft, too, especially useful for docking.

-Chris

 

[Nomad Willy]

OK Chris I’m convinced.
But I don’t know where my FB is so can’t put it back on.
I’d fit in on TF better w it but I just don’t know where it is.
But I’m brave and will find the willpower to go forth w/o it.
Now that I remember how stupid the W30 looks w a FB .... just doneno if I can do it.
And I’ll need safety belts on the seats up there when thr goi’n gets rough.
And to my sailboat friends I’ll just tell them “nope, got no room for high up things.

Ohoh Chris .. just can’t do it as I’ll prolly not be able to get into my slip.
You made a really good case for the FG but I just gotta have my covered moorage.
Sorry

But here’s a picture of a W30 w a FB. You be the judge.
Too me it looks like a cowboy’s kid wear’in daddy’s 10 gallon hat.

 

[boathealer]

But here’s a picture of a W30 w a FB. You be the judge.
Too me it looks like a cowboy’s kid wear’in daddy’s 10 gallon hat.

 

[ghost]

OK Chris I’m convinced.
But I don’t know where my FB is so can’t put it back on.
I’d fit in on TF better w it but I just don’t know where it is.
But I’m brave and will find the willpower to go forth w/o it.
Now that I remember how stupid the W30 looks w a FB .... just doneno if I can do it.
And I’ll need safety belts on the seats up there when thr goi’n gets rough.
And to my sailboat friends I’ll just tell them “nope, got no room for high up things.

Ohoh Chris .. just can’t do it as I’ll prolly not be able to get into my slip.
You made a really good case for the FG but I just gotta have my covered moorage.
Sorry

But here’s a picture of a W30 w a FB. You be the judge.
Too me it looks like a cowboy’s kid wear’in daddy’s 10 gallon hat.

Gotta say I like it best without the flybridge.