Nick14
Guru
A recent story in BoatTest:
(I wish I could get the Admiral to agree with this!)
The Case for Displacement-Speed Yachts | BoatTEST
boattest.com
(I wish I could get the Admiral to agree with this!)
The article does list as #1:Surprised this article focuses on cost.
In the PNW, log avoidance is a big reason to go slow, in addition to the fuel saved.
There’s a lot of oranges in this bushel of apples. You’re comparing a 65’ displacement hull to a ?? planing hull traveling at ?? speeds with ?? amount of fuel capacity, ?? amount of horsepower and ?? fuel type. Now, three identical length displacement, semi-displacement and planing hulls all traveling at displacement speeds, same fuel capacity, same horsepower engines, same fuel type(gas vs. diesel), your results won’t vary that much.Surprised this article focuses on cost. For distance cruising, a displacement boat will ofren be faster than a planing or semi-planing counterpart. It's a "tortoise vs hare" thing. A 65 foot displacement boat will tick over 200-225 nms per 24 hr period. A planing boat will do that in 14 hours but have to stop for fuel and risk having to time their entrance and exits. Yes, crew gets to rest at dock and perhaps be more selective about weather, but more often than not, there will be no net time savings despite being able to go 2.5x speed of displacement boat. And difference in cost is considerable if that's a concern for the owner.
I once played leapfrog with a 65 foot Azimuth in this very manner when I was delivering a 60 footer. Over the course of a 750 nm delivery, both boats arrived at similar times.
Peter
There’s a lot of oranges in this bushel of apples. You’re comparing a 65’ displacement hull to a ?? planing hull traveling at ?? speeds with ?? amount of fuel capacity, ?? amount of horsepower and ?? fuel type. Now, three identical length displacement, semi-displacement and planing hulls all traveling at displacement speeds, same fuel capacity, same horsepower engines, same fuel type(gas vs. diesel), your results won’t vary that much.
There is fast and then there is FAST. We were passed coming back from Alaska a couple of years ago by an 88' fast cruiser. On AIS they were averaging 33 knots. From radio reports they did Ketchikan to Port McNeill in one easy day, the next day they were in Astoria. At 7 knots you do 168 miles in 24 hours, but at 33 you do 792. The 7 knot boat doesn't catch up. Also from radio reports, they were burning 150 gal/hr.
On a longer delivery, the 7-kt boat may very well catch up because the large boat cannot carry enough fuel to run WOT for more than a few hundred miles so will have to stop for fuel which often takes several hours plus in/out (more if you have to time tides). For longer deliveries, the larger go-fast boat is either throttled back to an economical speed or, which was the case with the Azimut I encountered, it stops a lot......At 7 knots you do 168 miles in 24 hours, but at 33 you do 792. The 7 knot boat doesn't catch up. Also from radio reports, they were burning 150 gal/hr.
I did about 20 Atlantic crossing at 12-15 knots and don't remember wanting to go any slower. I cant even imagine doing a 45 day crossing. Some times its the journey and sometimes its the destination.What always strikes us is that we only come across water-moving boats from the Netherlands when we stay in Scandinavia.
One way trip is about 350 miles and you would expect that the number of fast guys from the Netherlands would be present in Scandinavia, but the opposite is true.
The moral of the story, slow boats, big trips/distances, fast boats, small trips/short distances.
Greeting,
Pascal.
On that day it worked out that the fast boat was faster. But Morro Bay cannot be reliably entered in all weather, nor can it be reliably entered at all times of day due to tides/currents and weather. Using the same boat but going slower to extend range and therefore bypass stops like Morro Bay where you can easily get stuck can often be much faster.The idea that the 7 knot and the 14 knot boat arrive at the same time is not true, unless the 7 knoty boat travels, and has the crew for 24X7 operation.
I generally travel slow because i like the reduced noise, and cost, and werar and tear on my expensive engines.
That said, I have and will continue to use speed to get me in a day what takes two days for the slower boat.
So many what iff's favor the faster boat. OK the weather is going to get snotty day after tomorrow. So... I can pick up the pase anbd make that interesting harbor, or I can gon slow and be stuck for several days in a boring harbor.
Or the time I lefr Morro Bay at first light headed for Santa Barbara. I called the harbormaster who does not take reservations and was told he had two slips available, but by dark they would for sure be full.
So... I got after it, spent some diesel, and was sipping a nice glass of wine in my cockpit when the slower boat was told to anchor out.
Peter I have never wished that I did not have the capability of faster speeds, because that gives me choices that a go slow only boat does not have.On that day it worked out that the fast boat was faster. But Morro Bay cannot be reliably entered in all weather, nor can it be reliably entered at all times of day due to tides/currents and weather. Using the same boat but going slower to extend range and therefore bypass stops like Morro Bay where you can easily get stuck can often be much faster.
Peter