super yachts 60million+
Discussion
LimaDelta said:
But the scaling up is what causes problems like lack of storage or production capacity. It is the LOA is size mentality which causes this. I think you are massively missing my point. While designers, as by your own admission, pay no heed to the actual size of the vessel (i.e. GRT), then these mistakes which impact real-world operations will occur. No Superyacht builder is thinking like a large shipbuilder, they are thinking like small yacht builders, but making them bigger.
But whatever, I'm not here for an argument, I pop in from time to time to allow outsiders a glimpse into the world of the Superyacht industry, nothing more, and my opinions are based purely on my time in that industry over the last three decades. It is interesting that you are so dismissive of my comments, which to be honest is at least consistent with most designers I have dealt with.
Someone is definitely missing someone's point. But whatever, I'm not here for an argument, I pop in from time to time to allow outsiders a glimpse into the world of the Superyacht industry, nothing more, and my opinions are based purely on my time in that industry over the last three decades. It is interesting that you are so dismissive of my comments, which to be honest is at least consistent with most designers I have dealt with.
At no point did I come close to suggesting that designers pay no heed to the size of the vessel, merely that grt, which is a measure of volume, not weight, is fairly useless for a designer.
Rule length x beam x moulded depth x block coefficient tells you the actual volume of the design when you need it, but even then, ships of similar length and volume may have vastly different displacements depending on their intended use.
Your comments about superyacht builders not thinking about large ships, just making smaller ones bigger, is I'm afraid also nonsense. This 50m ship you talk about, will be transversely framed as global strength isn't really an issue at that length. Anything over ~100m will be longitudinally stiffened, as global strength is going to define scantling design.
So I'm sorry if I seem dismissive of you, genuinely, but yes, when people pop up and tell me silly things like 'they just photocopy it and scale it up 20% and build it and thats why it all goes wrong'then yes, I'm going to be dismissive of it
Because it's nonsense.
And no remotely competent naval arc or ship designer, generally, is going to disagree with that.
thewarlock said:
LimaDelta said:
But the scaling up is what causes problems like lack of storage or production capacity. It is the LOA is size mentality which causes this. I think you are massively missing my point. While designers, as by your own admission, pay no heed to the actual size of the vessel (i.e. GRT), then these mistakes which impact real-world operations will occur. No Superyacht builder is thinking like a large shipbuilder, they are thinking like small yacht builders, but making them bigger.
But whatever, I'm not here for an argument, I pop in from time to time to allow outsiders a glimpse into the world of the Superyacht industry, nothing more, and my opinions are based purely on my time in that industry over the last three decades. It is interesting that you are so dismissive of my comments, which to be honest is at least consistent with most designers I have dealt with.
Someone is definitely missing someone's point. But whatever, I'm not here for an argument, I pop in from time to time to allow outsiders a glimpse into the world of the Superyacht industry, nothing more, and my opinions are based purely on my time in that industry over the last three decades. It is interesting that you are so dismissive of my comments, which to be honest is at least consistent with most designers I have dealt with.
At no point did I come close to suggesting that designers pay no heed to the size of the vessel, merely that grt, which is a measure of volume, not weight, is fairly useless for a designer.
Rule length x beam x moulded depth x block coefficient tells you the actual volume of the design when you need it, but even then, ships of similar length and volume may have vastly different displacements depending on their intended use.
Your comments about superyacht builders not thinking about large ships, just making smaller ones bigger, is I'm afraid also nonsense. This 50m ship you talk about, will be transversely framed as global strength isn't really an issue at that length. Anything over ~100m will be longitudinally stiffened, as global strength is going to define scantling design.
So I'm sorry if I seem dismissive of you, genuinely, but yes, when people pop up and tell me silly things like 'they just photocopy it and scale it up 20% and build it and thats why it all goes wrong'then yes, I'm going to be dismissive of it
Because it's nonsense.
And no remotely competent naval arc or ship designer, generally, is going to disagree with that.
1. The vast majority of readers of this thread are not Naval Architects, Class Surveyors, Superintendents, or Operational Crew, they are interested lay-people.
2. For those people, GRT is a far more meaningful metric for gauging the comparative size of a vessel than LOA. I am fully aware that professionals have other methods (which is relevant to the post I replied to).
3. Some Superyacht builders take recent smaller designs and superficially modify them into larger designs. This leads to some oversights and problems at an operational level, and in some occasions, serious design flaws. We joke that like Audi, they just make the plans a bit bigger. Nobody seriously believes they actually do this in reality.
4. Very few, if any builders close the feedback loop after delivery, this also leads to oversights and problems at an operational level, and in some occasions, serious design flaws, which in some cases are repeated on further evolutions of a design.
5. If designers designed large yachts from the outset, rather than trying to make a small yacht design bigger, it would lead to a better product, from an end-user perspective. Most of them do not take this approach. I am consulting with one builder who are currently building their largest ever (by some margin). It is frustrating to see such wasted potential to build a better product.
Anyway, I'm back to work in a week or so and will be dealing with this in reality, so I'm not going to worry about what a stranger thinks online. More pressing is the trees I need to finish planting when this snow finally melts.
I can't argue with your opinion, based on your experience, but years of experience don't allow you 'alternative facts'
People love it when you don't know how to do their job, but you feel qualified to tell them they're doing it wrong LimaDelta said:
The subtlety of a lot of discussion is lost on a text based forum, and you seem to be taking everything I say literally, so let me clarify, then respectfully bow out for now as this doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
1. The vast majority of readers of this thread are not Naval Architects, Class Surveyors, Superintendents, or Operational Crew, they are interested lay-people.
Indeed. Which is why I avoid hyperbole, or frankly, BS, as people that don't know any better will take it as fact.1. The vast majority of readers of this thread are not Naval Architects, Class Surveyors, Superintendents, or Operational Crew, they are interested lay-people.
LimaDelta said:
2. For those people, GRT is a far more meaningful metric for gauging the comparative size of a vessel than LOA. I am fully aware that professionals have other methods (which is relevant to the post I replied to).
I've never suggested that LOA/LWL was a useful metric. That's why I posted initially. I'm pointing out though, that GRT isn't too useful a lot of the time either. If someone asks how big a van is, do you say 3.5 tonnes? or 8 cubic metres? LimaDelta said:
3. Some Superyacht builders take recent smaller designs and superficially modify them into larger designs. This leads to some oversights and problems at an operational level, and in some occasions, serious design flaws. We joke that like Audi, they just make the plans a bit bigger. Nobody seriously believes they actually do this in reality.
I've said it before, but I'll say it again, this does not happen. Just doesn't. Not possible. Doesn't happen.LimaDelta said:
4. Very few, if any builders close the feedback loop after delivery, this also leads to oversights and problems at an operational level, and in some occasions, serious design flaws, which in some cases are repeated on further evolutions of a design.
5. If designers designed large yachts from the outset, rather than trying to make a small yacht design bigger, it would lead to a better product, from an end-user perspective. Most of them do not take this approach. I am consulting with one builder who are currently building their largest ever (by some margin). It is frustrating to see such wasted potential to build a better product.
Who are these ship designers that are bodging their designs in the manner you speak of? And how are they getting away with it, with respect to plan approval/classification society sign off?
Also, one final question, who on earth still uses GRT? Didn't that go the way of the Dodo back in the 80s? How old are these things you're working on?
thegreenhell said:
Somebody needs to post some pictures of big boats to get us back on track. Or do I mean long, or heavy boats? I don't know anymore.
Spent some time working on this last year
Ridiculously well appointed inside and out. Spielberg's
Cinema unlike anything you've ever seen inside it, unsurprisingly.
And no photocopiers were used in the design.
normalbloke said:
GreatGranny said:
Anyone else bored yet?
Certainly turned into a black cat/Elevenerife circle jerk quite quickly.
Just kidding, I know they do a valuable job, really.
It must be hell for designers when it comes to the interior of the boats. Impossible to please everyone! Never been on a superyacht where we didn't complain about a badly design galley, fridge and freezer sizes, chefs storage or something else. Still, we make it work and wait for a next shipyard period where we can alter some of the issues we encounter. Again, respect to the design teams as they have to work with so many rules and regulations.
M5-911 said:
It must be hell for designers when it comes to the interior of the boats. Impossible to please everyone! Never been on a superyacht where we didn't complain about a badly design galley, fridge and freezer sizes, chefs storage or something else. Still, we make it work and wait for a next shipyard period where we can alter some of the issues we encounter. Again, respect to the design teams as they have to work with so many rules and regulations.
Most of my experience is in naval ship design, and the customer is very specific and involved in laying out such spaces from the off. They know exactly what they need.Superyacht customers sometimes don't consider such things, (more interested in hottub and tv sizes) and really need some sort of experienced intermediary consultant involved in the process to avoid these issues.
If I were commissioning a large super yacht I have to say I'd want the input of the senior crew and captain as I'd want the ship to run smoothly and have the best chance of operational excellence and not have a crew under perform by having to fit in with the design.
I'd want safety (obvs) and operational factors put first before cutting edge design themes.
I'd want safety (obvs) and operational factors put first before cutting edge design themes.
thewarlock said:
My apologies. Its a character flaw of mine, correcting stuff that's blatantly wrong.
On a serious note, LD, you do appear to be talking about gross tonnage, which is not the same thing as gross register tonnage.
My wife makes a living correcting stuff that the likes of you believe you’ve done correctly On a serious note, LD, you do appear to be talking about gross tonnage, which is not the same thing as gross register tonnage.
AMVSVNick said:
thewarlock said:
My apologies. Its a character flaw of mine, correcting stuff that's blatantly wrong.
On a serious note, LD, you do appear to be talking about gross tonnage, which is not the same thing as gross register tonnage.
My wife makes a living correcting stuff that the likes of you believe you’ve done correctly On a serious note, LD, you do appear to be talking about gross tonnage, which is not the same thing as gross register tonnage.
TheJimi said:
AMVSVNick said:
thewarlock said:
My apologies. Its a character flaw of mine, correcting stuff that's blatantly wrong.
On a serious note, LD, you do appear to be talking about gross tonnage, which is not the same thing as gross register tonnage.
My wife makes a living correcting stuff that the likes of you believe you’ve done correctly On a serious note, LD, you do appear to be talking about gross tonnage, which is not the same thing as gross register tonnage.
thewarlock said:
Spent some time working on this last year
Ridiculously well appointed inside and out. Spielberg's
Cinema unlike anything you've ever seen inside it, unsurprisingly.
And no photocopiers were used in the design.
The proboscis is crying out for a couple of viewing windows....Ridiculously well appointed inside and out. Spielberg's
Cinema unlike anything you've ever seen inside it, unsurprisingly.
And no photocopiers were used in the design.
...and no, I'm not inviting a technical discussion about why it's a bad idea. Just that it would be cool
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff