Hello Frank (and others),

Thanks for your reply. I always read your posts with great interest.
You mentioned many years of experience talking to sailors since the
late 50's. Those of us with less experience welcome the fact that you
are willing to share yours. That is the beauty of Usenet. We can have
"conversations" with experienced sailors without being on the same
dock (so to speak).

You mentioned that this thread has spawned a couple if interesting
sub-threads, and I have another sub-thread for you. What do you think
of cutter vs sloop vs ketch rigs? Years ago my Coast Guard Auxiliary
instructor was "big" on ketch (or yawl) rigs due to the smaller sails
and because a reefed sail on the mizzen mast could act as a weather
vane, pointing the bow to the wind and helping prevent the boat from
lying abeam to the waves. Is this one of those tactics you now
consider "passe"? Do you have any experience or words of wisdom in
that respect?

Bob Whitaker
"Free Spirit"


(Frank Maier) wrote in message . com...
This thread has spawned a coupla sub-threads; so I'm gonna just make a
few
general comments here. As always, this is my opinion from my
experiences, YMMV.

Centerboards:

Like most things in life, it's often the execution that's more
important
than the concept. Well designed and well built centerboards are a
great boon
for shallow-water sailing; but a bad centerboard is a nightmare. Well,
a
pain in the ass, at least.

Heavy weather sailing (bare poles, lying ahull, etc.):

What an imtimidatingly broad topic! There are a lotta full-length
books
about this and reducing it to a few paragraphs here will probably lead
to
acrimony because of misunderstandings; but I'll throw out a few
comments
from my personal perspective.

I've raced and cruised on a variety of boats in a variety of weather:
a
full-keel Alden 42 ketch, a "cutaway" keel Challenger 40 ketch, a
folkboat,
and several different fin-keel racer-cruiser sloops, from light air to
a_whole_lotta_wind. [Brief aside: It's been my experience (not to be
confused with objective reality) that really heavy weather experiences
can
be counted on the fingers; but light air happens all the time. My boat
must
be able to survive heavy weather; but I want one which can also sail
in
light air.]

So, I've never gone to bare poles. I think lying a-hull is a passe
tactic
which probably wasn't even "good" for heavy full-keel boats back when
that's
all there was. My opinion is that experience has shown us that
maintaining
speed and, more significantly, control is a better survival tactic.
But no
one has ever done a rigorous, "scientific," double-blind type
comparison
test. Typically all we have to go on are anecdotes; and boats have
survivied, and failed to survive, using every variety of tactic. So,
you're
still kinda left in a position where ya gotta choose your own poison.

I've come to my position after reading most of the works on this
topic,
talking to other sailors since the late 50s, and my own experiences.
My best
recommendation is that, rather than take anyone's advice here, go do
the
same yourself. Heavy weather in mid-ocean while cruising on a heavy
displacement boat is not the same as heavy weather in mid-ocean racing
a
go-fast design. I've done both and come to my conculsions to my own
satisfaction. I'd say you're generally better off following your own
heart,
rather than blindly going through someone else's heavy-weather
checklist.

Beating off a lee sho

Well, here's where you definitely want a fin keel sloop in preference
to a
full-keel ketch. There have been discussions here on Usenet about what
"weatherly" means. If a boat can point high, but makes terrible
leeway, is
it truly weatherly?

Pooping (including surfing, double-enders, and small cockpits):

Except for the fact that he really liked sailing the Ranger, from
reading
his other comments, I'd hafta say that Matt and I are from opposite
ends of
the spectrum. SC31, Tayana, Baba, etc. are boats which I consider
unseaworthy. IMO, modern double-enders and small cockpits are a style
decision, not a functional one. Well, I kinda take that back. If you
have a
typical double-ender, you actually do need a small cockpit because you
(probably) lack reserve buoyancy. And most of the double-enders
mentioned in
this thread are heavy displacement. That means that they resisist
surfing.
That means that they get pooped constantly. Not what I consider fun.
Or a
sensible design decision. But, Man!, they *look* nautical.

Conclusion:

In a sense, Usenet is like real life, maybe just a bit less polite. At
the
end of the day, you still just wind up with opinions. Allow me to
bring up
my favorite demons, the Pardeys. The have about a bazillion sea miles
and as
broad a range of experiences as you'd ever want. Pretty much every
decision
and every recommendation they make is the opposite of what I prefer.
Do I
defer to their superior experience? Absolutely not. I have enough
experience of my own to trust my judgment for me. Besides, I like
having refrigeration and a
radio; and, with my own engine, I don't hafta constantly ask others
for
tows.

YMMV but that's what works for me,

Frank

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:39:52 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:


Of course the boat manufacturers are quite aware of the fact that less
than one percent of boat owners will actually go on an offshore
passage of any significance. It costs quite a bit more to build a
boat for that market and the vast majority of folks don't really need
it, and are not willing to pay for it. If you go to some of the
international cruising centers of the world where people have actually
made offshore passages just to get there, you will find very few boats
under 40 feet, and most are bigger.

I agree entirely, but I don't see it necessarily as a positive
development for the lifestyle of world cruising.

R.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:23:29 -0500, DSK wrote:


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...

Well, yes, that's a major trade-off. Of course, Moitessier solved that
problem in the '60s...just keep going until you arrive back where you
started! Seriously, though, current thought (when one can discern it
among all the floating rec rooms at boat shows) seems to be that
faster is better to avoid the rough stuff in the first place, which
means good upwind performance. The "best world cruisers" is great for
a good BS session online, but even marginal boats in good hands can
sail pretty impressively...and some nice boats in good shape have been
found adrift because of panicky crew or idiot captains ****ing over
the side....



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

Not at all, but some of those boats had desirable characteristics
absent from MOST...not all, thank goodness...of the current crop.
That's why there's such a steady trade in old Perry designs and Brewer
semi-customs and so on...they combine best of old and new-ish.

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.

Well, I am of the opinion that sailboats stink as transport
devices...unless you have nothing resembling a schedule, at which
point they are the best way to travel anywhere there's seven feet of
water. If my (to be hoped for) cruising life contains anything more
pressing than "get to typhoon hole in four months" as a Post-It on the
nav station, I will have not achieved my goals in life. So bring on
the North Sea sailing barges G...ok, maybe not THAT bulletproof....


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.

I don't consider those complex as I could devise the same mech.
advantage with a strong point and a series of blocks and falls. I
consider ELECTRIC winches, certain forms of autopilot, air
conditioning, large refrigeration set-ups and satellite TV receivers
to fall under "complex mechanical aids" in the sense that it's
unnecessary, too big a draw, too likely to break or too expensive to
maintain. A sturdy windvane AND a better sort of autopilot, preferably
cable or rod linkages over hydraulic, would provide the sort of
redundancy I would prefer. Then, self-steering by sail trim and bungee
cords is the "Hail Mary" of self-steering..essential I think to safe
passagemaking.

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.

With that I will agree, but fewer things to break is a simple credo. I
am not a Luddite in many senses, actually, because while I am suspect
of devices listed above, it will be crucial to living aboard for years
that I have complex SSB/weatherfax/email/satellite comm systems,
powered by carefully shepherded battery banks and charged by
wind/sun/towed generators. Unlike many cruisers, I WILL have kids
aboard, and medical, educational and family reasons dictate that I
have a better than usual degree of connectivity. I just hope that by
the time we go, marine electronics will be a little more integrated
and at a lower price than today.

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).

Exactly. More bits to fall off but more options to keep sailing. Also,
it's a fudge factor for getting a bigger boat...I think in some ways a
40 foot sloop is harder for a couple to handle than a 45 foot ketch,
but both are borderline unless you are quite fit. Better, I think, to
learn to live and sail with the size of boat you can manage, which may
be quite different boats at various life points.

R.

On 22 Mar 2004 10:45:29 -0800, (Frank Maier) wrote:

Beating off a lee sho

Well, here's where you definitely want a fin keel sloop in preference
to a
full-keel ketch. There have been discussions here on Usenet about what
"weatherly" means. If a boat can point high, but makes terrible
leeway, is
it truly weatherly?

Not in my book, no. In club racing, the tendency of the boat to make
leeway is generally known and made use of in order to make the mark by
a combination of trimming for the wind, active helming AND factoring
in that little bit of drift. The experienced helmsperson will get a
feel for how responsive their boat is and whether to stand off a lee
shore not due to hazards but due to sea state and the ability of the
boat to claw off. The fin keels excel here, and maybe in 20 years when
Dufours and Beneteaus have canting keels, maybe we'll all laugh at fin
keels. But every design has its strengths and weaknesses: I like to
discover or surmise the strengths, but KNOW the weaknesses....like my
fin keel, spade rudder flat bilged C&C just stinks backing off the
dock under power, but the same boat can turn in a length and I can get
close enough to marks at five plus knots to touch them...because I
know what lee she tends to make.

On the other hand, of course, if I lived in tidal waters, a semi-full
keeler (cutaway forefoot, say) would be great for low-tide maintenance
like the way the English fix stuff on their hulls when their harbours
dry out....

R.

On 22 Mar 2004 20:03:58 -0800, (Bob Whitaker)
wrote:

You mentioned that this thread has spawned a couple if interesting
sub-threads, and I have another sub-thread for you. What do you think
of cutter vs sloop vs ketch rigs?

You were asking Frank but as I have some heavy weather experience on a
ketch and they are on my short list (or a cutter, for that matter)...

Years ago my Coast Guard Auxiliary
instructor was "big" on ketch (or yawl) rigs due to the smaller sails
and because a reefed sail on the mizzen mast could act as a weather
vane, pointing the bow to the wind and helping prevent the boat from
lying abeam to the waves.

A similar tactic is used at anchor where a reefed down mizzen can act
as a riding sail (on a sloop it's sometimes a hank-on storm jib set on
the backstay). The mizzen, sheeted tight, keeps the bow into the wind,
reducing the side sheer that can unseat an anchor. Also makes for a
quieter ride in a blow.



Is this one of those tactics you now
consider "passe"?

I don't think anything that works is passe, but some things that
worked on older boats don't on newer designs. Deploying warps vs. sea
anchors (off the bow or stern? what about chafe? etc.) to slow the
boat down is one of those perennial debates that is best solved boat
by boat in 30 knots so that you can gain insight for the off chance
you'll need to know at 60 knots.

Five weeks to launch and this year's MOB drills....G

R.

(Bob Whitaker) asked:
....snip...
P.S. What do you think of cutter vs sloop vs ketch rigs?
....snip...

Well, you've perhaps already guessed my response. grin

Frank's Rig Rant
aka My Opinion and Welcome to It

KETCHES

I have a coupla years of ownership of, and a decent amount of offshore miles
on, ketches (the one I owned and, later, my father-in-law's). Like many of
the other boat types I've spurned in this thread, I find them lovely to look
at, elegant in repose, nautical in presentation, and pretty much a slow
pain-in-the-ass as a sailboat on all but a couple of points of sail. Allow
me to rant against ketches for a bit.

Their defenders claim many advantages to this rig: two masts for redundancy
in case of a dismasting; split sailplan gives easier sail handling; multiple
masts and the various types of sails they support allow unparalleled ability
to match your canvas to conditions; ...have I forgotten anything?

So, my response is:

Split sail plans make sail handling easier. Sure, in 1904, when some poor
sucker had to go below, carry up a heavy, wet canvas sail, hank it on, then
haul it up the wooden mast with a hemp rope using primitive types of
mechanical advantage. But this is 2004. Who nowadays does not have a roller
furling jib? Hell! Even some racers have 'em. You no longer hafta change
headsails for every 5 knots of wind. And as for difficulties in hauling
halyards... if you're experiencing exasperation, buy bigger Barients. I see
lots of traditional cruisers with POWERED winches. Come on, this is not a
realistic factor. In my experience, split sailplans simply add to your
workload. Not that big a deal in mild conditions; but we all seem to love to
talk about "heavy weather" and 'big seas." Me, I'm lazy. I want my life to
be easy in easy conditions and I *need* my life to be easy in complicated
conditions. When a squall comes up, the sloop reels in a couple reefs on the
main with his single-line reefing, rolls in the jib some, and he's ready. Wa
nna go through the Chinese-fire-drill laundry list to do the same
preparation for a ketch, flying as many as five different sails? Hurry,
hurry, Hercules!

Oh, and the safety factor or having an extra mast for redundancy, in case
one comes down...? Well, if you'll notice, many ketches use a triatic stay
as part of their rigging. This ties the masts together! If one comes down,
they're both coming down. Twice as much work, even in failure more!

The ability of a ketch to customize a wider variety of sail combinations
than a sloop is theoretically true. So what? A sloop with a roller furling
jib and some kind of short-hand-friendly flying sail (asymmetrical
spinnaker, cruising 'chute, whatever) is capable of easily and simply
creating a pretty damned wide variety of sail configurations itself. The
"fact" that a ketch can put up staysails in combination with various size
sails on her dual masts, along with various types of jibs, etc. doesn't
necessarily mean that the ketch has a *better* ability to fly the perfect
sailplan for a given condition. I guarantee that a sloop with a roller
furling jib and an easy-to-handle flying sail will make better time and
arrive at her destination with a more rested crew than a ketch in almost all
conditions, especially if there's any windward work involved.

And by the way, IMO, you should replace your standing rigging every ten
years. Wanna get a coupla cost estimates of the price difference between
rerigging a sloop and rerigging a ketch? Ouch!

For the sake of saving me a lot of time, I'll just throw yawls into this
group. Not perfectly appropriate; but good enough for Usenet. For a defense
of the yawl as the only possible "real" sailing rig, see any of Don Street's
writings. He loves his yawl with a passion.

The other multi-mast type of rig, although not mentioned in the OP, is the
schooner. Guess what I think about them? cynical grin

Well, actually I'm gonna make two exceptions to my general rant here. I
would endorse the Freedom cat-ketches; plus, there's a Freedom cat-schooner
(I don't know what else you'd call the Freedom 39), which I'd endorse. Of
course, these rigs are pretty alien to a "normal" ketch or schooner; so it's
really a case of apples and oranges.

CUTTERS

My simplest response is that I don't see any realistic benefit to a cutter
over a sloop, just expensive, unnecessary complications. People talk about
"balancing the rig" and all that kinda mystical sail trim stuff; but IMO if
you have a well designed sloop (and I grant that that's a measurable "if"),
you can balance just as easily. No, make that *easier* 'cause you only have
two sails to deal with rather than three. And on those *occasional*days when
you're not in survival weather, you avoid the complications of additional
rigging and sails. Think having to walk the jib around when you tack. Now
think about doing that in heavy seas. You gonna do it or you gonna send your
wife forward? Parenthetically, cutters sometimes (often) push the jib out
onto a bowsprit. Ick! Ick! Ick! Bowsprits are another one of those things
which I like to look at on other people's boats; but damned if I want one.
The sea is an unforgiving environment. Why give it an easy way to destroy
your rig and tear holes in your boat?

SLOOPS

A modern simple sloop is really an elegant setup, especially for
single-or-short-handers. A main with single-line reefing, a roller-furling
jib, and some kind of easy-to-use flying sail give you a rig which is simple
and easy to handle, easy to adjust for changing conditions, and a lot
cheaper than buying all the sails you need to power a ketch through the same
range of conditions.

And that's my $.02 on *that* one. wink

Frank

C'mon folks, let's not let Jax turn this into wrecked.botes. I blocked him
long ago, so I never even see his posts unless someone responds. Let's not
destroy this NG too.

--


Keith
__
'I had to hit him -- he was starting to make sense.'
"Shen44" wrote in message
...
Subject: Best 34 foot blue water cruiser

goud, you talk to yourself. get out and about and talk with brokers for real,
by actually sitting down at their desks and discuss boats.

*you* want to list a Nimrod that has been taken offshore (understand the kind
of person who would even think of taking a Nimrod offshore is a loose canon to
start with) go ahead. Nobody is stopping you.

*you* try to sell some abused boats as "just right" to some potential buyers
and your rep as a broker is done.

have fun, but don't give up your day job.

Jax wrote:

dougies, don't be foolish. *you* are advocating taking a Nimrod offshore
with
your statement. yacht brokers, most of them, won't list a Nimrod they know
has
been taken offshore, for the boat doesn't usually pass survey upon sale.

Wo ho! :-)

Thanks for that one. It's spring time in the NW, and my gardening wife has
been
nagging me to bring home several bags of steer manure. A statement that most
yacht brokers won't even list such and such a boat saves me the trouble. I
printed off about 50 copies of your post, ran them through the shredder, and
now have a miraculously fertile mulch that should produce fully ripened
tomatoes by mid-April.

As an ex yacht broker, (and still working on a daily basis with brokers,
surveyors, etc) I must absolutely disagree. No yacht broker who intends to
survive in the business will make a sight-unseen evaluation of a potential
listing, based solely upon whether the boat has been used under condition A
or
condition B.

If a boat has been offshore and remains undamaged, the offshore experience is
unimportant. If the most prestigious trademark on the planet has a fractured
hull to deck joint, cracked bulkheads, etc etc etc as a result of offshore
abuse, the brand name won't save it.

Used boats must be evaluated on an individual basis. Relying too heavily on
stereotype and the dockside rumor mill sometimes results in a prospect's
failure to consider a well found boat that would be ideal for his or her
purposes. More often, it
causes a prospective buyer to gloss over survey exceptions and other
warnings,
as, (after all), what could possibly be incurably wrong with a Brand X?

current thought (when one can discern it
among all the floating rec rooms at boat shows) seems to be that
faster is better to avoid the rough stuff in the first place,

it is not current thought, but rather current marketing advice, marketing
advice designed to sell bigger boats at higher prices.

At base, the marketing advice states that being on the water is dangerous and
therefore one should spend as little time sailing as possible. The marketing
advice seems to suggest (in a way that is not legally culpable) that a 9 knot
boat will experience no weather at sea, while a 5 knot boat will get pounded
repeatedly. The marketing advice does not *guarantee* 9 knot passages, but
merely suggests that such *might* happen, if you buys a 55 foot, 45,000 pound,
one point five million dollar vessel, rather than a ratty, unsafe, down at the
heel 35 foot boat for one hundred grand.

most people who have actually made long passages report typical daily mileage
is about 120 miles per day, give or take 20 or 30 miles depending on the
weather any particular day.

In other words, the marketing advice is selling boats to that portion of the
markeet that is terrified of the sea and wants to get off the water as quickly
as it can. This is a much larger market than is the market to sailors who find
sailing inherantly interesting.

One of the easiet ways to tell a sailor from a scared to death sailboat buyer
is the winds at which either expresses concern. the death is just around the
corner boat buyer talks of ROUGH seas as those that really are only maybe 4 to
6 feet high (often reported to be 20 footers) with winds of 20 knots (usually
reported not all that far off). the sailor who likes sailing is casual of
rough weather and if pressed merely says something about 50 knot winds and
building that made it hard to heat up the soup.

t'ain't funny, MaGee. It is real.
Endangering the lives of young coasties with wives and kids back on shore just
because someone lacked the capability to head to sea but did so anyway with and
EPIRB is a serious moral offense in virtually every society in the world.

Can you spell?

E
P
I
R
B


ANYone who thinks that way is a moral cretin.

You are going to endanger the life of a young coastie with wife and kids at
home just to rescue your scummy butt because you wanted to take your boat
where
you were not qualified to take it.

kriste almighty. You should be forcefully sterilized, and your children as
well should you already have childred.

what a putz.

You're funny.