Stern Engine rooms

[Neil2]

I've seen a couple of boats recently that have engine rooms right at the stern as opposed to the usual position in front of a boatmans cabin or bedroom.  I can't think of a good reason for this practice and such boats must surely be extremely noisy for the steerer.  Why would anyone want this arrangement?  is there a good reason for it?

 

 

[Hudds Lad]

I’ve seen one for sale like that, i just assumed whoever owned it had loved the engine so much they couldn’t bear having a room between them and it? It certainly gave lots of space for working on it and stacking the various spares, rags, oil etc.

[Tony Brooks]

21 minutes ago, Neil2 said:

I've seen a couple of boats recently that have engine rooms right at the stern as opposed to the usual position in front of a boatmans cabin or bedroom.  I can't think of a good reason for this practice and such boats must surely be extremely noisy for the steerer.  Why would anyone want this arrangement?  is there a good reason for it?

 

 

 

Not to sure what you mean, but it means you don't break up the accommodation  with the engine room and if it's a conventional "production" trad with modern engine you tend to get more accommodation for the length of hull. It also saves having the shaft needing a raised floor area.

[Hudds Lad]

https://www.apolloduck.com/boat/sm-hudson-57-traditional-for-sale/671370

 

like that?

[MtB]

43 minutes ago, Neil2 said:

I've seen a couple of boats recently that have engine rooms right at the stern as opposed to the usual position in front of a boatmans cabin or bedroom.  I can't think of a good reason for this practice and such boats must surely be extremely noisy for the steerer.  Why would anyone want this arrangement?  is there a good reason for it?

 

 

 

Yes. The inexperience of the person instructing the builder and paying for the work.

 

[Tracy D'arth]

My engine room is hard faced, even petulant but I never let it get stern. 

[Tony Brooks]

56 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

https://www.apolloduck.com/boat/sm-hudson-57-traditional-for-sale/671370

 

like that?

In my view, a waste of space.

[Neil2]

1 hour ago, Hudds Lad said:

https://www.apolloduck.com/boat/sm-hudson-57-traditional-for-sale/671370

 

like that?

 

Yep, that was one of them - ear defenders compulsory surely?

[MtB]

14 minutes ago, Neil2 said:

 

Yep, that was one of them - ear defenders compulsory surely?

 

Yes, ear defenders mandatory. Noisier even than having the motive lump under boards under your feet, I would imagine.

 

What is really weird though, is putting a solid fuel stove in that back cabin engine room! As if it won't be hot enough in there with the engine running! 

[Graham Davis]

Why would that be any m ore noisy than an engine under the rear decks?

[Ray T]

This little boat has the engine at the back. The engine room is however sealed off from the rest of the boat.

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:

In my view, a waste of space.

There's almost enough room behind that engine to fit a proper back cabin!

To my mind its neither one thing nor t'other.

[MtB]

7 hours ago, Ray T said:

This little boat has the engine at the back. The engine room is however sealed off from the rest of the boat.

 

 

That looks to me like a normal 'under-floor' engine installation in a trad stern boat. The just haven't constructed a floor over the engine yet, or a step to stand on whilst steering. Or a tiller! 

 

As it is in the photo, with nothing separating the engine noise from the steerer, this boat will be unpleasantly loud for the steerer, and jolly dangerous too should the steerer instinctively step into the hatches whilst steering. 

[frangar]

7 hours ago, David Mack said:

There's almost enough room behind that engine to fit a proper back cabin!

To my mind its neither one thing nor t'other.

It not even an interesting engine!  Bit of a missed opportunity I think. 

[Captain Pegg]

Vulpes has the engine mounted in the swim at the rear. The cabin steps and engine take up 5’ at the rear of a 24’ cabin with the gearbox positioned beneath the steps.

 

The inner 2’ of that space also houses the mezzanine consisting of a bunk bed where the occupant sleeps with their feet little more than 6” above the engine.

 

It most definitely saves a lot of space and it’s very clear that if the engine was mounted amidships then the headroom in a back cabin would be very restricted.

 

Falling on to the engine isn’t really possible since the rear of the bed cabin prevents that. It’s also not as noisy as steering a boat with a conventional engine room with an air cooled Lister with stove pipe exhaust a few feet in front of your head.

 

I can’t see that it’s a less logical arrangement than keeping a ‘traditionally’ located engine room on a leisure boat.

 

[frangar]

I have to say I love my engine room and back cabin. We liveaboard and cruise a fair bit. The engine room has many guises….drying room…workshop…utility room…somewhere dry for engine maintenance…

 

and there’s nothing like being tucked up in bed in a back cabin with the rain hammering on the slide or the snow coming down  and the range ticking over….and in summer sleeping with the slide cracked open and the dawn sun shining in. 
 

Being only a 50ft boat it’s our only “bedroom” but been more than happy with the arrangement for the last 29 years! 

[Neil2]

If you look at that Hudson the photo of the engine room shows the JD3 well forward, much further forward than a normal under deck trad engine would be.  This is the arrangement I'm talking about, not one where there just isn't a deck over the engine, but there could be.

 

I can see why someone would do it, as it markedly improves engine access which is often the achilles heel on many trads.  But these boats must be unbearably noisy with the engine just a few feet away.  

 

So the question is if you want that all round access why not solve the noise issue by positioning the engine room further forward which is what most do.  

 

I keep thinking is there an actual space saving with the engine right at the back.  That Hudson is "only" 57 foot so I wonder if it's in theory a better use of space.  There's the issue of the prop shaft running through the back cabin but unless the person who commissioned the boat was unusually tall I can't see that outweighing other considerations.  

 

On the plus side, in today's market a 57 foot Hudson at £65k is a bargain - provided you already have a hearing impairment.

 

[Neil2]

11 minutes ago, frangar said:

I have to say I love my engine room and back cabin. We liveaboard and cruise a fair bit. The engine room has many guises….drying room…workshop…utility room…somewhere dry for engine maintenance…

 

and there’s nothing like being tucked up in bed in a back cabin with the rain hammering on the slide or the snow coming down  and the range ticking over….and in summer sleeping with the slide cracked open and the dawn sun shining in. 
 

Being only a 50ft boat it’s our only “bedroom” but been more than happy with the arrangement for the last 29 years! 

 

I know a couple who have a 45' boat with a "proper" engine room and a similar arrangement.  Space is really at a premium on that boat but it is a beautiful old style Colecraft in immaculate condition and I would buy it tomorrow if he ever decided to sell it. 

[Tonka]

5 minutes ago, Neil2 said:

If you look at that Hudson the photo of the engine room shows the JD3 well forward, much further forward than a normal under deck trad engine would be.  This is the arrangement I'm talking about, not one where there just isn't a deck over the engine, but there could be.

 

I can see why someone would do it, as it markedly improves engine access which is often the achilles heel on many trads.  But these boats must be unbearably noisy with the engine just a few feet away.  

 

So the question is if you want that all round access why not solve the noise issue by positioning the engine room further forward which is what most do.  

 

I keep thinking is there an actual space saving with the engine right at the back.  That Hudson is "only" 57 foot so I wonder if it's in theory a better use of space.  There's the issue of the prop shaft running through the back cabin but unless the person who commissioned the boat was unusually tall I can't see that outweighing other considerations.  

 

On the plus side, in today's market a 57 foot Hudson at £65k is a bargain - provided you already have a hearing impairment.

 

Why have a long prop shaft. Surely you could fit hydraulic drive. I believe the 70 ft Janus has this arrangement

[Tonka]

We had a 60 ft working boat which had reverse layout I.e the engine hole was the kitchen and where the boatman's cabin should of been was where the Petter PD2 was. It was in the process of being built when the builder who also owned "the boat and butty co" at Runcorn found out that they had a full season booked on the self steer camper but no boat. So they changed the design to suit campers

[ditchcrawler]

2 hours ago, Tonka said:

Why have a long prop shaft. Surely you could fit hydraulic drive. I believe the 70 ft Janus has this arrangement

Which is what I have, just so I have the headroom in the back cabin. I  am not overly tall but have had back problems for the past 30 odd years. So I can stand up straight when in the cabin or walking through. Same reason I have a pumpout toilet, I couldn't be removing and emptying cassettes on a regular basis 

[Tonka]

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

Which is what I have, just so I have the headroom in the back cabin. I  am not overly tall but have had back problems for the past 30 odd years. So I can stand up straight when in the cabin or walking through. Same reason I have a pumpout toilet, I couldn't be removing and emptying cassettes on a regular basis 

Forgot about yours, sorry

[Ray T]

I forget which ex working boat this is but it has an engine in the back cabin.

This is not a normal 'under-floor', yet to be completed engine installation in a trad stern boat.  It does have a step to stand on whilst steering and a tiller!

 

Photo's taken at Alvecote gathering 2014

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, Tonka said:

Forgot about yours, sorry

Not a problem, I don't expect people to remember. It was the only reason I did it that way. I bought an engine without a gearbox so probably cost and extra £2000 or so to do

[Rob-M]

Nansen has the engine at the back end of the cabin, originally it had a mid wheelhouse so I presume the engine was behind the wheelhouse.  You can see the gear lever on the right of the steerers step. It is very noisy when steering.