The article I linked mentioned the owner having a mooring at Howland's landing, which is just S of Emerald Bay. That pic could be of that mooring. Like a lot of Cat mooring fields it can get really rolly (bow & stern, waves don't always line up with wind anyway). I suspect a narrow beam ULDB powerboat would be pretty lively, so not surprising if they used some version of a flop stopper. We have two!Well with a beam of 10’ she might need it!
Great article about SARRISA. But yeah, the mileage claim is "Amazing if true", considering "he still runs the boat at full throttle wherever he goes".That looks like the perfect Catalina boat.
Google turned up this article on her: https://www.powerandmotoryacht.com/blogs/still-cruising-after-all-these-years
25kt, 4-5nmpg. Amazing if true.
How is it possible for SARRISA, weighing perhaps 7 tons loaded (vs. 1.8 tons) with 12+ times the horsepower (316 vs. 25) and running more than twice as fast as Wilhelmina (25 knots vs. 11 knots) to get "around 4 to 5 nautical miles per gallon" compared to Wilhelmina's 9.6 NM per gallon?What developed was a 48-foot by 10-foot-10-inch ultra-light displacement boat (ULDB), weighing 12,000 pounds dry. Powered by twin 158-hp Volvo diesels with propeller pockets, Sarissa would run 25 knots.
Yeah, I struggle to believe those numbers. Obviously it will be relatively efficient with that length/beam/weight but it can’t be that efficient at that speed.Great article about SARRISA. But yeah, the mileage claim is "Amazing if true", considering "he still runs the boat at full throttle wherever he goes".
How is it possible for SARRISA, weighing perhaps 7 tons loaded (vs. 1.8 tons) with 12+ times the horsepower (316 vs. 25) and running more than twice as fast as Wilhelmina (25 knots vs. 11 knots) to get "around 4 to 5 nautical miles per gallon" compared to Wilhelmina's 9.6 NM per gallon?
For an interesting comparison let’s check the Tim Kernan further development of SARRISA.It is not complocated.
If she runs 25k wrt and she has 306hp. Then she drinks 16 g/hr. Thay is 25/16 nmpg.
Lets do it another way too. Give her credit for uldb and from Crouch say 70lb/bhp at 30 MPH. 14k/70 = 200 bhp. That would be 10 g/h.
So between 1.5 and 2.5 nmpg at 25 to 26 kts range
Let's say 17 knots for one hour = 17 NM. And 17 NM / 9.76 gallons = 1.74 NM per gallon (nmpg). Sounds realistic to me.at his reported cruising speed of 16-18 knots (3000 rpm) he burned a total of 9.76 GPH
I think WHITECAP LWL is closer to 44’ her hull is 48’ LOA.Whitecap at 17k is running in the transition range but those are good numbers for that speed regime. The Peters SARISSA at 25kt is fully planing. Sarissa has a Dis/(.01L)^3 of 100. Whiecap has 155 which is still quite light by modern standards. I assumed 40 dwl in both cases
WHITECAP comes up on plane around 14-15 knots, you can really see the reduction in her wake when she makes it up. She does not have much bow raise when she makes the transition. I run her at 16-18 knots because Paul Bieker and Eric Jolly told me that was the most efficient speed for her kind of vessel. I run my 2000# skiff at that same speed. Narrow boats are best in my world.Whitecap at 17k is running in the transition range but those are good numbers for that speed regime. The Peters SARISSA at 25kt is fully planing. Sarissa has a Dis/(.01L)^3 of 100. Whiecap has 155 which is still quite light by modern standards. I assumed 40 dwl in both cases
If you had one of these gadgets mentioned by @kokopelli you would know the most efficient speed in real time, perhaps taking conditions into account?I run her at 16-18 knots because Paul Bieker and Eric Jolly told me that was the most efficient speed for her kind of vessel.
Its NMPG at what speed that is really the relevant question depending on your goals ; ) And there are VERY different boats being compared in this thread. A fully foiling boat or a PT (lightweight) skiff would win there, but then there are limits on what you can do with it ; )NMPG seems like a good measure of efficiency, I wonder which boat in this thread wins the prize on that basis? A quick review of the first few pages shows some interesting contenders, though it's not always clear whether the claims are mpg or nmpg. To be fair, some acknowledgment must be made for accommodation/payload capacity, since small skinny boats can do very well in optimal conditions.
I would name her Cat StevensI would think this boat would be pretty efficient…..wish I had more information about her.
View attachment 501232
Feather, located at Bagnall Boat Builders, Milford, Auckland, New ZealandI would think this boat would be pretty efficient…..wish I had more information about her.
View attachment 501232
That image doesn't look like PILAR to me?Good enough for Hemmingway, good enough for Castro, good enough for moi.
View attachment 501315
Wheeler shipbuilding Company, Brooklyn, New York