Steven Speilberg's "Seven Seas" by Oceanco Yachts

@K1W1, Nicely spotted K1W1, iirc at the time there was even a post on here mentioning the text of the law/exemption... it was quite funny in the way it read as it was clearly aimed at that one vessel but trying not to "seem" as it was a "special favour" hehehe... oh politics

But then again, it was built in germany, so flagging it in the US wasnt oh-so patriotic...building it here would have been a bigger act imo? but i'm not one for political discussions!

----

@Millow, have you ever seen the difference that even a little bit of tint makes on visibility of glass? You may have noticed if you have tinted windows on your car (I imagine you dont have a tinted front glass, but may have the wide windows...) On a bridge window at night the difference on visibility is very steep. In this sort of situation you dont want to play around, and no one is going to risk it imo... I hadnt even noticed it until you mentioned it and I went back and had to look hard to see what you meant... imo it doesnt really stand out that much...

Also, in most conditions the interior will be lit (i.e. saloon, etc), and the bridge will not (exactly to maximise exterior lighting), so any effect of tinting is at least somewhat neutralized... that is why you can notice this tinting discrepancy more easily in yachts in photoshoots or in sleeper ports (like gib), then when they are active and close by on charter or owner-use. my 0.02

Thanks for the great shots CaptTom!

You don't really get a feeling for how massive Seven Seas actually is unless you go by her in a boat like you did or walk on the dock besider her.

I had lunch on the 2nd floor balcony of Pelican Landing on the other side of the dock from Seven Seas and felt like I was the size of a postage stamp in comparison. Even from their high 2nd floor balcony Seven Seas was still towering over the diners. Her air draft has got to be about 90'?

BTW Pelican Landing serves an awesome fish burrito!

@ RVN-BR and Innomare
Thank you very much for your good explinations , I understood it easily.
Yea sometimes the windows do not disturbe the design that much it depands on how the sun is shining.

Nevermind

Shoot, too late to edit my previous post. Anyway, years back I worked the tail end of a Spielberg production as a PA. It was "Inner Space", and I was just cleaning up some set pieces at an old studio in San Francisco that I used to work at. He's just a guy, and those pics on the link seem exceptionally voyeuristic. But that's just me. No offense meant, just my $.02

On the yacht itself; I'm assuming that thing can traverse the Atlantic, or is she limited to European waters?

I'm a howlie at powered motor yachts, so I'm kind of curious.

Hi,

The yacht was built in Holland and the photos above were taken in Ft Lauderdale so whadda ya reckon?

Charterworld reports that "Motor yacht SEVEN SEAS has a spectacularly shaped and thoroughly tested steel hull with bulbous bow that is capable of worldwide ocean-going voyages and extensive cruising on high seas."

There is no tonnage limit for US flagging of foreign built vessels. The Jones Act and the Passenger Vessel Services Act prohibit the carriage of passengers or freight between US ports (coastwise trade) on foreign flag or foreign built vessels.

Currently there are more than 90 foreign built ships over 10,000 tons flying the US flag serving in the US merchant fleet. They are used in foreign trade which includes loading cargo in a US port then delivering it to a foreign port where cargo is uploaded for delivery to a US port.

American Maritime Congress

I wasn't around to listen to the discussions regarding Limitless but there are several regulatory issues that apply to ships of 300 tons or more. Three specific areas that might have been involved are OPA90 financial limitations which limit fines to around $1000 per GT, "Notice of Arrival" requirements which may have been seen as privacy issues, and the rule that exempts recreational vessels "not engaged in trade" from inspection requirements. For non US readers, an "inspected vessel" is one that carries a USCG "Certificate of Inspection" and must meet a long list of construction and manning requirements.

The Act declared the tonnage to be less than 300. It is a common practice to facilitate the specific needs of well-connected constituents through those "private bills." The specific bill that"Deems a described vessel to be a recreational vessel of less than 300 gross tons." was tacked on to the law that funds the USCG.

Hi,

If you go faster than cruise it will be less , slower then it will be more.

You might well be surprised how much fuel can be saved by just dropping a few hundred rpm

Hi,

Marmot, I found this posted elsewhere on here.

Senate Bill S1004, 104th Congress (1996), 1st Session, Section 1121 states:

SEC. 1121. VESSEL DEEMED TO BE A RECREATIONAL VESSEL.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The vessel described in subsection (b) is deemed for all purposes, including title 46, United States Code, and all regulations thereunder, to be a recreational vessel of less than 300 gross tons, if—

(1) it does not carry cargo or passengers for hire; and
(2) it does not engage in commercial fisheries or oceanographic research.

(b) VESSEL DESCRIBED.—The vessel referred to in subsection (a) is an approximately 96 meter twin screw motor yacht, the construction of which commenced in October, 1993, and that has been assigned the builder’s number 13583 (to be named the LIMITLESS).

Sorry if I am confused but Limitless weighs a lot more than 300 tons. According to Superyachtintelligence she weighs in at 2,146 gross tons and 643 net tons.

Tonnage in this context is volume, not weight. It is a regulatory measure.

Make Google your friend and mentor.

Ah, at long last it is finally making sense thanks to yet another yachting fundamental rooted in drinking!

From Wikipedia:

Historically, tonnage was the tax on tuns (casks) of wine that held approximately 252 gallons of wine and weighed approximately 2,240 pounds. This suggests that the unit of weight measurement, long tons (also 2,240 lb) and tonnage both share the same etymology. The confusion between weight based terms (deadweight and displacement) stems from this common source and the eventual decision to assess dues based on a ship's deadweight rather than counting the tuns of wine. In 1720 the Builder's Old Measurement Rule was adopted to estimate deadweight from the length of keel and maximum breadth or beam of a ship. This overly simplistic system was replaced by the Moorsom System in 1854 and calculated internal volume, not weight. This system evolved into the current set of internationally accepted rules and regulations.

When steamships came into being, they could carry less cargo, size for size, than sailing ships. As well as spaces taken up by boilers and steam engines, steamships carried extra fresh water for the boilers as well as coal for the engines. Thus, to move the same volume of cargo as a sailing ship, a steamship would be considerably larger than a sailing ship.

"Harbour Dues" are based on tonnage. In order to prevent steamships operating at a disadvantage, various tonnage calculations were established to minimise the disadvantage that the extra space requirements of steamships presented. Rather than charging by length or displacement etc., charges were calculated on the viable cargo space. As commercial cargo sailing ships are now largely extinct, Gross Tonnage is becoming the universal method of calculating ships dues, and is also a more straightforward and transparent method of assessment.

She could have been transported using Dockside or some other similar company. Based on a standard $1K per foot, it would have cost about $280K or so. I wonder if that would be cheaper than having a crew make the Transatlantic crossing by themselves.

Hi,

Does that rate apply regardless of the beam of the vessel?

My guess is that there may be variances on that. Dockside's website has a worksheet for sailboats, motoryachts and catamarans you fill out to get a quote. I got the $1K number from one of the shows about yacht transport and from Rich Lazarra at the Lazarra blog. Supposedly Dockside has the capability to transport vessels up to about 540 ft or so. I'm guessing that something that large would have a beam rate multiplier involved.

Dockwise

I got a quote from Dockwise to transport a 103' long 20' wide 165.00 metric ton motor yacht from Florida to Italy for $121K or about $1,174.00 a foot. That included 3M of insurance with a 5K deductible.