Vic Smith wrote:

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:04:28 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:26:52 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

There's a lot of talk of fatigue and multiple watchkeepers, yet
singlehanders seem to sail overnighters all the time.

Only when well offshore, inshore they have to stay awake, frequently
exceeding their endurance limits. I was reminded of that yesterday as
we cruised past Pt Judith lighthouse in Rhode Island. Sometime back a
young lady singlehander successfully sailed her 30 something boat all
the way across the Atlantic up to that point. After being awake for
over 2 days due to bad weather and heavy shipping traffic, she mistook
Pt Judith light for the old Brenton Reef tower, and parked her boat on
the beach just down the shore.

The waters in question where Skip is now are very congested with
*large* commercial shipping and also a wide assortment of fishing
vessels. You can not safely sleep, even for 15 minutes.

Thanks for shedding some light on what Skip was encountering.
I do still suspect he'll have a different take on it, but we'll see.
It's my "impression" that he learned a lot from the Keys grounding,
and is putting some thought into his course.

That was my idea too. I didn't think that the bad weather started
until he was off Ocean City.

You mentioned the Chesapeake Bay course to NYC, and the first thing
I thought of when Skip went offshore is that at least he didn't have
to constantly watch the sounder. He did mention avoiding shoals.
Does Chesapeake Bay present a special challenge for a boat of his
draft? It may be he wanted a good sail without those concerns.
Not knowing these routes and I'm all ears.

The Chesapeake IMHO is one of the best places to sail. We have a
friend with a boat like ours that has a 6'6" draft and he has no
problem sailing in the Chesapeake (and neither do we). After all,
freighters and tugs transit the Bay all the time. Anchoring close to
shore might be difficult for a deeper draft craft, but anchoring
farther away from shore means that you have less insects (usually).

Another problem in the Bay is crab pots - usually if you see crab pots
that will alert you to the fact that the water is getting shallow
there (and this also holds in much of the rest of the ICW)

BUT -- all the weather problems that Skip had, he would still have had
in the Chesapeake. And he would still have had the freighters etc,
and in addition would have had to do the Delaware Canal at the other
end of the Bay and the trip would undoubtedly have taken longer.

He can do the Chesapeake on the way back south.

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:22:56 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

Does Chesapeake Bay present a special challenge for a boat of his
draft? It may be he wanted a good sail without those concerns.
Not knowing these routes and I'm all ears.

No. Some of the rivers and bays off of the Chesapeake are shallow but
the central portion is mostly deep water and very well marked. There
are many good deep water harbors.

If you are interested in learning more about east coast cruising I'd
recommend downloading the free NOAA charts along with a chart viewer.
I have spent endless hours in the off season "cruising" on computer
charts and planning the next trip. For me, there's always a next
trip...

You can also download the coast pilots for free which have a wealth of
detailed information. The Atlantic coast waterway guides are another
good source, along with the "Skipper Bob" books.

On 2007-08-21 16:22:56 -0400, Vic Smith said:

Does Chesapeake Bay present a special challenge for a boat of his
draft? It may be he wanted a good sail without those concerns.
Not knowing these routes and I'm all ears.

No, there's no real challenge, except that there's a constant flow of
water south and he's running in or near a current running north, which
can make a big difference in distance made. Weather would be similar
inside or out, and as others have said, the Delaware Bay passage is
often no picnic.

MY problem is that I listened to the weather Sunday, and the offshore
forecast was for small craft advisories and lots of rain -- which we've
had ever since. A front has been sitting at about the VA/DE border with
lows running down it. Even up here near Philly, we've been getting
monsoons.

He has the advantage of a fairly heavy boat that likes heavy air, at
least better than our cork, but he should have realized they were going
into known sloppy conditions, and Linda shouldn't have been so
optimistic, not taking meds beforehand.

Personally, this week was one to take the slower inside route where
they had the advantage of a multitude of "plan B" anchorages in fairly
easy reach. I expect they'll make it, perhaps have made it already, but
that was a "yeah, we done it" sort of passage.

Skip, please stop rushing.

--
Jere Lull
Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's new pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI pages: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

"KLC Lewis" wrote:


"Skip Gundlach" wrote in message
roups.com...
August 21 - All at Sea


Skip, there is nothing inherently wrong with sailing in foul weather --
provided, of course, that you and your crew are up to it. But from your
report, Lydia is NOT up to it, at least not yet. Please don't repeat this.
You don't have to be ANYWHERE at any particular time. And there is
absolutely no "shame" in turning around and heading back to port if
conditions deteriorate unexpectedly.

"Those who fight and run away, live to fight another day."

I have to say that I did not find what he did particularly untoward. I
noted that he said he was well rested at the start, and at the start
someone that is well rested can do more than if it is at the other end
of the trip (as it was the first time). I don't know if the boat
could have been hove to or sailed in a direction so that the waves
weren't rolling the boat so much or not.

Managing seasickness is not something that one can do for someone
else. It takes a certain amount of trial and error to get it right.
Second guessing Lydia won't help her.

In our case, there's no seasickness problem, but Bob doesn't sleep
well underway. So I adjust to that by sleeping as much as possible
(especially during the day) because I can usually sleep whenever and
wherever I want to. When he runs out of steam or when he would
normally be asleep, I can take over the watch and he can take a nap.
Of course we also don't make a multi-day passage - I don't want Bob
doing that for more than 24 hours.

I have been told that the first 24-36 hours of an extended cruise are
the most difficult because it is hard to sleep at the beginning. After
a day or so, people adjust and are actually able to sleep off-shift so
they think Bob would eventually be able to do more sleeping. I think
that is true. I'm just not sure that he wouldn't get too tired to
sleep before he adjusted to the routine. And actually Lydia being out
of commission from seasickness at the start might make adjusting to
the watches easier because she started out rested in the middle rather
than at the beginning - the equivalent of my sleeping in the daytime
of the first day.

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:44:43 -0400, Rosalie B.
wrote:

I have to say that I did not find what he did particularly untoward.

The way I read Skip's post, they started to encounter deteriorating
weather conditions right outside the Chesapeake Bay-Bridge tunnel
area. That's not a very auspicious start for a 200+ mile offshore run
to NYC. Subsequent weather confirms that assessment. I also take
issue with not breaking up the trip into multiple legs, especially
since Cape May is not only an easy inlet, but also a fun town to
visit. What's the rush?

To answer Vic Smith's response, the alternative to the proposed plan
was not the ICW but rather Chesapeake Bay, arguably one of the finest
cruising areas in the mid-atlantic region. Skip's choice was to go
offshore along the Delmarva Penninsula which has no good cruising
inlets for over 100 nautical miles. That violates my "Plan B" rule
which says there should always be a Plan B in case Plan A starts to
look a little sketchy for some reason.

I have made the decision to run offshore of Delmarva several times but
only in a stable weather window, and never for more than 36 hours
which is about my limit for staying fully alert. In addition, neither
my wife or I get seasick under normal conditions, and my wife is an
experienced watch stander who knows her limits.

Wayne.B wrote in
:

What's the rush?


Same as always, his FAMILY is waiting in Sandy Hook....(sigh)


Larry
--

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:35:34 +0000, Larry wrote:

Same as always, his FAMILY is waiting in Sandy Hook....(sigh)

Recipe for disaster.

Skip Gundlach wrote in
oups.com:

reappeared shortly to empty her empty stomach into
a bowl.

TOO MUCH INFORMATION! TOO MUCH INFORMATION!!.....(c;

I'll never be able to eat cereal on Flying Pig....hee hee.

Larry
--