bull****. I was there. not a single boat sailed that day after mid morning.
NY harbor had more then 40,000 boats in it and there was zero point zero room
for sailing. In fact, the Staten Island ferry stopped running several hours
early due to the thick congestion on the harbor.

The Bicentennial celebration that year included a tall ships parade up
the North River (Hudson). All participants motored from the start
except Colas. He tacked into a northerly, slicing back and forth
through the massive fleet of spectators past the bleachers at Barttery
Park City.

A black squall line became just visible at the G Washington Bridge.
Colas managed to get all the sails down before it reached him. THere
were bikini-clad lovelies decorating the deck, but they didn't assist.
Colas did it all as far as I could see.

I went aboard the next day to see the hardware.


Rodney Myrvaagnes J36 Gjo/a

The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the
simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.
- Richard Dawkins, "Viruses of the Mind"

On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 09:05:45 -0500, DSK wrote:


Size isn't really an issue for singlehanding (or shorthanding), people
have singlehanded surprisingly large boats... over a hundred feet LOA.
Equipment is a big issue though; and so is skill & forethought. In
former times, big sailing cargo were sailed by as few men as could be
done with, to keep crew expense down. You can read accounts of three
masted schooners being sailed by two men & a dog

For an extreme case, Alain Colas sailed a 240-foot four-masted
schooner in the 1976 Transatlantic race. It had eight self-tacking
sails, like a separate masthead sloop rig on each mast. All had a
semicircular traveler track that went right to the gunwale.

All the controls led back to a battery of self-tailing winches at
waist height behind a bulwark surrounding the pilot house. The middle
winch of each set of three was the sheet; the other two located the
traveler.

The Bicentennial celebration that year included a tall ships parade up
the North River (Hudson). All participants motored from the start
except Colas. He tacked into a northerly, slicing back and forth
through the massive fleet of spectators past the bleachers at Barttery
Park City.

A black squall line became just visible at the G Washington Bridge.
Colas managed to get all the sails down before it reached him. THere
were bikini-clad lovelies decorating the deck, but they didn't assist.
Colas did it all as far as I could see.

I went aboard the next day to see the hardware.


Rodney Myrvaagnes J36 Gjo/a

The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the
simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.
- Richard Dawkins, "Viruses of the Mind"

Wendy wrote:
It seems like the design would simply *have* to be easier in a following
sea.

Like the song says, "It ain't necessarily so." There are a couple of
factors that affect how a boat behaves in a following sea, and it also
makes a big difference in how bad a following sea you plan to be in.

An important characteristic in any boat, sail or power, is reserve
bouyancy... in other words, as conditions (rolling, heeling, big waves,
whatever) stick the hull or a part of it deeper into the water, how
strongly does the hull, or that deeper immersed part of the hull, try to
rise? This is one case where more is better. And a boat with a transom
is going to have more enclosed volume, thus more reserve bouyancy, than
a canoe stern.

But keep in mind, most long distance cruisers avoid heavy weather and
spend less than 1% of their sailing time battling storms.

The one thing that I don't like about canoe sterns, and heard the most
complaints about, is that it severely reduces cockpit area (thus
available living space) and it's difficult to mount equipment on them.


Not the be-all and end-all goal. I'm not antisocial Being single, I
simply expect there would be times when I would sail alone. I may be best
served by something smaller, but 37' is attractive. The Pacific Seacraft at
32' would be fine, I think.

Size isn't really an issue for singlehanding (or shorthanding), people
have singlehanded surprisingly large boats... over a hundred feet LOA.
Equipment is a big issue though; and so is skill & forethought. In
former times, big sailing cargo were sailed by as few men as could be
done with, to keep crew expense down. You can read accounts of three
masted schooners being sailed by two men & a dog

One of the things I'd recommend is to get as much experience as possible
sailing OPBs. You seem to have the credentials to be a highly sought
after crew, it should be difficult to get a berth on some deliveries.
It's no problem at all if you're willing to bring boats back from races!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

"Armond Perretta" wrote in message
...
However depending on boat size, having a canoe stern gives up a few
positive
aspects of transom stern boats without necessarily offering compensation.
I
want to suggest (at the risk of drawing ire) that there has never been any
real evidence that these designs are any better or worse than transom
boats
in rough going. We hear things about "parting breaking waves and seas"
and
so on, but I don't believe there is any quantifiable evidence that
double-enders do any better than any other designs. Not that they do any
worse either, but there's a suggestion of superiority out there that is
not
supported by any real evidence.

It seems like the design would simply *have* to be easier in a following
sea. I spent a lot of time running these boats
http://www.boatshow.com/POWER/CustomDivePro42.html which are rudderless
jets, and they were horrid in a following sea. But I admit that comparing a
300hp non-displacement hull to a 35-40 sailboat is an apples-and-oranges
thing. My experiences may well be a hindrance here... I am not committed
to a double-ender.

Next, and again depending on boat size, for a given length you definitely
_do_ lose some room, both on deck (in and around the cockpit) and below
(stowage-wise). This isn't much of a problem for a single-hander in a 40
foot boat, if a 40 foot boat is what you want. But single-handing a 40
footer is not necessarily what it's cracked up to be. I cannot tell for
sure after re-reading your initial post, but you seem to suggest that this
is a goal.

Not the be-all and end-all goal. I'm not antisocial Being single, I
simply expect there would be times when I would sail alone. I may be best
served by something smaller, but 37' is attractive. The Pacific Seacraft at
32' would be fine, I think.

This is going to be an involved (and entertaining) process. I know about
ten times as much about sailboats today than I did yesterday, and I still
don't know very much at all!

Wendy

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:39:05 -0500, "Armond Perretta"
wrote:

However depending on boat size, having a canoe stern gives up a few positive
aspects of transom stern boats

One such thing is the ability to have a swim platform/integral
ladder/easy transition from dinghy to cockpit. That's important to
many people, including me.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:39:05 -0500, "Armond Perretta"
wrote:

However depending on boat size, having a canoe stern gives up a few positive
aspects of transom stern boats

One such thing is the ability to have a swim platform/integral
ladder/easy transition from dinghy to cockpit. That's important to
many people, including me.

The Perry design double enders are distinctlly 'different' from the
Collin Archer influenced design in that Perry has added a considerable
'bustle' to the stern. Underwater the shape is very similar to wide
transom designs of that design era. Perry will flaty acknowledge that
the stern choice " ... is truly/solely for 'aesthetics' , unless you
plan to sail around the world backwards".
I have a TY37 and find an interesting positive aspect to the pinched
stern....... you cant overload a pinched stern with lots of stored /
ever accumulating heavy weight crap; thus, you automatically keep the
'ends' light to prevent 'hobby-horsing' / pitching. Dont believe me,
go to the lazarette of any fat-assed boat and look whats accumulated
there after a few years.

Hey, turn the pinched stern inside -out and what do you have? ....
sugar scoop!



In article , Armond Perretta
wrote:

Wendy wrote:

I think I have identified some choices that fit my budget and
expectations:

Tayana 37 ...
Valiant 40 ...
Pacific Seacraft 34/37 ...
Ta Shing Panda 38 ...

Thoughts/opinions are certainly welcome!!

If I'm not mistaken all of these except the Pacific Seacrafts are Bob Perry
designs, and there's certainly nothing wrong with that (I just noticed that
another writer pointed this out elsewhere, so maybe my memory is correct).
The PS boats are, I believe, Crealock designs. Both of these NAs are of
high repute.

You are obviously leaning toward "double enders" or canoe stern boats. If
that is because you like the look that's fine, but you should be aware of
some other aspects of the design. The original idea for this style dates
back to certain Scandinavian designs from the early part of the 20th
century. There have been many modifications over the years (e.g., the
Atkins series, which I believe includes Steve's "Ingrid"), but it wasn't
until Bob Perry came along and modified the design with the Valiant 40 that
the idea really took off. The Valiant 40 was in some ways revolutionary and
is still way up there on the list of good designs.

However depending on boat size, having a canoe stern gives up a few positive
aspects of transom stern boats without necessarily offering compensation. I
want to suggest (at the risk of drawing ire) that there has never been any
real evidence that these designs are any better or worse than transom boats
in rough going. We hear things about "parting breaking waves and seas" and
so on, but I don't believe there is any quantifiable evidence that
double-enders do any better than any other designs. Not that they do any
worse either, but there's a suggestion of superiority out there that is not
supported by any real evidence.

Next, and again depending on boat size, for a given length you definitely
_do_ lose some room, both on deck (in and around the cockpit) and below
(stowage-wise). This isn't much of a problem for a single-hander in a 40
foot boat, if a 40 foot boat is what you want. But single-handing a 40
footer is not necessarily what it's cracked up to be. I cannot tell for
sure after re-reading your initial post, but you seem to suggest that this
is a goal. If so, you should give serious though to what size makes
ultimate sense in the long term. I have single-handed many miles in designs
around 30 feet. I once took a 47 footer from Florida up to Long Island
single-handed, and although it was quite comfortable while underway
offshore, and especially at anchor, handling a boat that size in harbor or
alongside by myself was less than enjoyable. Too much work, planning,
anticipation, and just plain worry. As an aside, remember that tying
stern-to in a 40+ foot double-ended boat by yourself, and then navigating
the gap to get ashore, is usually harder than with a transom boat.

In short, think about why you want a double-ender, and also what size you
can get away with. Especially for $90K or so.

The Perry design double enders are distinctlly 'different' from the
Collin Archer influenced design in that Perry has added a considerable
'bustle' to the stern. Underwater the shape is very similar to wide
transom designs of that design era. Perry will flaty acknowledge that
the stern choice " ... is truly/solely for 'aesthetics' , unless you
plan to sail around the world backwards".
I have a TY37 and find an interesting positive aspect to the pinched
stern....... you cant overload a pinched stern with lots of stored /
ever accumulating heavy weight crap; thus, you automatically keep the
'ends' light to prevent 'hobby-horsing' / pitching. Dont believe me,
go to the lazarette of any fat-assed boat and look whats accumulated
there after a few years.

Hey, turn the pinched stern inside -out and what do you have? ....
sugar scoop!



In article , Armond Perretta
wrote:

Wendy wrote:

I think I have identified some choices that fit my budget and
expectations:

Tayana 37 ...
Valiant 40 ...
Pacific Seacraft 34/37 ...
Ta Shing Panda 38 ...

Thoughts/opinions are certainly welcome!!

If I'm not mistaken all of these except the Pacific Seacrafts are Bob Perry
designs, and there's certainly nothing wrong with that (I just noticed that
another writer pointed this out elsewhere, so maybe my memory is correct).
The PS boats are, I believe, Crealock designs. Both of these NAs are of
high repute.

You are obviously leaning toward "double enders" or canoe stern boats. If
that is because you like the look that's fine, but you should be aware of
some other aspects of the design. The original idea for this style dates
back to certain Scandinavian designs from the early part of the 20th
century. There have been many modifications over the years (e.g., the
Atkins series, which I believe includes Steve's "Ingrid"), but it wasn't
until Bob Perry came along and modified the design with the Valiant 40 that
the idea really took off. The Valiant 40 was in some ways revolutionary and
is still way up there on the list of good designs.

However depending on boat size, having a canoe stern gives up a few positive
aspects of transom stern boats without necessarily offering compensation. I
want to suggest (at the risk of drawing ire) that there has never been any
real evidence that these designs are any better or worse than transom boats
in rough going. We hear things about "parting breaking waves and seas" and
so on, but I don't believe there is any quantifiable evidence that
double-enders do any better than any other designs. Not that they do any
worse either, but there's a suggestion of superiority out there that is not
supported by any real evidence.

Next, and again depending on boat size, for a given length you definitely
_do_ lose some room, both on deck (in and around the cockpit) and below
(stowage-wise). This isn't much of a problem for a single-hander in a 40
foot boat, if a 40 foot boat is what you want. But single-handing a 40
footer is not necessarily what it's cracked up to be. I cannot tell for
sure after re-reading your initial post, but you seem to suggest that this
is a goal. If so, you should give serious though to what size makes
ultimate sense in the long term. I have single-handed many miles in designs
around 30 feet. I once took a 47 footer from Florida up to Long Island
single-handed, and although it was quite comfortable while underway
offshore, and especially at anchor, handling a boat that size in harbor or
alongside by myself was less than enjoyable. Too much work, planning,
anticipation, and just plain worry. As an aside, remember that tying
stern-to in a 40+ foot double-ended boat by yourself, and then navigating
the gap to get ashore, is usually harder than with a transom boat.

In short, think about why you want a double-ender, and also what size you
can get away with. Especially for $90K or so.

Wendy wrote:

I think I have identified some choices that fit my budget and
expectations:

Tayana 37 ...
Valiant 40 ...
Pacific Seacraft 34/37 ...
Ta Shing Panda 38 ...

Thoughts/opinions are certainly welcome!!

If I'm not mistaken all of these except the Pacific Seacrafts are Bob Perry
designs, and there's certainly nothing wrong with that (I just noticed that
another writer pointed this out elsewhere, so maybe my memory is correct).
The PS boats are, I believe, Crealock designs. Both of these NAs are of
high repute.

You are obviously leaning toward "double enders" or canoe stern boats. If
that is because you like the look that's fine, but you should be aware of
some other aspects of the design. The original idea for this style dates
back to certain Scandinavian designs from the early part of the 20th
century. There have been many modifications over the years (e.g., the
Atkins series, which I believe includes Steve's "Ingrid"), but it wasn't
until Bob Perry came along and modified the design with the Valiant 40 that
the idea really took off. The Valiant 40 was in some ways revolutionary and
is still way up there on the list of good designs.

However depending on boat size, having a canoe stern gives up a few positive
aspects of transom stern boats without necessarily offering compensation. I
want to suggest (at the risk of drawing ire) that there has never been any
real evidence that these designs are any better or worse than transom boats
in rough going. We hear things about "parting breaking waves and seas" and
so on, but I don't believe there is any quantifiable evidence that
double-enders do any better than any other designs. Not that they do any
worse either, but there's a suggestion of superiority out there that is not
supported by any real evidence.

Next, and again depending on boat size, for a given length you definitely
_do_ lose some room, both on deck (in and around the cockpit) and below
(stowage-wise). This isn't much of a problem for a single-hander in a 40
foot boat, if a 40 foot boat is what you want. But single-handing a 40
footer is not necessarily what it's cracked up to be. I cannot tell for
sure after re-reading your initial post, but you seem to suggest that this
is a goal. If so, you should give serious though to what size makes
ultimate sense in the long term. I have single-handed many miles in designs
around 30 feet. I once took a 47 footer from Florida up to Long Island
single-handed, and although it was quite comfortable while underway
offshore, and especially at anchor, handling a boat that size in harbor or
alongside by myself was less than enjoyable. Too much work, planning,
anticipation, and just plain worry. As an aside, remember that tying
stern-to in a 40+ foot double-ended boat by yourself, and then navigating
the gap to get ashore, is usually harder than with a transom boat.

In short, think about why you want a double-ender, and also what size you
can get away with. Especially for $90K or so.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://kerrydeare.home.comcast.net/

Tayanas:
Every one is different below decks - all were "semi-custom'. Many have
oil finished interiors and over the years have age darkened and need
lots of work stripping. Varnished interiors wlll 'dazzle'. The
interior crafstmanship is utterly phenominal - master cabinet makers
all. A good Tayana will look like a blending of a good shipyard and an
upscale furniture manufacturer.
Definitely dont bother with a "pullman" interior if you're interested
in blue water.

There maybe 'some' problems on older boats. If you get serious about a
TY37 drop me an email, as I will relate to 'stuff' that most surveyors
will absolutely miss, etc.

;-)