This Can't Be a Good Design

In one of the other videos it looked like there were two 55gal drums full of (water?) sitting in the center of the cockpit. Maybe testing to see what it would take to make it float on it's lines with the additional flotation of the cockpit extension?

I guess you could put a bunch of lifting strakes on the bow and some spray rails but it seems you would still have the same problems at low speed.

I wonder what they ended up doing with it? I still think smaller, lighter engines to take weight out and reduce speed (since it obviously does not like speed), sell it as a trawler and start over.

Maybe donate it to a Thai government official? ;-)
hmm video said Thailand but should be Taiwan...

Hey!!! That's my girl ya talkin' about!

Hi ThirdHatt, enjoy your posts here & the other forum. Mate, as you say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder!
Imagine if we all liked only the same designs! Poor Tom Fexas would never have got that beauty in your avatar off the drawing board or brought us all those designs (Midnight etc), Krogen would never have sold a "Whale Back" & Carver & Bayliner (Holy cr@p!!!) would not have been responsible for introducing so many people to their first boats!
Not too mention all those fathers never getting to walk their "Beauties" down the isle to a love blind groom, and vice versa!
The Nordhavn "floats my boat" but then, so does the Hatt 53!

Expedition Yacht Fisher

Do keep in mind that the “E” in the Nordhavn 75EYF stands for Expedition Yacht Fisher. She is not your typical battlewagon that runs at 30 to 40 knots, but instead is designed to take you out to where the fishing grounds are a little less overrun given her 3,000 nautical mile range. She is fitted with hydraulic stabilizers and is designed for around the world cruising. So the looks are a little different than most other tournament boats, but then so is the concept behind her design.

good points, but i think i draw the line at Carver's Mariners! makes the Whaleback look elegant.

I am with you on the Carver Mariners. We call them 'the orthopedic shoe"
Although here lately I think Cruiser's Inc has them beat. (think "520 sports coupe") ;-)

What an awesome line!
"I told you, you're flooding the lazarette!!"

The video is of no surprise to me including the comments on it! My Symbol Yacht cockpit also floods in seas over a metre aft of beam, my boat is designed for slower speeds 9-10 knots, the water is picked up by the swim platform and climbs up the transom steps. The good news is when I first discovered it my hatch was locked down, the bad news was the seals were in the wrong place!! So much for quality standard ISO 9001.

Where to now Take Five?
By your own publication of the problems with Symbol, your resale is a no go, luckily for the next buyer, but you are stuck with it? It has been a while yet Symbol are still in business I notice and that rankles me considering you have some serious safety issues on your vessel, not just cosmetic.
Bad situation!

"Well at least we've got some weight in the ass end!"

Next they'll try and sell it as an adjustable ballast feature.

[QUOTE='roundthehorn]Do keep in mind that the “E” in the Nordhavn 75EYF stands for Expedition Yacht Fisher. She is not your typical battlewagon that runs at 30 to 40 knots, but instead is designed to take you out to where the fishing grounds are a little less overrun given her 3,000 nautical mile range. She is fitted with hydraulic stabilizers and is designed for around the world cruising. So the looks are a little different than most other tournament boats, but then so is the concept behind her design.[/QUOTE]

I completely respect the "Expedition" in the design. My comment was directed at the styling, not the overall design. The little windows on the lower deck facing fwd look awkward in my opinion. Removing those and sloping that edge forward could have given a more sleek exterior appearance that is more "sportfish" while also eliminating the risk of busting out windows when the bow gets stuffed into a wave hard. I am no expert in design by any stretch of the imagination but it just seems to me that the superstructure could have been designed to be a bit more visually appealing. Just my opinion, to each his own.

I was one of those who was blown away by the concept when they started advertising in the magazines and I could not wait for the boat to be built. For two years all I could find online was computer renderings. I went to the Ft. Lauderdale show to see her and was sad to learn that the boat did not make it to her debut, and I believe it was postponed until the Miami show. I saw the blue hull '09 75EYF for sale last year in Ft. Lauderdale and I was just not as impressed standing there seeing her in person as I had hoped to be although I have no doubt that she is incredible at what she was designed to do.

I've dealt with ISO certification on multiple occasions, admittedly not in maritime industry (heavy machinery and FMCG, if anyone cares), and I can give it to you first-hand that it is, well, maybe not exactly "nothing" but clearly nothing special.

No certification is capable of keeping up with a rather fluent comings and goings of an ongoing manufacturing, that's not even talking about "ill will" situations such as a special one-time "buckling up" for a pass - and those are common enough. Keep in mind that ISO 9k is not about end product quality, it is about some formalized business processes (which at least in one case I witnessed were actually inferior to the non-certified organization).

Bottom line, provided you have no other input about a manufacturer, ISO 9k-family certificate conveys exactly zero information about end product quality to you as a customer, despite what they'd like to imply.

Hi,

That is a very true and accurate statement.

I have found a well known company that has attained an ISO 9xxx Accreditation and now sits on it's laurels always claiming to have robust QC Systems and procedures in place but never being able to demonstrate them actually being used on the job.

Many see the ISO Certificate hanging on the wall as sign of good practices in all aspects of the operation.

The case presented to get the initial accreditation might well be done with the best will in the world but if the drive and determination is not there amongst the hierarchy and supervisors then the paper is not worth the frame it is usually mounted in.

What I learned while dealing with ISO inspectors and standards is that it means almost nothing. I used to think it was the difference between a reputable company with a not so reputable company.

It just means you produce a consistent product. As one inspector explained on my first audit: You can get ISO certified for producing a turd. You just have to produce the same turd consistently. Time after time.

Ass has been said before, it means nothing other than some other person is going to have the same problems.

Yep, that quite sums up the common misconception about ISO 9k family standarts - I referred to this as "what they'd like to imply".

I wouldnt call hard words on this, let's just call it a "running gag": certified companies keep misrepresenting their certificate as if it is some sort of guarantee and telling good signs about their products, ISO - the organization - says no word about it because it encourages more companies to seek the certificate (and pay for all the associated services). Everyone's happy!

Keep in mind that as of today, ISO certification carries a very noticeable price tag, which could well buy you a custom business process optimization tailored for your specific needs; to compete, ISO needs some kind of "brand recognition", which the misconceptions above reinforce.

If there is a successive approximation of truth here, this is the next step. However, again not the last.

What ISO 9k does is certifies that there are certain formalized and standart processes in place. Period. That applying standartized manufacturing processes should result in a consistent outcome is again an implied consequence (I believe it's stated somewhere in the papers, but it is NOT what the work is being done on). This cause and effect might seem natural to those who hadn't been to a real plant, but those who had will quickly notice how standartizing inherently dispersive variables (workforce qualification, metal casting and hand-wielding etc) could perform worse then more "per case" approaches.

To illustrate the above example, you can standartize the diet, the bowel configuration and QC post, and get your ISO 9xxx for that, but I guess it's no rocket science to figure that mother nature will sneak some dispersion in the resulting turd nontheless.

Truth to be told, in my almost 10 years of consulting experience in various field, I'm yet to see a single certificate or standart in any industry (and i've been to many) that reliably delivers on the expressed or implied promise of "quality". If the company is upright, no three letters will affect the quality of their product, and the same for companies of the lesser sort.

A friend and collegue of mine just gave this very nice example: ISO 9k compares nicely with "X for dummies" books. It can and will elevate your garage mess (of business or knowlege, respectfully) up to the point of basic competence, so it would be soundly unfair to call it "nothing". (Even when I'd say there are other ways to achieve same result, some of them better)
For a basically competent, both things could still be useful as a *checklist*, but probably not paying out already. For those who do know checklists already, both are of no help.

I have spent over $250,000 and over 12 months of my life rectifying the issues on my boat which is now completely compliant and safe. I have even improved the boat along the way and made the necessary modifications to overcome the cockpit problem, I would not sell nor attempted to sell the boat the way it was.

If the value of my boat and other Symbols has been affected by this, then that is a matter for Symbol, I am the messenger not the cause.

What I have found offensive and despicable in this whole saga is that there was an ongoing reliance on the fact that owners would not talk about the problems as they are concerned about devaluing their boats and the effect on the resale.

Had someone spoken up before me I would not be in the position I found myself in.

“All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (Edmund Burke)