Return to the Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping home page
Copyright © Boatnerd.com All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Terms of use Instructions/FAQ
[
Post a Reply
| Next
| Previous
| Up
]
From: Chuck
Location: Dexter, MI
email:
Remote Name: 69.7.217.24
Date: 05.31.08
Time: 01:24:27 AM
My guess is that different hull forms contribute to the different midsummer draft cargo capacities between the Beeghly and Tregurtha. I'm basing this statement on a couple of data points. (1) Even though the depth of the LAT's hull is 1' 06" greater than the CMB, the LAT's midsummer draft is 5" less, which means that she needs more freeboard to be "safe" and would contribute to reduced carrying capacity at midsummer draft. (2) For a given hull cross-section, a greater percentage of the CMB's length is comprised of cargo hold space. While both boats have 5 holds, the CMB has 25 hatches vs 24 hatches on the LAT; with constant hatch width / spacing, this would give the CMB an extra 24' of longitudinal cargo hold capacity. (3) Visually, if you look at aerial pictures of both boats, the forward house on the LAT appears to take up more hull length than does the forward house on the CMB. (4) When the LAT was converted, her beam was increased by 7' and her depth by 2'. To merge the new midbody to the original bow / stern, the hull would have to be faired / smoothed to get to her new dimensions; this would result in reduced carrying capacity in the transition areas. Visually, this can best be seen when you compare the bow sections between the two boats; on the LAT, for example, the forward cargo hold does not appear to be at max beam for the first few hatches. Anyway, my thoughts after looking at the pictures / write ups for each boat in the Fleet section.
Return
to the Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping home page
Copyright © Boatnerd.com All
Rights Reserved.
This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Terms of use
Instructions/FAQ