Mangusta 108 Experience

......

Geez, Cap, you just don't know when to quit.

Questions 1 through 4 and number 8 I did not answer because I don't know and am smart enough not to pretend I do, unlike some.

Questions 5,6, and 7 I already answered several times, get someone to explain them if they were too difficult for you.

I still don't understand why you have judged someone (about whom you know nothing of his experience, qualifications, and history) unfit to move over to the Mangusta. It's not your call Cap, give it a rest. But, this really isn't about him is it?

.... BLOCK

Ok, here is a simple question:
How would any of you go about finding the right person to help you with this waterjets learning curve?
i.e. Imagine you are a captain for an owner, and said owner decided he wants a larger, faster, waterjet yacht that he would like you to run for him.
Now, you know that you might be able to go out and figure things out for yourself, but that's probably not the smartest way to go.
What kind of criteria would you use to choose the person who is going to train you and get you competent enough to run the boat without this more qualified person around for you to rely on should things go south?
What are some desired learning objectives?
What are some demonstrable practical skills and performance ideals?
Looking forward to your ideas

The previous captain of the boat you are purchasing would be the obvious choice. There are also many captains/consultants out there (some well known) with LOTS of jet experience.

Hi,

This seems like a sound and sensible way to achieve the desired result.

"This seems like a sound and sensible way ..."

I thnk you are right. This should get the guy past the Independent Determination of International Operational Training (I.D.I.O.T.) inspector from the the New York Certification Analysis Police

The previous captain of course and I think KaMeWa can recommend a couple of captains that use to teach you how to drive any waterjet yacht. They are running such boats every day in our waters and have been around the world teaching captains of yachts and ferries how to handle twin and triple waterjets.

Given the nature of the questions (1-4) I wonder if the Mangusta is really the right boat for this client. Waterjets are great for going fast but they are one of the most inefficient propulsion methods for economic speeds (sub 15 knots).

Also the hull is a full-on V-shaped planing hull, which results in a big wake and again, not-so-economic displacement speed. Combine this with shaky behaviour in waves when going slow, and I wonder if the owner shouldn't look at a boat with shaft propellers and a decent semi-displacement hull.

Now if the first question was, "What is the expected top speed after 1000 running hours" and the second "For how many hours on end can I drive the boat at full throttle", the Mangusta would probably be the right boat.

Bruno

I agree, jet's are usually very in-efficient at slow speeds (displacement speed). Generally they are designed to have the most efficiency at cruise speed and once you get too far under that efficiency goes out the window. Another issue with the Mangusta's is that they don't have a very good range.

If he's looking for fuel efficiency and to cruise at displacement speeds, you can still get great efficiency with a lot of planing hulls if you run them at displacement speeds with straight shafts and propellors.

"If he's looking for fuel efficiency ..."

The only thing we know is that he is looking at a Mangusta. Nobody uses Mangusta and efficiency in the same sentence ... it's a yahoooooooooo thing and if that's what you want, that's all that matters.

Who are we to nitpick the reasons? Why should anyone have to justify that desire?

To me it's like drinking flaming Sambucca from an overflowing glass, silly, pointless, and sometimes dangerous but who does it to be serious, relevant, and secure?

His first 4 questions are pertaining to fuel economy so I would assume as well as anyone else in a normal state of mind that considering 4 out of 8 of his questions pertain to fuel economy, that it is an important issue to him. 50% of his questions actually pertain to fuel economy. Fuel economy is obviously important to him. If his first 4 questions were asking about speed, one would assume speed is important to him. Nobody is justifying any desire or assuming anything, they are just pointing out that if fuel consumption is important to him, there are better propulsion systems to achieve that at lower speeds and maybe a better yacht for that purpose.

A forum is designed for a collective group of people to get together and answer questions and form ideas and come up with various solutions. Don't attack someone for offering a different solution or idea. Nobody is telling him to do anything he does not want to do, nor forcing their idea on him, or making him do anything.

"Don't attack someone for offering a different solution or idea."

Geez, who was attacking anyone? My last post was a lighthearted observation of the fact that all we know is the boss wants a Mangusta and his captain has some questions.

If we can't answer his direct questions maybe we should just accept the fact that the boss wants it and that should be good enough. So far all the guy has had is a few good suggestions about how to get training, one opinion about crew and an observation about maneuverability, and a thousand suggestions that the captain isn't qualified and the boss shouldn't get the boat.

"there are better propulsion systems to achieve that at lower speeds and maybe a better yacht for that purpose."

Talk about rash assumptions. Fuel consumption is important to everyone for many reasons. Why do you assume that because the captain asked, the owner should find another boat? That wasn't what the man asked, he asked what the fuel burn was in different modes.

Give the owner and his captain credit for having the ability to make their own decisions. Don't you think it is a bit arrogant to take it upon yourself to decide the boat is not for them just because the captain asked some valid questions? If you know the figures, supply them.

The captain didn't ask for a "solution" he didn't even present a problem. He simply asked for information and then got swamped with innuendo and opinion.

If you have run a Mangusta 108 or similar boat then provide him with the knowledge you gained by running it. If you haven't, why have you decided it's not the boat for them?

And you think a lighthearted response is an attack? Must be a grim Monday where you're at.

I haven't decided anything for them. A sentance that starts with the word "Maybe" is simply a suggestion. "Maybe one should take a look at a similar vessel with different propulsion if you're looking for fuel economy at slower speeds" is a suggestion. I had a great Monday, sorry if you haven't. There's an old saying in this industry "if you have to ask the price, you can't afford it." What kind of drugs are you on anyways?

"There's an old saying in this industry "if you have to ask the price, you can't afford it."

Yeah, and it's only tossed out by those who don't have to pay the bills. Trust me, the boss wants to know what the price is and his captain has a duty to ask.

You implication that I am on drugs is offensive and contributes nothing to the discussion. Is there some reason you felt that was necessary?

Yes, your replies are often irrational. You make these replies based upon half of a sentance and not even the entire sentence or post.

Hi,

I would say that you have just about described yourself in your last two posts.

At least Marmots posts are technically accurate and not based on an unsubstantiated secret dealer memo- (Remember your Break in Oil claims)

Hi Marmot,

I only stated that I "wonder" whether the Mangusta would be the right boat for him, based on the tiny bit of information we have. I didn't impose any decision on any one, I was just trying to provide more arguments to put in the balance.

I don't know if these questions originate from the owner or the captain. You assume the latter, and that the questions are asked only to make a cost estimate. It can just as well be that the owner is a treehugger who doesn't know too much about boats (allthough I must admit, that's pretty unlikely ).

If I had the figures he asked, I would have given them. In lack thereof, I just made some general observations, which the captain and owner can perfectly well disregard if they are not applicable to them. A forum is more than straight answers to straight questions IMO. It's sometimes in the "noise" where you find valuable info.

PS - for a very rough estimate of fuel consumption (L/h) at cruising speed, multiply 90 % of the total fuel tankage (L) by cruising speed (knots) and divide by range at cruising speed (Nm). The resulting figure should include generator use as well.

Bruno

"I don't know if these questions originate from the owner or the captain."

All we know, since the guy has been driven to ground by the look of it, is that the questions were asked. My position is answer the question asked, not try and read between the lines when we can't even see any lines. There are many posts where the question begs another and in those cases my own approach is to ask that question rather than "assume" the poster has some underlying agenda or lack of knowledge.

This is probably the risk of purely text based discussions on complex issues, we can't evaluate anything but the words themselves and a fair response demands that our own assumptions don't provide an answer to a question that was not presented.

Maybe it was that multi-vitamin I took earlier in the day but I read the questions at face value and answered the ones with which I had personal experience. If he had asked for opinions or rules of thumb then my response might have been different.

Hi,

Oh well I guess CaptJ will be around your office soon for the hair follicle test then.