New Astondoa 72... The worst foredeck ever designed!

Perhaps this link will offer some insight.

1976-1981 Triumph TR 7- America Gets A Wedgie

And then, a few years later, Pontiac did it all over again with the Fiero

Bloody UGLY!!!
And I am a Triumph fan, even though they were always trouble, they made up for it in fun. But this dog of a car had nothing to make up for it's ugliness.
Give me a TR5, TR3 or TR6 or even a Stag (I still have recurring nightmares of the overheating Stag in summer, while the heaters were full on and my passenger was complaining about burning legs).
Ah, British sports cars, the smell of leather and oil, oil, oil, on the garage floor.

Is this bow more to your liking?

I spent 3 hours on board the 72 at the Palm Beach show a week or so ago.

My view of the overall fit and finish of the yacht is that it was outstanding, especially the joinery, which was obviously of very high quality. Interior and exterior hardware appeared to be of high quality.

The layout is standard-main deck salon, galley, with dinette opposite, helm and a 4 cabin lower deck. Simple and appeared to be well thought out. Storage space was well designed and well finished. The design trade offs necessary in a 72 foot yacht appeared to be well thought out.

The small crew quarters was finished to the same standard as the rest of the yacht.

The ER was spacious for a 72 foot yacht and well laid out with filters/strainers etc easily accessible. The bulkheads are clad in stainless steel. Bilges were well finished.
The electronics were mounted on panels that lifted on struts and the wiring appeared to be very clean and well organized.

All in all I was quite impressed. I sent some time looking at Azimut/Ferretti/Sunseeker/Princess/Monte Carlo/Choy Lee etc offerings and thought that the overall fit and finish of the A72 was superior to all of them.

With respect to the rails or lack of them, the Broker recognizes the issue with the sun pad rails and would replace the them with higher ones so sunbathers, etc. would not go sliding off.

Well that's jolly nice of him.

You've still got to access the joint from inside to install the fasteners that hold the deck to the hull. And applying the glue/caulk to hold it together would be more difficult with no access to the seam from the inside. I think it's a purely stylistic measure that probably takes more care (to align the two halves more consistently) than it saves labor.

These guys from Spain just do not know how to build them. I'm just 6' , but whem i gome to the lower deck i've hit my head hard, collapsing with the (luckily) padded ceiling. The bow area you mentioned is not just one example of the bad ergonomics, it's general approach of this shipyard.

Low headroom isn't always a bad thing. It also means lower center of gravity. It's a decision that is made that has pluses and minuses.

You can't. The hull isn't rigid enough, especially on the hull sides and will flex and move when the cap is screwed/bolted/attached to the hull, which in a lot of cases would result in a lot of split cabinets and woodwork, or a very wavy hull to deck joint. Plus in many cases you have to access the hull joint etc etc

It IS a bad thing when the headroom is just below actual standing room for the vast majority of humans (i.e. less then 2 meters). You get neither the full advantage of the lower center of gravity nor the real convenience of real standing room...

Go ahead and do one of the two but don't try doing both I say.

That's just one example. It also means differences in draft, and windage, and there are materials costs too.

If you don't think that there are benefits to losing the 4" that you miss so sorely, why wouldn't a boat that has deck heights that you like add 4"? If there are no costs that extra 4" would at least be pretty/nice.

The boat builders are building boats to sell. If people are buying them then the decision can't be too stupid. It's not a safety matter, hidden from the buyer, lurking and waiting to kill someone. It's something you can see the instant you walk through the boat. People make their choices, and don't seem to mind too much to pay.

People are getting taller and taller. What owner wants to be on a yacht and ducking everywhere and bumping his head because he forgot to duck. A yacht should have headroom and a good experience, not camping in a little RV. So what if you have to increase the beam 6", and spend a little in materials to make decent headroom. An owner won't buy a boat he's not comfortable on......I've seen numerous owners not buy a boat because the master bed was too short, and there was no where for them to stand up in the boat. I've also seen owners buy short boats once, then they make sure to move to a brand that accomodates them the second time.

I just cannot understand the designers for this floating nuisance. Nowadays every architect uses CAD software or similar, and such obvious faults are just unforgivable. As for Astondoa 72-the part i was talking is the entrance from the saloon to lower deck (cabins). Shame!

We may have been on different A72's.
Although I am only 5'6", I noticed no lack of head room going below and my head came no where near any bulkhead. The head room in the cabins was fine as well.