Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #112   Report Post  
Wayne.B
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:38:16 GMT, "Denis Marier"
wrote:

This statement makes sense. I got involved with my 27' sailboat in 40 foot
waves.


=========================================

I don't think there's a boat of ANY size that will be comfortable in
those conditions. My original statement was made in regard to the
routine 6 to 8 foot waves that are found all of the time in offshore
conditions. It doesn't take a storm, just steady 20 knot winds. Most
small boats turn into a rain forest on a pogo stick after a few days
of beating into that. I have been on a well made 48 footer that
wasn't much better, and on a 50 footer that was taking green water
over the deck every 7 or 8 waves. Not storm conditions, just normal
waves in average windy weather, the kind that you get with every
frontal passage. Most coastal cruisers have no idea what it's like to
do that for 2 or 3 days in a row, sailing around the clock. It's
tough on the equipment and tough on the people.

  #113   Report Post  
rhys
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:38:16 GMT, "Denis Marier"
wrote:

'smaller boat can be safer in the sense that a compact cabin doesn't have a
lot of room to fall in the case of a knockdown, and usually has handholds
everywhere.'
This statement makes sense. I got involved with my 27' sailboat in 40 foot
waves. My wife and I were unable to remain inside the cabin. First thing,
the boat has to be steered up and down the crests. The boat was not the
problem. It's me that was the problem. I was throwing up most of the time
and could not hold any food or liquid. I was tied to the cockpit with a
plastic bucket between my legs. Most sailboats will survive a severe storm
it's the human that can't.


This is basically my point: the crew, not the boat, is the weak link.
That's been proven for years, is case-studied in books like "Heavy
Weather Sailing", and is found in the old saying: "don't leave the
boat until you have to step up into the life raft".

Recall the Westsail 32 of the "Perfect Storm"...the real story is
interesting in that the skipper who wanted to stay with the boat fared
worse in the rescue than the boat...which safely grounded itself!

See http://world.std.com/~kent/satori/ if you haven't heard this. It's
a perfect example of how the right boat and the right sailor can
weather (potentially) even the most hellish storms. Of course, if you
get killed by a rogue wave, it's your time to go, but a well-sailed
smaller boat of certain qualities will give you that much more of a
fighting chance than a different (NOT better or worse, note) type that
will tend to exhaust and sicken its crew in a lumpy seaway.

Westsail 32s, Contessas and the like are great seagoing boats that
few current sailors would find comfortable, but I would gladly cross
an ocean in them because of their great track record as "survival
boats" that "take care" of their skippers in a way a lot of newer
designs can't do, because they are faster, bigger, have a Jacuzzi and
a garage for the Zodiac, etc.... I like steel cutters and ketches made
for the North Sea for the same reason...not fast, but easier sailing
in waves and can sustain a lot of punishment.

Read the post-war early cruising stories. Not only were most of those
boats wooden, they were 30 feet or less (Wanderer II and III and the
Roths, Pardeys and so on come to mind), had oil lamps, canvas sails,
hank-ons, wooden masts and a compass and sextant. Maybe the
best-equipped would have a battery radio (receive only!), and three,
instead of two, small one-speed winches.

Typically, they would self-steer, and rigged twin headsails for
downwind work. All pumping was manual, and if they had inboards, they
were one-cylinder gas or paraffin engines or heavy diesels that might
give four knots in a flat sea.

They would be narrow, deep and dark below, because lots of light meant
lots of places for water to get in, and that meant more pumping. On
the up side, they might feature carpets, bookshelves and small
fireplaces to make everything snug.


I have the impression that if my boat would have
been larger I would not have been able to go up and down the 40 foot waves.
That does not mean that I do not want a larger boat!


As do we all, but like anything else, there's a tradeoff. I have
decided personally to restrict my "dream boat for world cruising"
search to the 38 to 45 foot range, because less is too small for
stores and one wife and one kid plus me and a workbench G and 45
feet is about the limit for sail handling without complex mechanical
aids. Even then, I would prefer a split yawl or ketch rig so I
wouldn't need a monster main or genoa.,,and I believe (currently) 45
feet is my limit. If my wife was six feet tall instead of five feet, I
might go 50 feet, but she's unlikely to grow now!

R.
  #114   Report Post  
Denis Marier
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

"don't leave the boat until you have to step up into the life raft".
If my memory if correct when I read the book about the Fastnet Race. Some
crewmen were left for dead on board sailboats while others stepped in life
rafts. When the abandon boats were checked after the storm.
Un-conscientious crewmen were found badly wounded but still alive. The
other thing is when more than 1-2 people start to vomit in a life raft its
no joke. Taking see sickness pills before the going gets too bad or
stepping up into a life raft is not a bad idea. Now days, where the water
is cool, the use of survival suits is getting more popular.




"rhys" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:38:16 GMT, "Denis Marier"
wrote:

'smaller boat can be safer in the sense that a compact cabin doesn't have

a
lot of room to fall in the case of a knockdown, and usually has handholds
everywhere.'
This statement makes sense. I got involved with my 27' sailboat in 40

foot
waves. My wife and I were unable to remain inside the cabin. First thing,
the boat has to be steered up and down the crests. The boat was not the
problem. It's me that was the problem. I was throwing up most of the time
and could not hold any food or liquid. I was tied to the cockpit with a
plastic bucket between my legs. Most sailboats will survive a severe

storm
it's the human that can't.


This is basically my point: the crew, not the boat, is the weak link.
That's been proven for years, is case-studied in books like "Heavy
Weather Sailing", and is found in the old saying: "don't leave the
boat until you have to step up into the life raft".

Recall the Westsail 32 of the "Perfect Storm"...the real story is
interesting in that the skipper who wanted to stay with the boat fared
worse in the rescue than the boat...which safely grounded itself!

See http://world.std.com/~kent/satori/ if you haven't heard this. It's
a perfect example of how the right boat and the right sailor can
weather (potentially) even the most hellish storms. Of course, if you
get killed by a rogue wave, it's your time to go, but a well-sailed
smaller boat of certain qualities will give you that much more of a
fighting chance than a different (NOT better or worse, note) type that
will tend to exhaust and sicken its crew in a lumpy seaway.

Westsail 32s, Contessas and the like are great seagoing boats that
few current sailors would find comfortable, but I would gladly cross
an ocean in them because of their great track record as "survival
boats" that "take care" of their skippers in a way a lot of newer
designs can't do, because they are faster, bigger, have a Jacuzzi and
a garage for the Zodiac, etc.... I like steel cutters and ketches made
for the North Sea for the same reason...not fast, but easier sailing
in waves and can sustain a lot of punishment.

Read the post-war early cruising stories. Not only were most of those
boats wooden, they were 30 feet or less (Wanderer II and III and the
Roths, Pardeys and so on come to mind), had oil lamps, canvas sails,
hank-ons, wooden masts and a compass and sextant. Maybe the
best-equipped would have a battery radio (receive only!), and three,
instead of two, small one-speed winches.

Typically, they would self-steer, and rigged twin headsails for
downwind work. All pumping was manual, and if they had inboards, they
were one-cylinder gas or paraffin engines or heavy diesels that might
give four knots in a flat sea.

They would be narrow, deep and dark below, because lots of light meant
lots of places for water to get in, and that meant more pumping. On
the up side, they might feature carpets, bookshelves and small
fireplaces to make everything snug.


I have the impression that if my boat would have
been larger I would not have been able to go up and down the 40 foot

waves.
That does not mean that I do not want a larger boat!


As do we all, but like anything else, there's a tradeoff. I have
decided personally to restrict my "dream boat for world cruising"
search to the 38 to 45 foot range, because less is too small for
stores and one wife and one kid plus me and a workbench G and 45
feet is about the limit for sail handling without complex mechanical
aids. Even then, I would prefer a split yawl or ketch rig so I
wouldn't need a monster main or genoa.,,and I believe (currently) 45
feet is my limit. If my wife was six feet tall instead of five feet, I
might go 50 feet, but she's unlikely to grow now!

R.



  #115   Report Post  
JAXAshby
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

I would not take a Nimrod 36 to sea.

Wayne, a Bristol 27 will be far more comfortable at sea than a Nimrod 36.


================================================= ==========

You may be right Jax because I have no experience wiith either. I'd
suggest you spend a week on each one beating to weather in the open
ocean and then give us a full report on your findings.











  #116   Report Post  
JAXAshby
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

if you are getting beat up in 20 knot winds at sea you have picked the wrong
boat to go to sea on.

This statement makes sense. I got involved with my 27' sailboat in 40 foot
waves.


=========================================

I don't think there's a boat of ANY size that will be comfortable in
those conditions. My original statement was made in regard to the
routine 6 to 8 foot waves that are found all of the time in offshore
conditions. It doesn't take a storm, just steady 20 knot winds. Most
small boats turn into a rain forest on a pogo stick after a few days
of beating into that. I have been on a well made 48 footer that
wasn't much better, and on a 50 footer that was taking green water
over the deck every 7 or 8 waves. Not storm conditions, just normal
waves in average windy weather, the kind that you get with every
frontal passage. Most coastal cruisers have no idea what it's like to
do that for 2 or 3 days in a row, sailing around the clock. It's
tough on the equipment and tough on the people.









  #118   Report Post  
Wayne.B
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:33:20 -0500, rhys wrote:

Typically, they would self-steer, and rigged twin headsails for
downwind work. All pumping was manual, and if they had inboards, they
were one-cylinder gas or paraffin engines or heavy diesels that might
give four knots in a flat sea.


=================================================

Also typically, they would plan their route to be exclusively downwind
because the boats they were on were almost incapable of meaningful
work to weather, and even if they could have, conditions would have
been hell on board.

  #119   Report Post  
DSK
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

"Denis Marier" wrote:
'smaller boat can be safer in the sense that a compact cabin doesn't have a
lot of room to fall in the case of a knockdown, and usually has handholds
everywhere.'
This statement makes sense. I got involved with my 27' sailboat in 40 foot
waves. My wife and I were unable to remain inside the cabin. First thing,
the boat has to be steered up and down the crests. The boat was not the
problem. It's me that was the problem. I was throwing up most of the time
and could not hold any food or liquid. I was tied to the cockpit with a
plastic bucket between my legs. Most sailboats will survive a severe storm
it's the human that can't.


That's a good point, but it may be gilding the lily to say that most
sailboats will survive a severe storm. Motion sickness is certainly no
joke, and fatigue is one of the biggest factors in riding out really bad
weather. BTW the point somebody made about survival suits is also very
important... keeping warm is key to being able to take an active role in
your own survival.


rhys wrote:
This is basically my point: the crew, not the boat, is the weak link.
That's been proven for years, is case-studied in books like "Heavy
Weather Sailing", and is found in the old saying: "don't leave the
boat until you have to step up into the life raft".

Recall the Westsail 32 of the "Perfect Storm"...the real story is
interesting in that the skipper who wanted to stay with the boat fared
worse in the rescue than the boat...which safely grounded itself!

See http://world.std.com/~kent/satori/ if you haven't heard this. It's
a perfect example of how the right boat and the right sailor can
weather (potentially) even the most hellish storms. Of course, if you
get killed by a rogue wave, it's your time to go, but a well-sailed
smaller boat of certain qualities will give you that much more of a
fighting chance than a different (NOT better or worse, note) type that
will tend to exhaust and sicken its crew in a lumpy seaway.


I'm not sure that the type of boat matters as much as how it is equipped
and what tactics the crew has practiced and what decisions the skipper
takes. A lot of cases I've heard pointed to as saying "well this is a
bad boat to take offshore" were the result of poor equipment, poor
judgement, or a combination. The boat itself did not seem at fault other
than bad luck in ownership...


Westsail 32s, Contessas and the like are great seagoing boats that
few current sailors would find comfortable, but I would gladly cross
an ocean in them because of their great track record as "survival
boats" that "take care" of their skippers in a way a lot of newer
designs can't do, because they are faster, bigger, have a Jacuzzi and
a garage for the Zodiac, etc.... I like steel cutters and ketches made
for the North Sea for the same reason...not fast, but easier sailing
in waves and can sustain a lot of punishment.


And it's important, in a boat like that, to be able to take a severe
tossing, because you'll be in mid-ocean long enough to guarantee that
you'll get one. Except for consistent downwind routes, they have a hard
time making passages. Ask some of the transPac guys how the Westsail 32s
get back from Hawaii... or from Cabo...



Read the post-war early cruising stories. Not only were most of those
boats wooden, they were 30 feet or less (Wanderer II and III and the
Roths, Pardeys and so on come to mind), had oil lamps, canvas sails,
hank-ons, wooden masts and a compass and sextant. Maybe the
best-equipped would have a battery radio (receive only!), and three,
instead of two, small one-speed winches.

Typically, they would self-steer, and rigged twin headsails for
downwind work. All pumping was manual, and if they had inboards, they
were one-cylinder gas or paraffin engines or heavy diesels that might
give four knots in a flat sea.

They would be narrow, deep and dark below, because lots of light meant
lots of places for water to get in, and that meant more pumping. On
the up side, they might feature carpets, bookshelves and small
fireplaces to make everything snug.


So, you're advocating going back to the horse and buggy?

Seriously, I've read all that and also sailed some of those boats. If
you want an escape from modern life, it's great... you always have Motel
6 to fall back on (which those guys did not). I think that some of the
characteristics of these boats are very good at sea... a kindly motion,
for example, a *secure* cabin, inviolable structural integrity (which
actually those boats didn't have, but failures tended to be in small
bits that were easily repairable with on-board parts & tools). They also
broke out the champagne any time they had a 100-mile 24 hr run.


.... I have the impression that if my boat would have
been larger I would not have been able to go up and down the 40 foot waves.
That does not mean that I do not want a larger boat!



As do we all, but like anything else, there's a tradeoff. I have
decided personally to restrict my "dream boat for world cruising"
search to the 38 to 45 foot range, because less is too small for
stores and one wife and one kid plus me and a workbench G and 45
feet is about the limit for sail handling without complex mechanical
aids. Even then, I would prefer a split yawl or ketch rig so I
wouldn't need a monster main or genoa.,,and I believe (currently) 45
feet is my limit. If my wife was six feet tall instead of five feet, I
might go 50 feet, but she's unlikely to grow now!


We were looking more for a given range of cubic & displacement, rather
than an LOA range. And what's wrong with complex mechanical aids? A
windlass and a self-tailing winch are both *great* ways to handle
strains than muscle alone will not.... faster and with more control than
a handy-billy. Neither are prohibitively expensive (especially if they
come with the boat 2nd-hand) and neither take prohibitive mainenance
IMHO. I don't want to accuse you of being a Luddite but it seems you're
leaning that way... certainly simpler is better, the question is to make
a good choice of systems to include and recognizing their true cost.

FWIW I'd agree with the split rig... it is a maintenance hit but it
offers redundancy and it keeps the main truck lower for getting under
fixed bridges. On the East Coast there are a lot of places you can't go
if your 'air draft' is more than 55 feet (16.9m).

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

  #120   Report Post  
rhys
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:44:17 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:33:20 -0500, rhys wrote:

Typically, they would self-steer, and rigged twin headsails for
downwind work. All pumping was manual, and if they had inboards, they
were one-cylinder gas or paraffin engines or heavy diesels that might
give four knots in a flat sea.


=============================================== ==

Also typically, they would plan their route to be exclusively downwind
because the boats they were on were almost incapable of meaningful
work to weather, and even if they could have, conditions would have
been hell on board.


That is largely true as well, although some boats in the "crossover"
period of the '60s were cold-molded composite hulls with
race-influenced rigs that featured enough foredeck to work upwind. But
yes, many of the older "cruisers" did not work well to weather, for a
number of reasons.

They typically took a lot of water over the decks in a way
unacceptable to current thought. On the other hand, they were also
designed to bob free of that same water and didn't ship tons of it in
huge cockpits.

But in other ways, they had highly desirable sea-keeping
characteristics. That why I like 25 year old Ted Brewer/Bob
Wallstrom/Roger Marshall/Bob Perry designs, for instance, that in my
limited experience of looking at plans and sailing on a few examples
in heavy weather, seem to combine a lot of the old with the new and
more efficient hull shapes developed since, say, 1960.

We have better boats today than 50 years ago, in nearly every respect.
That's categorically true, in my opinion. However, marketing to a
generally coastal cruising/entertainment-oriented pool of potential
boat buyers has meant that some aspects of sea-kindliness have been
sacrificed, again in my opinion. There are vastly greater numbers of
recreational sailors today, but the number of truly skilled sailors,
able to get the best out of their 35-45 foot boats in all weathers, is
probably a smaller proportion today than 40 years ago, if only for the
simple fact that then, if you couldn't sail yourself to safety, you
were very likely dead. Today, you trigger the EPIRB and get into the
liferaft and two hours later, the helicopter lands and someone hands
you a nice cup of chicken soup. While this is not a bad thing in any
sense, we have made some compromises in boat design and general skill
level that would have seemed questionable to the Don Streets and the
Pardeys still sailing among us.

R.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Water systems on my boat - need suggestions, please. Adam Boat Building 10 May 10th 04 03:53 PM
Harry's lobster boat? Gould 0738 General 3 December 23rd 03 07:24 AM
Where to find ramp stories? designo General 15 December 9th 03 09:57 PM
Fresh Water Tank Lou Cragin Cruising 6 December 8th 03 09:23 AM
Hot Water Dispenser Conor Crowley Cruising 11 October 28th 03 08:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:21 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017