Visit our Popular Forums

CarlF · 13-08-2017, 09:10

To the origional question of why you see more trawler design yachts than tug design yachts:

1. Trawlers made by dozens of companies have been sold in the US for perhaps 50 years. Grand Banks made their early boats in wood as fiberglass was still in its infancy. Trawlers have little in common with real fishing trawlers either above or below the waterline. Some of the most popular built today have two engines and a "semi-planing" hull which would never be done in a fishing boat that uses nets.

2. Tug yacht designs are a fairly recent phenomon. A couple of small yards in the US used to make cute "gentlemen's" tugs but these were meant for puttering around a harbor. American Tug and a couple of others have done a great job popularizing their design as a "trawler alermative" for the last 10-15 years. But they also are a "semi-planing" hull which no real working tug would use.

Despite the recent popularity I would guess new trawler designs outsell new tug design 10-1. Likely for the simple reason that there are 10 times as many trawler companies and salesmen at boatshows.

Finally, there's a big range in each design. I think a Grand Banks Heritage and a Nordhaven trawler Have less in common than the Grand Banks and an American Tug.

Stumble · 13-08-2017, 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wckoek

I mean tug yacht and cruisers build for recreational purpose.
If the hull can be the same or similar to trawler yachts, and they have even more interior volume, I see why not the design even if exterior only is taken to a blue water motor cruiser?
The pilot house offered great visibility, and the cabin covered deck offered more protection from weather and sprays.

Also tugs have more tuck in flares for lack of better term, what is the purpose or benefit of this design?
And do tugs have lower freeboard?

There are a lot of misunderstanding built in here...

1) The shape of the hull defines the interior volume. For the same length the only ways to get more volume is to either increase the height or the width. Neither are desirable from a design standpoint. The wider a boat is the less efficient it is. Because it requires the hull to move a larger frontal area out of the way. For tugs this isn't an issue, they are designed around so much available power that a slight loss to hull design simply isn't more than a fractional rounding error. But for a yacht where 20hp is enough for cruising speed, requiring an extra 5 for the overly beamy hull matters.

Adding height reduces ultimate stability and increases the roll momentum. Basically tall boats are less stable and less comfortable. Its fine in sheltered water and close to shore, but the further you go from the harbor the less ok it is.

2) Moving the bridge to the bow does provide more visibility, but only to the point it allows you to look down over the bow. Tugs do it because they need the aft deck for line handling and winches. But the bow is also the part of the ship with the most motion. The further forward the wheel the more likely the vessel will induce sea sickness.

It also has other negative effects. 1) At anchor a bridge forward design will naturally ride stern to the wind, while the hull wants to ride bow to the wind, this exacerbates tacking at anchor, and increases jerking on the anchor chain. 2) While docking the bow can become almost uncontrollable in even moderate winds, with the rudder so far from CoE of the sail plan there isn't much you can do to control the bow. Tugs get around this with multiple large engines and massive props, as well as rotating Kurt nozzles and traction drives none of which make sense for a recreational boat

3) The flare in tugs is to prevent squatting under massive loads. size of size tugs have the largest engines of any boats, and they put them to work. When towing barges or other ships the tow line tries to drive the stern into the water, this requires enormous amounts of reserve buoyancy aft to prevent this phenomena (called squat). There is little to any advantage of this for a yacht, except for the styling clues.

4) The low freeboard is just a function of operational location. Here we are talking about harbor tugs, that work primarily in harbors and rivers. There is no need for freeboard because they don't see much in the way of waves. Ocean going tugs are a different thing.

The thing s if you want a tug for aesthetic reasons then go for it. There is a certain sense of aesthetic value to all yachtings, but the hull design, even just the styling clues, of tugs really are not advantageous to pleasure boats. But they are not a practical choice, just like a F-450 duelie diesel with a goose neck hitch is a silly vehicle to go pick up groceries.

**David M** · 13-08-2017, 09:35

Some yacht-tugs plane and some do not. There will be a difference in the hull shapes with the planning tugs having a flatter bottom.

The largest manufacturers of yacht-tugs in the US....

http://www.rangertugs.com/

http://www.nordictugs.com/

https://www.americantugs.com/

Have a look at the pictures of the different models.

**TrentePieds** · 13-08-2017, 09:42

Wckoek:

Here is a link to a Jay Benford site with some "tug" designs:

http://benford.us/pdf/TugYachtBarge.pdf

Benford is dean of the "cute" designers. He has a wonderfully romantic eye and a soft pencil that is nearly as good as old Billy Gardens :-)!

Stumble gave you some valuable insights in #17 above. Think about what Stumble sez when you look at the arrangement plans given in the link. Note the overall length of the sundry "tugs" and think about what you really get for your money - space-wise :-)

You will see that to get the equivalent living quarters in a "tug" that you would get in, say, a 36 foot tri-cabin, you need to go to something like 48 or 50 feet. Obviously that increases displacement, and therefore cost, not only of construction but also of operation.

A quick off-the-cuff example: The increase in volume (and therefore displacement) is equal to the increase in length raised to the third power. Go from 36 feet to 48, i.e. and increase of 12 feet on a base of 36, or an increase to 1.333 of the base length. The increase in displacement is therefore 1.333 x 1.333 x 1.333 or 2.34.

In rough measures, therefore, to get in a tug the accommodation you can get in a 36 foot tri-cabin you have to spend over twice the money!

Another point Stumble made is that "tugs" are meant for puttering about in protected waters. Here in the Salish Sea where (working) tugs are ubiquitous, "toy" tugs are not common. Stumble and Lepke will both bear me out: Tugs are an industrial necessity in our waters despite the fact that the dangers of low freeboard are recognized. Men who get paid to go to sea in tugs recognize and accept that. There is a difference between accepting industrial risks you must accept because your livehood requires it, and voluntarily accepting risks merely because something appeals to you aesthetically.

TP

Cheechako · 13-08-2017, 09:53

Let's face it , Trawler and Tug are both just names when it comes to recreational boats. Real Trawler's fish, Tugs tow.
Nordic Tugs: 26'-54' Pretty popular. Near me. Pretty spacious cabins above the 26 footer. There are advantages to this type of boat. High bulwarks and walkable protected side decks.
Nordic Tug Models - Cruise in Comfort - Choose your style

Matt Johnson · 13-08-2017, 10:04

Click image for larger version

Name: 5972279_20161015040201081_1_XLARGE.jpg
Views: 420
Size: 82.5 KB
ID: 154049

My favorite tug/yacht design is the Lord Nelsen 49' (and 34').... seems like a great cruiser!

1987 Lord Nelson 49 Victory Tug Power Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

Matt

Wckoek · 13-08-2017, 10:12

Thank you for all the comments.
I get an idea of different characteristics and what to look for when looking for a motor cruisers.

Wckoek · 13-08-2017, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by funjohnson

Attachment 154049

My favorite tug/yacht design is the Lord Nelsen 49' (and 34').... seems like a great cruiser!

1987 Lord Nelson 49 Victory Tug Power Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

Matt

It look really nice, and I like the layout and the aft deck.
This one looks more like a tug with the freeboard aft and the tumblehouse.
Who is the designer?
It was really expensive or keep its value well given its age and type.

tuffr2 · 13-08-2017, 10:35

A commercial tug pushes things like coal barges or maybe cruise ships.

For non-commercial use I am not sure if the word 'tug' should ever be used.

Even Ranger Tugs are really trawler like. But some, maybe all Ranger Tugs will plane.

Commercial tugs will not plane...not even semi-plane.

Cadence · 13-08-2017, 11:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wckoek

Despite their larger interior volume (and lesser deck space) as compared to trawlers of similar size, why are tugs less seen and used as cruisers?
How do they compared to trawlers in terms of engine power requirements, carrying capacity, speed, fuel economy and seaworthiness?
And what are their advantage and disadvantages as compared to trawlers?

It is a mater of semantics. What is called a tug and what is called a trawler.
In my humble opinion the term trawler has been bastardized. When hulls that plan are called trawlers.

Stu Jackson · 13-08-2017, 11:12

There was a fine article in Pacific Yachting last month on a Pilgrim tug, quite nice to add to the mix, not being built anymore though.

You should go get ON some of these boats, too. Always a great way to spend a weekend!

Good luck, happy hunting.

Scout 30 · 13-08-2017, 17:13

Don't forget Sam Devlin's tugs, from tiny to over 40'.
https://www.devlinboat.com/2016/03/sockeye-42/

ZULU40 · 14-08-2017, 02:30

Has to be said too, that tugs in particular are taken on somewhat of an evolution / revolution in design and configuration. These days tractor tugs are ever beamier to stave off broaching and provide safer working decks. They have very deep heavy forefoot blades for grip and twin power pods for control. For the same reasons, presently there are moves toward catamaran configured tugs, the design of which is more or less on trial. They can be called on to operate in the roughest seas just outside of port, still the risks of such low freeboard are there.

For the cruising tug, operating in larger rivers and bays, coastal enjoyment, perfectly fine. Global circumnavigation, probably not.

Benford's own iteration is of a a circa 1960s design with the clients brief held as "to make it look like a real working tug". Accommodations are not as severe as one might think.