What about a job on those Shadow Boats?

Lady Lola Shadow

Here's Lady Lola Shadow going through the bridge in St. Maarten last year.

Niel -

Where's my picture on Lady Lola going through the bridge right behind the Shadow?

Kidding, and thanks for the nice shot of LLS.

I know of a UK Customs Cutter that had to pay tax on it's remaining bunkered fuel!! If they didn't the cutter would be impounded.

I believe that this happened in Norway, with the cutter commander not being able to find proof of origin for the fuel.

Shame eh!!

Somewhat related to the topic of transfer of fuel, what about other goods such as alcohol and tabacco products? Those are heavily taxed in some countries. Transfer of meat products can also be a problem. That's a shame really.

The only concern that I have with transfer of fuel between two ships is safety and potential enviromental damage should something goes worng.

A question for Stan, if you dont' mind.

While no doubt that a shadow boat has a number of benefits. How about the cost of running two smaller boats compared to a larger one?

For instance, instead of having a 250' yacht (or ship), will it cost less to run say a two 164' fleet.

Personally heli refueling and storage space are some very good reasons. If something has to go wrong during refueling of the heli, better on the shadow than on my yacht. Aviation fuel is nothing like diesel. Same goes to the water toys if they run on petrol.

The following post is originally posted by YES!, his original post was lost along with two of my other posts. I got a copy in my e-mail, I guess he wouldn't mind me posting it again for him.

Good idea to copy from the e-mail responder. Thanks for covering for me lurker!

I mentioned tobacco and alcohol products because fuel should be treated in similar manner as well. Of course the potential tax revenue from taxing transfer of fuel is a lot greater. So, how would different countries interpret their legislations and enforce them is another issue altogether. There is always the potential environmental and safety issues and that can be exploited by legislators.

To build and to operating two 164 footers would be cheaper than 250 footer based on my own rough estimates, too. I think there are many other factors that favors two 164 footers in terms of cost and maintenance.

For examples, you need a lot more teak to cover the 250 footer than the 164 footer. The shadow of course won’t need teak, or may be just a little accent next to the heli pad to greet the owner & guests.

Tender garage is another cost saving factor. To design, build, and maintain those hull side garages isn’t cheap. You need extra reinforcement to compensate for the lost of hull structure integrity much like the sunroof on a car except it cost a heck lot more. The 250 footer will probably have at least two hull side garages. I reckon that those two garage doors alone can add a million to the final price of the 250 footer. Not to mention that launching the tender form hull side garage can be problematic and dangerous in rough sea.

Having a shadow also gives you a lot of flexibility when choosing the main yacht. You can have the 70 knot TWINE, Wallypower 118 or a Wally sloop, or even the Maltese Falcon clipper and still have a heli and all the toys ready for you.

On the other hand though, the 250 footer is probably more stable and probably more sea worth in extremely bad weather. However, that shouldn’t be an issue if the owner doesn’t plan on ocean crossing or head down to Antarctica. Speaking of which, it reminds me of the alt house explore yachts. Their foredeck tender storage solution is simple, but the tenders are not sheltered. The alt house design is pretty to my eyes, but perhaps doesn’t offer as much accommodation compared to other designs.

Thank You......

for re-posting my reply, lurker - I thought it had been lost in space, and as you can see by the length, I would have hated to re-invent the wheel.

To your latest comments, the really significant advantage to the forward house is that it allows construction of the huge (70 feet long by 36 feet wide) hangar. During transits and passages, all the toys, the helo, the tenders, everything goes inside the hangar; you close the stainless steel roller door and head to open water. All is stowed, secured and protected from the elements. There is a significant savings of wear and tear by keeping the gear enclosed.

Why would you cross an ocean in a Wally 118 or anything else less than 300 feet? All you do is beat your yacht, beat yourself, or worse, beat your crew to death. Put it on Dock Express along with the Yacht Escort Ship and give the crews a holiday. They will be much the better and your yacht and equipment arrives as it departed, with only some slight exhaust residue on the decks.

I certainly wasn't thinking about or even suggesting crossing with a Wally 118. I am not suicidal, and I think there is a good chance that the boat won’t make it if you factor in the reliability aspect of it.

I was thinking of something like the first 151 foot explorer yacht Turmoil by Vripack. I know that it made a few transatlantic crossings and had been to places up north like Greenland. I am thinking that a 250 footer is probably more appropriate for this task than the 151 footer with a shadow. I have to say that this is a special case. Maybe only one in a thousand 50m+ yacht owner are like that?

The only limitation to trans-oceanic crossings is the operating range of the vessel, i.e., how much fuel, wind or favorable current you have.

Kon Tiki (a raft) proved the trans-Atlantic capability as have hundred of people in 30 foot sailboats - singlehanding none-the-less.

I do not even know the range of a Wally 118, but with a Yacht Escort Ship, she can go anywhere! Just hold on and enjoy the ride.

When clients ask about trans-oceanic capabilities, I tell them the realities of a 3 week plowing through the water with nothing-to-see journey (that is why sunrises and sunsets seem so beautiful) and suddenly the requirement to sail across is not so important. It is actually quite a boring trip unless you have to say "I did it." If they insist, I recommend a 150 footer or greater just from a comfort perspective. I know they will still likely have the crap kicked out of them on some leg of the journey. I have personally been on 1200 foot aircraft carriers taking 25 degree rolls in 35 foot seas and seeing steel handrails literally ripped off the bulwarks. There is no ship big enough to face God's angry sea. If it doesn't sink, you can make it. But do you really want to?

Your comments, lurker, on the "Sail It or Ship It" thread are correct with respect to the combination of ego, maturity and available time. 99% of owners do not cross. I know Perkins sails but did he do a crossing or just talk about it?

Wallypower 118 has a rante of 1500nm@9 knots, or 380nm@60 knots. Since you will need to be followed by a shadow and be refueled, you will probably be doing 9 knots. I think I had rather be on a full displamcent boat, the shadow boat crew will probably endure the trip better.

I would still do it if Scarlett Johansson on board, like in the movie The Island.

Actually I think there is a big difference between actually sailing across the ocean in a smaller sailboat (76' or less) than a huge mega yacht (150' up). The experience and the bragging right earned are totally different.

I would love to give it that a try with a 76' sailing cat one day, but I wouldn't want to do it in a 150 footer powerboat. Just because I will feel that I gain a lot more if I actually sailed.

Hi

I have done NZ to UK on a 16m Ketch in 1983, Palma to Antigua on a 26m Ketch in 1986.

I have also done 12 Trans Atlantics and a Round the World (1997-2000)run in various size Motor Yachts from 40 to 55m.

The sailboats were a good buzz and a real adventure especially the NZ to UK trip.

The Motor Yachts were also a good buzz and an adventure just a different sort!

There is something to be had for unlimited freshwater and hot showers, active stabilisation and airconditioning or am I just showing my age!!

How about sailing in one of those? http://www.matrix-yachts.com

EDIT: oh and btw, well done sailor.

This is what I have against cruising in multihulls, great fun inshore but out there, well it's up to you.



http://images.google.com/imgres?img...capsize+multihull&svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&safe=off

Sorry I know that got a little of topic