MYLIUS 50 NOMINATED FOR THE EUROPEAN BOAT OF THE YEAR CONTEST

Well, I refer the nomination because I had not mentioned it on the post about this year's contest (I will change it). Not really my fault since it was not on some of the lists. A bit odd too since it is a 2013 boat that only changed the name, from Mylius 15E25 to Mylius 50.

But who cares, this is a sexy one LOL and I like it a lot. This boat is a kind of a Ferrari with a  luxury sedan interior, quite an amazing (and expensive) sailboat, an all carbon one with a big draft.

 Regarding the big draft, there is no substitute for that in what regards performance, sure a swing keel is a much  better solution regarding a lower draft but nothing can beat a torpedo keel like this one in what regards drag and efficiency. A lifting keel would be the closest thing but on a Yacht of this size  it would intrude the interior, increasing weight and in what regards weight this is a minimalist boat...... but not in interior comfort. Besides a 3.00m draft is not a problem when sailing out of big tidal waters or some specific cruising grounds.

 I found that when I cruised for two weeks on a 41ft with a 2.70m draft. I thought that I would have some problem in what regards anchoring but no, I anchored on the same spots I used to anchor and that has not made any difference. But that was in Croatia and it does not apply to all cruising grounds.

To better understand what we are talking about let's compare the Mylius 50 with a First 50, a great and very fast performance cruising boat:

 Regarding beam, the First is a relatively narrow boat with 4.42m, the Mylius has the same beam; regarding LWL, the First has 13.26m, the Mylius 13.35m,. Till now nothing very different between the two even if the Mylius has the beam much more brought back....but in what regards weight the First 13780kg look huge if compared with the Mylius  9900kg (carbon boat) and in what regards ballast ratio the First 34.6% ( a considerable ratio for the draft and keel) can't compare with the 38.4% of the Mylius. That difference is much increased if we consider that the keels have a similar design but the one of Beneteau has a draft of 2.39m while the Mylius has 3.00m: then the difference in RM provided by the bigger ratio and the bigger draft is just  BIG!!!

The Mylius makes the F50 look like a slow boat. The Mylius is not only much lighter but also much more powerful and that means incomparably faster. That power is visible on the sail area each sailboat can carry. Even if  the First weights almost 3000kg more,  it carries upwind considerably less sail area (111m2 to 148m2,both boats with a jib): That is a HUGE difference. If the Mylius is a Ferrari, the First 50 is only a Golf GTI.

About the Mylius general concept:"Technical excellence and design, speed and comfort, experience and innovation, appearance and functionality, technology and style, a holistic view and care for detail are all values that give rise to Mylius boats. The result of a long and passionate process of research, design and construction, each Mylius boat is unique, beautiful, fast yet easy to sail, capable of offering the most in terms of navigation and life on board, be it on a pleasure cruise or a regatta, whether moored in port or in the open sea."

That seems obvious but these yachts seem so unusual, so passionate that I am curious about the people that are behind them. This is no usual shipyard, these guys are passionate for their work and we can see it on the end result. Who are they?

"Mylius was born in 2003 from a dream and the love for sailing of three men. Mario Sassi, Alberto Simeone and Mauro Montefusco always lived sailing as their big passion, since childhood; then, after various professional experiences in other sectors, they launched a completely new company, able to reflect their way of living and loving the sea. ...In 2007 the first Mylius 14E55 was launched, a fast cruiser-racer without sacrifices in terms of comfort, but winning high-level regattas – as the two Italian ORC Int’l Championships won by “Fra Diavolo” in 2009 and 2010."

Maybe that is what makes them different: They are not boat builders looking for a profit but people coming from different professional experiences sharing a passion for sailing and beautiful boats. The Architect (not NA) among them is Alberto Simeone that coordinates a team of naval architects, naval engineers and designers to give shape to their dreams. The sailingboat manufacturing world needed what they brought new: Passion and a notion of a sailboat as a work of art, perfection sailing, not only fast, but beautifully and with an interior that matches in design quality the sailingboat quality. The best of several worlds: top technology, top yacht naval architecture, top interior and exterior design, a work of art.

TRUE BOAT PORN VERSUS JEANNEAU 64 / AMEL 55 / HR 62

This was to be a post about the new Jeanneau 67, the flagship of Jeanneau but then something changed on my mind and I decided to make something different and more vast. Let's first have a look at the Jeanneau 67, on a test by Yachting world:
Nice boat, isn't it? or should I say nice yacht? and before you start to think that this  yacht is only for a few let me tell you that Jeanneau sold in the last years 800 sailboats between 53 and 57 feet. Push pull technologies allowed this size of boats the ability to be solo sailed, dispensing a crew, but giving all comfort in sea motion, added safety and living space, that only a true big yacht can offer. This one costs about a bit more than a million euros and on this department, meaning with people able to own such a boat and pay the huge costs of maintenance and marina, money is not all that important and probably this boat will be competing with the Amel 55 and Halberg Rassy 62, all interesting boats with the same high technology that allows them to be sailed solo. All very  easy and practical boats. Continuing with YachtyingWorld tests, let's have a look at those two:
Yes, all very practical, not properly beautiful but very comfortable and seaworthy. If they were women we would say that they would not call much attention, they would not be sexy, a bit too fat, they would cook very well and were nice to go along. All very nice but hardly exciting, maybe a quiet love but not a true passion and a torrid affair. That will only happen with a true beauty, a sexy lady that would turn your head around and would make you noticed and envied everywhere you went. Only one of those will be able to raise true passions and an irrational desire. Not as comfortable to live along, as the first fat lady, but one that will give you more pleasure and will make you feel truly alive. If we were talking about boats we would be talking about these ones: Many call them boat porn. I don't like the denomination, it seems there is something dirty about them. What is the problem to prefer a gorgeous sexy woman to a fat but very nice lady? What has that to do with Porn? So from now on no more porn boats, but sexy boats. They can do the same as the fatter ones, faster, more uncomfortably and on a more passionate way. For some the passion that can be translated by hours at the wheel, enjoying every moment, will be very disagreeable to others, that would prefer the boat on autopilot and will want a more sedate motion than the one of  a boat going way faster, with spray flying around from time to time.
So, if you have some millions to spend on a boat, take your pick...and if you don't.... take  your pick anyway because this thing about sexy yachts versus comfortable yachts does not happen only in big boats: we can make this comparison with any cruiser size, even if the big ones are the sexiest and more beautiful ;-).

DUFOUR 382 VERSUS OCEANIS 38

The boat hit the water recently and is going to be one of the attractions of the Fall and Winter boat shows. The 382 substitutes the 380 and has a slightly more modern hull, with chines and the beam more pulled aft but in any other way it is very close on the overall dimensions to the previous boat. The type of hull is close to the  410 one, but the 382 does not look as elegant as the big brother...neither as elegant as the smaller brother, the 310.
The 382 has some interesting features, like the boom inclined to the bow, that allows an easier work on the mast and on the main sail, a very big main traveler over the cockpit and one of the new furlers derived from the ones that are used on solo racing.

It has also some odd features like having only two winches!!!, being the two on the back of the boat, near the wheel, optional, no grab rail at the wheels or at the cockpit table and having on this type of hull only one rudder. That one I don't get it: Felci designed the 310 and the 410 with twin rudders and this one, with the same type of hull, with a single one? When I saw that and the very similar identical dimensions I thought that this one was a 380 MKII, but the transom is different and this one has chines.

I don't like the interior. Sure it has six possible versions, but a lot of flexibility is not the only thing that matters: it has to be cozy and nice and  by the images they show and for what I have seen on the movie the interior is just...cold and uninspired, as much as the one of the 38 is bright and cozy. The only advantage I saw: A big freezer/refrigerator of a size I had never seen on a 38ft boat. The Beneteau 380 clearly wins in what regards boat interior, except if for you that huge refrigerator is more important than all the rest. 

Regarding hulls, the Beneteau one is more inspired by a solo Open racer type of hull, with more beam and a transom allowing less heel: 3.99m to 3.85m; the Beneteau LWL is considerably bigger: 10,72m to 9.90m , the weight is smaller 6850kg to 7060kg, the Beneteau keel design, B/D ratio and draft indicates a bigger  RM coming from a lower CG: Draft - 2.08m versus 1.90m; B/D ratio - 26% to 22% .

To the bigger RM that comes from the lower CG the Beneteau adds a considerably superior RM coming from the hull form stability (more beam) and that means  a boat with a considerably bigger overall stability, a more powerful boat that will be able to carry more sail when the wind goes up, to reef later and to sail faster. It is possible that the Dufour will have a slightly better performance with light winds, or close upwind (it remains to be seen) but not much since the Oceanis  not only has a bigger LWL as it is lighter and carries substantially more sail: Upwind 65.7m2 versus 60m2 and downwind 146.7m2 to 117m2.

Contrary to its little brother, the Dufour 310, that I find a great little and boat, I don't think the 385 has the arguments to oppose the market leader on this size and category.
 Sure, I really hate the Oceanis no traveler system, up there on the air and I like a lot more the  big traveler of the Dufour, but that is too little for opposing to the Oceanis 380 advantages in what regards the sailing performance, not to mention the superior control and easier sailing offered by the Beneteau twin ruder that is also a more reliable solution. Between the two I would chose the Dehler 38....well that would be between the three LOL. Between the two I don't think the new Dufour 382 will be a match to the Oceanis 38...but who knows, I might be wrong ;-)

LINJETT 43, A VERY STRONG BOAT!!!

May not be beautiful, in fact it looks like a boat coming from the 90's, but I have to agree that it is very well built, or may I say exceptionally well built. They don't give the dimensions but looking at the other boats, the 37 and 34, they have nothing remarkable, except a very good build and a high quality interior even if with an old design. 

So why I am talking about it here, if it is not an interesting one? Well, the design my not be interesting but the built of the boat, particularly the keel structure is unbelievably strong for a lifting keel. Who would believe that a boat with a lifting keel could have a 8k grounding without damaging the keel? Really surprising. A pity the rest of the boat to be so uninspiring.  

CIRCUMNAVIGATING ON A SMALL BOAT (MAXUS 22)

I knew about this attempt much before it started. Tomasz, a Polish follower of this blog, called my attention to it in April...but I have hesitated to post about it. I was afraid that could come as an endorsement of this type of adventures. Sure, I have posted about crazy adventures like sailing the Atlantic on a traditional Indian small boat or circumnavigating on an open beach cat, but this one is made on a mass production protected waters boat and the ones that sail it make statements like this:

"Ten hours later I was sitting at the helm during his watch, and the anemometer showed up to 50 knots true wind. The established wind was not less than 45 knots. F..In the air, rain and water spray limited the visibility to 20 meters. Brave Puffin under  foresail went full against the wind making 3.5 to 5 knots, accelerating strongly after  passing the wave crest....We still have a smaller and smallest storm jib ... If anyone says that small boats do not have any advantages in a storm that is to say that he lacks experience ...sailing in small boats. Not saying that every small sailboat is good to sail on this conditions. Also not saying that every large yacht is suited to the task. Capable yachts are properly prepared, and the size has nothing to do with it."

That I don't subscribe and that may create illusory expectations on the ones that will think that a production boat like the Maxus 22 is as suited for the task as a bigger production boat designed for offshore work and I say so because they talk about " adaptation of the serial design...for ocean sailing" but never say what were those adaptations and give the dimensions of a standard boat :" Maxus 22 was designed by Jack Dashkievich. We make them from 2013 with both interior and exterior ballast. The entire construction is done in our yard in Węgorzewo. We have yachts sailing in Poland, Germany, France, Russia, Denmark and Sweden. Specifications: hull length: 6.36 m, beam: 2.48 m interior height: 1.60 / 1.73 m sail area: 23 m2."

http://www.northman.pl/eng_maxus-solo-around-o-projekcie.htm 

This gives the very wrong idea they are doing it on almost standard boat with some few modifications and in fact, at first, I assumed that it was true and they were crazy sailors trying an irresponsible attempt, but after all it is not a boat close to a standard Maxus 22 but a highly modified one with a reinforced hull and a beefed up rig. We cannot find that information on the page of Maxus yachts but we can find it here.

http://www.zewoceanu.pl/Maxus-Solo-Around/Jacht---Maxus-22

But not even here can we find nothing regarding what I saw on the photos: A boat with a much bigger ballast than on the standard boats and a bulbed keel.That implies not only a reinforced hull but a boat structurally reinforced, in other words, a completely different boat and a much more expensive one.

The Maxus 22, on its most interesting version the QR is a boat that weights 1200kg and has 250kg of ballast on a non bulbed lifting keel. Nothing to do with the ballast or the keel of the Puffin, the "Max 22" that is circumnavigating. The shipyard, not making all this clear, induces in error future clients that will think that the Maxus 22, even in its fixed keel version (the less popular) is more than a boat for sheltered or semi-sheltered waters, a boat with offshore potential and that is not only untrue but dangerous. Not saying that the Maxus 22 and the other Maxus yachts are not interesting boats, quite the contrary, just saying that they were not designed, or RCD approved, for offshore work and that the publicity they make regarding a Max22 circumnavigating is a misleading one.

They talk a lot about a low budget project but modifying extensively a  Maxus 22 for doing this will be more expensive than to buy  a Django 6.70 or 7.20, boats that  were developed from the mini racer concept and have already an offshore potential on their standard versions. It is low budget because Maxus had done the job for them for free in exchange for publicity revenues ;-)

Saying all this, it is an interesting performance and the sailors that are attempting it are experienced ones, with an adventurous mind: Simon Kuczynski, a sailing instructor with 25000nm and Dobrochna Nowak also a  sailing instructor that crossed the Atlantic twice, one of them on a 5m sailboat. 

They have already sailed till Canary Islands and are waiting a good weather to cross the Atlantic. You can follow their adventures here: 

http://www.northman.pl/maxus-solo-around.htm

http://www.zewoceanu.pl/Aktualna-pozycja/

And have also a look at the Maxus 22 that, without pretending to be an offshore boat, is a  nice trailerable inexpensive weekend cruiser for semi-protected waters, one where the weight of the crew and form stability has a significant role on boat stability. Or saying in other way, a boat that sails well but will not recover easily from a knock-down, if it recovers at all. Nothing wrong with that given the waters the boat is designed to sail on.

ROUTE DU RHUM: GREAT MOVIES AND A 360º EXPERIENCE ON A MAXI TRIMARAN (MOVIE)

Let's start by that 360º experience: I have seen a lot of 360º pictures and they are great to show the interior of a sailboat, but a 360º movie? I did not even know that it was possible LOL.

That's what they have done on Sodebo trimaran, Thomas Covilleis maxy trimaran, the one that had the bad luck of being hit by a cargo ship. Go to the below link and you will have six movies to explore, some with the boat sailing. Great experience, Have fun ;-)

http://www.goutezalaliberte.com/

And the two great movies of the Route du Rhum, by Destopnews and as a bonus, also a great movie about the finish of the first leg of the VOR.

WHAT RUDDER IS BEST FOR CRUISING: SKEG RUDDERS? SINGLE SPADE RUDDER? TWIN SPADE RUDDER?

That's a subject that has been recently discussed extensively on internet forums even if the answer to that question has been given by the most prominent NAs on the design of most  recent cruising boats: Almost all feature a twin rudder set up. To the more distracted, let me point out that a two rudder set up has nothing to do with a twin wheel set up. A twin wheel set up can drive a single rudder or a twin, as a single wheel can drive a twin rudder system. That's true that a twin wheel setup is today the norm but some drive a single rudder and the reason for its almost universal use on cruising and also most racing boats has nothing to do with a single or twin rudder setup.
So, let's focus on the rudders: It seems obvious that the more protected rudder is the one that comes on the continuation of a full keel. But there is an efficiency problem: the rudder to work well has to be in the way of the water flux (not to mention the efficiency of a full keel), the further away from the keel the better and in what regards that, it cannot be a worse situation that a rudder immediately aft a full keel.

The next step, following the search of a more efficient and better sailboat, in what regards rudder, it was to separate the rudder from the keel, using modified fin or fin keels. Almost all the first rudders of that era used a skeg, most of the times an integral one that protected all the length of the rudder. That improved the rudder efficiency but also revealed some problems regarding the use of skegs: They found out that a skeg could not be strong, otherwise the skeg would resist to a strong impact or grounding, but the force transmitted to the hull, multiplied by the long arm due to the depth of the rudder, would risk to break the hull at the insertion point.

After finding out that problem, the skegs become thinner and as the rudders, sacrificial, face to the hull integrity.One more step brought boat design to modern spade rudders, rudders  designed for max efficiency, away from the keel and designed, as the skegs, with a sacrificial function: They should be strong enough to sustain all the abuse strong sea conditions could have on them, resist small shocks but face big shocks, they should break or bend in in a way that protect hull integrity. Not an easy compromise designing a rudder that responds to these two apparently opposed constraints.

Better keels, better hulls (with the beam more brought aft) and lighter sailboats give cruising boats a better sailing performance. The rudders have to be designed not just to respond to a slower and more sluggish sailing, but to boats that have an increasingly better performance and that, in what regards rudder design translated in more efficient rudders, auto aligned, balanced and more deep.

Deep rudders, some almost the depth of the keel, are more vulnerable, not only due to the bigger efforts that a deeper rudder generates, but are also more exposed to breakage due to groundings or eventual shocks with submerged objects. Besides it was discovered that in beamier designs with the beam brought aft, due to the strongly asymmetrically wet surface when the boat is heeled, the best position to a rudder is not at the center of the hull, but at the center of the wet surface (while the boat is heeled) and that means on the side and therefore a rudder on a twin rudder setup, that would respond to this demand, could be much smaller, much less deep and have less efforts than a single rudder positioned at the center of the hull.

Rob Humphreys describes here the benefits observed through a tank testing that was performed on a Oyster 885 model and that convinced Oyster management regarding the benefits of using twin rudders on their line of yachts:

"David’s naval architecture back -ground (David Tydeman is the CEO of Oyster Group) quickly helped me persuade him that twin rudders were the way to go! It was clear that this was going to be a bit of a sea-change for Oyster and I was pleased that David was keen to push this onwards and also to support this breakthrough with a decent budget for tank testing. We both felt it would be helpful to have fairly tangible reference information for those owners trying to understand the shift from a skeg-rudder to the twin rudder form for this exciting new model.

In fact our testing session set out to do more than just this because we also used the opportunity to let the spade rudder have its say, just for some form of completeness. We have often been asked why Oyster has tended to steer clear of spade rudders and the answer has more to do with potential vulnerability than any disrespect for its potential qualities. As any Oyster owner knows a blue-water cruising yacht has to be accomplished in a number of different ways, and one of the lower profile requirements has to be an ability to slide backwards against a Mediterranean harbour wall without necessarily endangering the steering gear. ..

In our tank testing we were focusing our attention on a fully-pressed up set of sailing conditions, with the boat heeled over to twenty degrees and sailing at nine knots, with a variety of leeway angles and load conditions. .. We tested a lot of other things as well but the rudder testing part was most interesting and was totally supportive of all that we had learnt to be true in the field. ... For example, with the twin rudders set to just two degrees to the flow the spade rudder needed to be at over six for an equivalent moment, and the skeg-hung rudder at eight – all for the same yaw moment.Put another way, the leeward twin rudder provided 4 times as much force than a skeg rudder!..

From our perspective twin rudders represent a huge benefit and an Oyster owner will really appreciate it too as soon as he has the wheel at his finger-tips. But what’s also interesting is that the system fares a lot better in terms of potential reliability, especially against the spade rudder. The blades are significantly smaller and more lightly loaded, and the span is considerably shorter, making it almost impossible to damage the steering gear when reversing into a quay. And of course, with two rudders rather than one there is an obvious increase in the level of redundancy. Unlike some twin-rudder installations, the arrangement we have for Oyster means that even assuming the worst-case loss of one rudder it would be possible to still sail the boat on the compromised tack, albeit with reduced canvas."

http://www.humphreysdesign.com/63/twin-rudders-for-blue-water-cruising/

This pretty much says it almost all regarding why a twin rudder is more adequate to a cruising boat and does not tell the full story. There are certain things you can't measure on a tank test and one of them is the feel you have on the boat and the easiness to control it. In what regards that ,sailors that experienced twin rudder configurations, reported in almost in all cases a superior easiness to control the boat, specially downwind, and that makes sense if we take into account the superior directional stability that the two rudders on the sides will provide compared with a single one at the middle.

So, the single spade rudder is as dead as the skeg rudder? Not quite. I continue to see designs of racing boats and of top cruiser racers, designed with CFD and VPP extensive use, that continue to use a deep very narrow spade rudder. Rating formulas can have to do with that but I am more inclined to think that for absolute maximum performance, less drag and maximum rudder sensibility, those rudders offer advantages but in all the cases we are talking about boats designed to offer maximum performance, with a crew and that demand a very exigent and controlled sailing. Solo racers have for many years adopted twin rudders as the better solution and that has probably not to do with absolute performance but with the requirement such boats have to be easily controllable, since they are sailed solo and many times on autopilot.