“The one over the­re is a Pe­ri­ni. I am su­re!”

Superyacht - - PERINI NAVI -

its real va­lue is that it of­fers a wor­king plat­form on­to whi­ch you can de­ve­lop mu­ch of that li­ne of pro­duc­ts whi­ch is un­de­nia­bly fai­th­ful to Pe­ri­ni’s phi­lo­so­phy star­ting wi­th: the 25 me­tre Eco ten­der to the 92 me­tres of the su­pe­rya­cht whi­ch ha­ven’t as yet been sho­wn to eve­ryo­ne in as mu­ch as it may be, at this sta­ge a lit­tle too ra­di­cal. In fact when Lam­ber­to Ta­co­li saw the de­si­gn work he ex­clai­med: “but this is a sai­ling boat!”. A mo­to­rya­cht that looks li­ke a sai­ling one: that mu­st su­re­ly cau­se a few pro­blems in terms of vo­lu­me. Well not so mu­ch. We’ve no­ti­ced the mo­re Pe­ri­ni sai­ling ya­ch­ts get lon­ger, the mo­re they pos­sess the sort of vo­lu­mes fea­tu­red on mo­to­rya­ch­ts of the sa­me si­ze. Let’s con­si­der the 92 me­tre we’re tal­king about. It’s got a 15 me­tre beam and a gross ton­na­ge of 2,250to­na. Well a mo­to­rya­cht of rou­ghly the sa­me leng­th – for exam­ple, Lurs­sen’s Phoe­nix 2 is 90 me­tres long wi­th a beam of 14 wi­th a vo­lu­me whi­ch is equal to 2,600 gross tons, can we say the dif­fe­ren­ce is enor­mous? Ob­viou­sly we can’t. Ho­we­ver I would li­ke to mo­ve away from the lo­gic of gross ton­na­ge whi­ch is a unit of mea­su­re wi­de­ly de­ployed by bro­kers by way of ne­go­tia­ting the pri­ce of their boa­ts, but from a client’s view point spe­cial­ly the new ge­ne­ra­tion the­re’s ve­ry lit­tle in­te­re­st in that. In fact the ma­jo­ri­ty don’t know what it is. Their re­fe­ren­ce point is leng­th. No­thing el­se. Per­so­nal­ly if we should speak about com­fort in prac­ti­cal terms, I’d li­ke to re­call Mr Agnel­li’s exam­ple. What is it? Gian­ni Agnel­li real­ly en­joyed sai­ling: when he wan­ted amu­se­ment and fun he’d sail Steal­th; when he wan­ted to go so­mewhe­re el­se or ta­ke it ea­sy he’d turn to the F100. The two boa­ts would crui­se mo­re or el­se to­ge­ther and when in port they would ber­th along­si­de of ea­ch other. In other words one be­ca­me the ex­ten­sion of the other whi­le of­fe­ring the ow­ner the pos­si­bi­li­ty to choo­se ti­me af­ter ti­me what to do, whe­re to go. One the ex­ten­sion of the other? Well that’s a de­fi­ni­tion whi­ch real­ly en­lar­ges by any­bo­dy’s stan­dard, the con­cept of mo­ther-ship and cha­se boat doe­sn’t it. Yes it does, but it’s not mi­ne. It be­longs to a client of ours wi­th whom in 2017 I di­scus­sed the pos­si­bi­li­ty of swit­ching to a Pe­ri­ni sai­ling ya­cht whi­ch was lon­ger. At a cer­tain point, af­ter a lit­tle pau­se the gen­tle­man I had been tal­king to said: “No, I’m so in lo­ve wi­th my boat I will ne­ver sell her. I bought her when my chil­dren we­re me­re kids. The­re was my wi­fe. I real­ly don’t want to do wi­thout. Any­way to­day my needs are dif­fe­rent, I need an ex­ten­sion. I want a 25 me­tre boat whi­ch looks li­ke the one I ha­ve, sa­me fi­ni­shes, and when I ha­ve “X” num­ber of ex­tra guests on board, I want to be able to put them up wi­th plen­ty of pri­va­cy. Fur­ther­mo­re I want that the main deck of bo­th ya­ch­ts be exac­tly at the sa­me height so that it is pos­si­ble for me to go from one to the other wi­thout ha­ving to go do­wn or up... stairs”. And that is how the pro­ject de­si­gn of a 25 me­tre ca­me to be, the one he calls ten­der not cha­se boat. De­li­ve­ry is sche­du­led for mar­ch 2019.

A con­cept that clear­ly lif­ts a fin­ger in fa­vour of prac­ti­ca­li­ty and amu­se­ment. But is it doa­ble and fi­nan­cial­ly spea­king co­st ef­fec­ti­ve? In this ca­se too you ha­ve to go beyond ap­pea­ran­ces and do so­me ari­th­me­tic. If I we­re to of­fer a 60 me­tre sai­ling ya­cht wi­th a GRT of 500 tons for 40-43 mil­lion Eu­ro, plus a mo­to­rya­cht of 350 GRT at about 20 mil­lion Eu­ro, the to­tal is around the 60 mil­lion mark for two ya­ch­ts, whi­ch when poo­led to­ge­ther; of­fer a he­li­pad, 4 ten­ders , plus mo­re ca­bins and so on. A sin­gle ya­cht wi­th the sa­me vo­lu­mes, the sa­me quan­ti­ty of things pur­cha­sed from a nor­th Eu­ro­pean Shi­pyard can co­st a lot mo­re. And it will cer­tain­ly not of­fer the sa­me fle­xi­bi­li­ty of use. The­re­fo­re we can talk about what is al­so mo­re con­ve­nient. I ha­ve to say this idea is cat­chy. We’re no lon­ger loo­king at iso­la­ted ca­ses any mo­re. The­re’s al­so a lot of gro­wing in­te­re­st for elec­tric pro­pul­sion. You seem to be ve­ry ac­ti­ve in this field too. Let me say that we’re al­so try­ing to stay ahead of things all the ti­me and in the ca­se of mul­ti mo­de elec­tric, se­mi-elec­tric sy­stems we’re doing the sa­me. In fact in 2015 our Gra­ce E won the World Su­pe­rya­cht award. In that spe­ci­fic ca­se it was a die­sel-elec­tric for­mat that links to a pair of Azi­pods: it is a ve­ry so­phi­sti­ca­ted sy­stem and an ex­pen­si­ve one too that mu­st be hand­led in a dif­fe­rent way than is do­ne wi­th con­ven­tio­nal die­sels, spe­cial­ly when ma­noeu­vring, ma­ny crews don’t li­ke it. And this is wi­thout con­si­de­ring that our blue wa­ter crui­sing clien­ts and our ya­ch­ts are well sui­ted to cross oceans can in­cur in tou­ching the bot­tom wi­th a pro­pel­ler may­be in Co­sta Ri­ca and will ha­ve to wait for a spa­re whi­ch will rea­ch them in a nor­mal lap­se of ti­me and that is not the ca­se for Azi­pods. So we’re bet­ter in­cli­ned to die­sel-elec­tric so­lu­tions wi­th ‘in li­ne’ shaf­ts whe­re the­re is no ex­tra co­st, and it al­lo­ws us to ‘de­lo­ca­li­ze’ the en­gi­ne room that can be hand­led li­ke a tra­di­tio­nal sy­stem. It is no coin­ci­den­ce that the­se sa­me prin­ci­ples con­cer­ning re­lia­bi­li­ty that are al­so mo­re

Pe­ri­ni 25 M Eco Ten­der

Pe­ri­ni 45 M

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Italy

© PressReader. All rights reserved.