largest payload / displacement 39-55+ft used multihull: cross, etc for cargo/work

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I'm not anti-multihull but I do accept thier limitations. Multihulls are just not well suited to heavy duty cargo transport.

In general, you are correct. This proa is meant for transporting high valued tropical nuts harvested in west african marshlands organized by an ngo for local community development. It is only the proof of concept for a 60m one with 400 ton carrying capacity and with plenty of crew quarters in the windward hull as depicted

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by lucdekeyser

In general, you are correct. This proa is meant for transporting high valued tropical nuts harvested in west african marshlands organized by an ngo for local community development. It is only the proof of concept for a 60m one with 400 ton carrying capacity and with plenty of crew quarters in the windward hull as depicted

The OP was asking about 39-55' boats presumably that could be handled by a couple sailing the boat. The "proof of concept" was already at 39'. The full size would be upwards of 200' and presumably require a larger crew.

Of course 400 ton isn't much for a 200' monohull, so yes, my point was still correct that multihulls aren't suited to heavy loads. As I previously stated, they get used for light duty work where speed is more important such as ferry work.

[jdazey]

My wife and I have both fished trimarans, a Piver Lodestar and a Piver AA31, for salmon in Alaska. A friend of ours, Ken Short, built the first Skookum 53 troller. We've looked at most of the 53s and came close to buying one. When we wanted to move up from our AA31, we looked closely at a Horstman 39, but it had a rotating wing sail that we would have had to change.

If you looking in the 39' to 55' range and need to carry an extra 6,000lbs, take a look at Cross or Horstman. I don't thing the Browns with center cockpit would allow use of the center of the boat for a hold. The Cross 46 or Tri-stars in the 45' and up range have aft cabins that will accommodate the crew. They will be overloaded and sailing will be compromised, but you already know that. There are a couple of Cross 46s (actual length may vary up a bit) for low asking prices. The hull shape of a Wharram hurts it load carrying capacity, but a large one might still work.

I'd suggest being very careful about cutting up the deck structure to accommodate the hold. Horstman especially designed his boats to incorporate the deck as a structural element.

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The OP was asking about 39-55' boats presumably that could be handled by a couple sailing the boat. The "proof of concept" was already at 39'. The full size would be upwards of 200' and presumably require a larger crew.

Of course 400 ton isn't much for a 200' monohull, so yes, my point was still correct that multihulls aren't suited to heavy loads. As I previously stated, they get used for light duty work where speed is more important such as ferry work.

In general I agree. The OP has posted in this part of the forum so we can suppose he is thinking about a multihull. If a multihull is used for cargo then a proa would allow a capacity in its largest hull that is the closest to that of a monohull. A catamaran between 39'-55' corresponds to 78'-110' of combined hull length. This would mean a proa with about 70' long hull and a 40' short hull. Such one sails already: the expedition ship Gaiasdream

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by lucdekeyser

In general I agree. The OP has posted in this part of the forum so we can suppose he is thinking about a multihull. If a multihull is used for cargo then a proa would allow a capacity in its largest hull that is the closest to that of a monohull. A catamaran between 39'-55' corresponds to 78'-110' of combined hull length. This would mean a proa with about 70' long hull and a 40' short hull. Such one sails already: the expedition ship Gaiasdream

I fully understand he was asking about multihulls. That was why I was pointing out their limitations.

Never heard someone suggest a 70' boat is in the 39-55' range. Have you had any luck paying for slips or haul outs based on this logic at the 39-55' prices? If you are building a custom boat, you could achieve the same performance an even better storage by just extending the cat hulls out to 70' for about the same price.

[purvisgs]

Thanks for all the input thus far.

I realize that a multihull may not be best suited, however, I am only going to own one boat right now.

To be clear I am not going to grossly overload any boat, and hope to not overload at all. Instead of specifying that I want to carry 6000lbs,

I should have asked: with any existing/older design, what is the highest payload avaliable?

I dont have a specific cargo in mind, however I am very familiar with the se AK salmon troll fishery and may decide to start out in that type of fishery with a boat like this. Other uses i can realistically see within my lifetime would include research, cargo, and charter. I am not expecting to make money with this, to be clear. More along the same lines as "hobby farming" etc.

I realize a monohull likely has potential for more payload. however, for me, at this time, it has to be a multihull. Even if the hulls are so wide that it will only sail downhill

[indodream]

Ciao,

This link might be of interest for you.

Is a Newick's trimaran cargo project .

Beautiful, indeed.



TDP Vaka Update