@@ExpeditionYachts I'm Japanese and dated a guy that was Japanese, but born in Norway. He was in the Norwegian navy, so I got to see and be around many Norwegian vessels, and I was always VERY impressed!
If the navy wants to scrap the Independence Class littoral trimaran, then that is my perfect vessel. It is even based on a conceptual paradigm of mine from 2003, provided the consumption isn't over 100 GPH or if the turbines can be replaced with conventional engines and props.
Great specs for an Exploration superyacht...start imagining a combination of: Ragnar x OceanXplorer ......let's pack her with; Lab+ Submersibles+ Amphibious vehicles/ Tenders+ Onboard hangar+ ROV crane+ Bespoke Statetoom
We purchased in-class vessel at a very good price. It is being converted at a commercial shipyard to expedition yacht standards. As this is a private client, I can not share costs. However, given that prices on all these ships has risen in last 3-years due to charter demand, we could probably do a a similar conversion today for $15-20 million (including vessel purchase), with boutique cruise ship interior, not glitzy 'yacht'.
I want an expedition yacht. I've made the explicit statement, so that you doubt my intent. I'd, first, explain my rationale for it, and, subsequently, my needs, so we can modify the needs based on the rationale to modify the dimensions into a workable solution. As far as exploration is concerned, the Garcia 60 Exploration Yacht, with a centerboard, fulfills my needs for economic exploration, so I don't need another yacht for mere exploration. I, primarily, want the expedition yacht to be able to carry a helicopter and an amphibious vehicle, so I can explore the shores from yacht. Most important of all, I want to be able to preferably carry an amphibious aircraft and, if it is unable to do so, to at least refuel it. We all know that fears are irrational, but we still need them addressed for our peace-of-mind, regardless of how ludicrous they may sound, so let's not debate the irrationality of my fears, but, instead, work on decisively addressing them. My fear is that of sinking in the ocean, either because of a freak wave caused by an unexpected tsunami or by a storm that I'm unable to evade in time. I also don't want my expeditions to be captive to fair-weather or, for me, to not be able to access medical services in an emergency. This is where the rationale for an amphibious aircraft is my overarching concern. I've perused through all kinds of amphibious aircraft, but the only one that can land in the open sea is the Grumman Albatross whose length of 63 feet turns into a problem because most economical vessels don't have such large beams. Unless, I can carry this peculiar aircraft, I'd rather not carry any aircraft at all because the others can either not handle open seas or, else, are single engine. If I can't carry it onboard, I'd still want it to be able to fly in to rescue me, for which I'd need to refuel it. Aside from this, I'd want the vessel to have twin engines, twin rudders, and a substantial draft to survive the worst sea-states. I don't want to break ice with it, but want to survive impact with floating ice and debris(containers). I'd want the saloon to be extravagant, the fly-bridge to be small( so as not to disturb the center-of-gravity in the event of a massive storm), the sun-deck and sky-lounge to be comfortable and( if possible, even extravagant), my office/library to double as a small hospital, my owner's suite to be luxurious, and the other 5 guest suites to be comfortable. I'd want it to not consume more than 60 to 100 GPH on a stable cruise, but I don't care how much it consumes in the event of a storm, so wouldn't mind backup power. I don't care if its diesel-electric or shaft-driven. I also don't care if it has an x-bow or a traditional flared bow, but I don't want an axe-bow vessel. Finally, I don't want it to be a White Elephant; I want to be able to charter it to earn an income and to also eventually sell it, so I'm willing to depart rom my own needs for a practical vessel. I want it be practical, like the Seawolf and Ithasca, so it lives on for hundreds of years and doesn't end up in a scrapyard because no buyer can afford to operate it. Here is a look at the Albatross: www.jpflyingservice.com/a-wandering-albatross/w
re -- tsunami As I understand the process, a tsunami is destructive near-shore and ashore. Off-shore, is a tsunami barely noticed as merely another in an endless series of waves?
That is when running at speed. Less burn than a large sportfishing yacht. On station engines are near idle. Also keep in mind that they transport up to 300 survivors.
