Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Wide load

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Wide load

    The latest lobsterboat from Glen Aylward's shop in Shelburne, NS:

    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Too far inland.
    Posts
    8,858

    Default Re: Wide load

    25' beam?
    No adversary is worse than bad advice.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Texas ya'll
    Posts
    1,225

    Default Re: Wide load

    Here's comes a link to another song by Queen...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    Figment, Glenn has been building boats with a beam of 30 feet recently. Length is limited by Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, beam is limited by the width of the shop door. (Although I know of one shop that disassembled the end wall of their shop to get a boat out.)
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Wide load

    And this is all about dumping day?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    It's actually about wide lobster boats, Chris, but dumping day is getting near, too.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    Hyannis, MA, USA
    Posts
    45,675

    Default Re: Wide load

    F cubed.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    5,433

    Default Re: Wide load

    Are there boats whose beam exceeds their length?
    Will

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    Getting close, Will. By Transport Canada regulation, these boats are limited to 15 metres (49 ft. 2-1/2 in.), although fisheries regulations limit length to 45 ft. There is a loophole which allows the hull to be 15 metres and still compliant with fisheries regs as long as the hull aft of 45 feet contains no equipment or catch - in other words, a void compartment. Fishermen use this space to stow cordage and buoys, and traps on dumping day.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Too far inland.
    Posts
    8,858

    Default Re: Wide load

    How long until someone turns the loophole around and leaves the space forward of 45' as a void compartment?
    No adversary is worse than bad advice.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,184

    Default Re: Wide load

    Or just cuts off the first 4 feet, creating a 45 foot punt.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    Figment, that can't be done, due to how such boats are measured.

    robm, it has been done.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Norwich,United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,717

    Default Re: Wide load

    It isn't only yacht measuring rules that are "type forming" then.What sort of power does it take to push a hull like that at a commercial speed?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    John, it took me a few minutes to stop laughing at how to answer the situation that you are asking about. Here goes...

    First, measuring rules: Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans (DFO) limits boats in given fisheries by length, measured from tip of bow to rudderpost, and Transport Canada Marine Safety (TCMS) places a length limitation of small fishing craft of 15 metres (49' - 3"), measured from the tip of the bow to the outside surface of the transom, beyond which a higher license is required to captain the boat. So for the average Joe fisherman, he wants his boat to be under 45 ft. LOA per DFO measurement and under 15metres for TCMS measurement, and wants a deck the size of a tennis court so he can carry all his legal allotment of pots at once on dumping day (usually between 400-500 pots). And this is where the fun and games begin. To maximise deck space while staying under the legal TCMS length limit, the hull is extended aft past the rudder stock with a bulkhead immediately aft of the steering gear. This creates the void compartment that I talked about in an earlier post - any equipment such as fuel tanks or fish holds aft of the rudderstock and DFO switches its definition of length to that of TCMS, hence the bulkhead aft of the rudderstock. In addition to this, the fishermen also add a "balcony" (they call it a "deck extension") cantilevered off the transom to extend the deck another five or six feet. So the 'forty-five-foot" boat actually comes in at around fifty-five feet LOA. But in the quest for ever more deck space, the boat is made wider and wider. I managed build projects where a hull came out of the 24-foot-wide mold and was sliced and diced (fiberglass is such a forgiving material to build boats with) to become 30 feet wide. I know of a few boats in the area that are 32 and 33 feet wide. Again, the only limiting factor is the gross tonnage regs, and many fisherman with these big little boats are quite prepared to accept the penalties of more expensive safety systems in their quest for deck space.

    One of the current dodges about keeping gross tonnage under 15 GRT that is happening around Cape Sable Island - which frightens the hell out of me - is to cut a large notch in the keel up to eight feet long and almost up to the hull surface (just below the line of the shaft, actually) to remove enclosed volume thereby reducing GT. The folks doing this have not considered how drastically they are compromising longitudinal strength of the hull, nor considered how much drag this notch will create (no fairing to streamline) and slow their boat down. I expect to hear of losses at sea from boats breaking up amidships. Transport Canada has not caught up to this yet and legislated minimum longitudinal strength criteria.

    Second, powering. Transport Canada Marine Safety (TCMS) places requirements on qualifications based on installed horsepower - if installed horsepower is over 1000 BHP a qualified marine engineer is required to be on board at all times. So, with the advent of computer-controlled Tier III diesel engines, the fisherman calls his local engine rep and orders an engine with a controller chip set to have the engine deliver 950 or 975 hp. After the boat is launched and TCMS inspection is over and the fisherman has his TC inspection certificate, he calls the engine rep and has a new chip installed, boosting horsepower to 1200 hp or more. Does he need this much power? Hell, no. I did powering and prop calcs on maybe a dozen of these new big little boats and all of them would hit hull speed - about 10 knots - with around 375 to 400 hp. Add on another hundred horses for the hydraulics and pumps systems, and a little bit to spare, and a 500 or 550 horse engine would be fine. "But I want to go faster!" claims the fisherman. I try to tell them that his 45' x 30' x 6' boat is bow-heavy, blunt, and has the streamlining of a brick and just physically won't do more than hull speed, but what do I know? So he stuffs a thousand horsepower in the boat and gets it to go 1/4 knot faster than calculated hull speed. (I have documented sea trials on three boats of this sort, and the numbers are real, not estimates.) But, he gets to brag about how much horsepower he has, while his fuel bills go up 30% - 40% more than necessary.

    Let's not begin a conversation about hull efficiency and weight distribution, OK? <grin>
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Wide load

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    It's actually about wide lobster boats, Chris, but dumping day is getting near, too.
    I guess I was trying to ask if the beam of the boat was to maximize trap carting capacity for dumping day, the HP thing amazes me, I worked a 140' dragger with a copper bessemer 650 HP, it was huge slow rpm and not suitable for lobstering or a lobster boat, but we towed a 41 net wood or steel doors, even 600hp seems wild to me for a boat that size the doesn't tow anything just moves between bouys and pulls stuff up. My time lobstering was on a 36' boat you could put a 10 stringer on, we could stack a lot more. Times have changed, of course you rules are very different than Maine's, and it seems you work farther off shore.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,184

    Default Re: Wide load

    Wouldn't towing a barge full of traps for dumping day be a more economical way to set them? Less boat required so lower initial cost, and cheaper to run as well.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    Chris, sorry I misunderstood your question. Yes, beam is solely for trap-carrying capacity on dumping day. Mind you, when it comes time to move traps about they will carry quite a few, but nothing like on dumping day. As for working offshore, the boats out of Yarmouth and Cape Sable Island fish out to the 200-mile economic exclusion zone limit, and south to George's Bank, skirting the international border. They are often out for three to five days. In winter.

    robm, I am not trying to be funny, or 'snarky', but... towing a barge would be unwieldy at best, and dangerous at worst. For instance, how would you gain access to the barge when it is blowing twenty knots and a six-foot swell is running? As for initial and running costs, if they were a factor in the fisherman's decision process, he wouldn't install a 900 hp motor when a 500 hp one will do. Local fishermen will moan and cry over paying $50 more for a coil of pot warp than he did last year, but doesn't think twice about paying $50,000 for horsepower he doesn't need. I know, it doesn't make sense to me, either.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,184

    Default Re: Wide load

    Makes sense. I am more used to Salish Sea conditions than North Atlantic in the winter. I was applying the same logic to the situation as to my vehicular one: why drive a truck if I only need the capacity twice a year?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    The 'logic' - which is somewhat defensible - is that statistically, 70% - 80% of the season's total catch is caught in the first month of the six-month season. There are 'hot spots' that everybody wants to put their pots on at the start of the season, so the fisherman does not want to arrive there behind the others, and he doesn't want to stop claiming his 'spot' halfway through to run back to port to load the rest of his pots. Therefore, he wants a boat with the best speed it can muster, and a boat that can carry all of his pots at once.

    I am noodling around with a design that will provide the carrying capacity for pots and live wells for the catch (a new trend locally) but will beat hull speed by about 30% - 50% with installed horsepower of about 600hp. But it ain't your normal lobster boat and build costs would be about 20% higher than a 'normal' boat, but preliminary economic evaluation indicates that the lower operating costs would amortize the additional build costs in three to five years. Whether I can convince anyone to buy the design & build it is quite another story.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Norwich,United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,717

    Default Re: Wide load

    Would a catamaran be a sensible alternative?They have gained a foothold among our crab fishermen,who launch off beaches and value the speed and working platform.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    15,860

    Default Re: Wide load

    I think a catamaran would be a good fit, but...

    There have been several cats in the local fishery and they have done OK, but two primary complaints keep popping up. Firstly, they tend to bury their bows and make for a wet, uncomfortably-riding boat. Second, they do not have adequate hold capacity to allow for live wells of sufficient size. I believe that I can overcome both issues with the design I am cartooning, but the very conservative fishing community will find it difficult to get over their prejudice against cats due to the previous experience with the cats that have already been in service. Kinda like trying to sell a wooden boat to a 'glass boat owner - "A guy my friend knows had a wooden boat, and it rotted all to hell, so I know that all wooden boats rot in a year!"
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •