# More Guts, or Less Sense?



## Jim H (Feb 18, 2006)

I had a great talk last night at the dock with the owner of the boat next to mine. We talked about many things, but one was his Columbia 22. It's also near our boats, and I've always admired it as a hale small craft with a nice green hull.

Basically, he owned it for 15 years. Bought it in '82, and sailed and did basic upgrades every year he owned it. No problem selling it to a friend when he moved up to a Catalina 27.

He was talking about how much he liked the boat, and noted that the previous owner had took it to Hawaii, twice. Both times in the 70s, both from San Francisco and back, once with a crew of two, and once with a crew of four...

Anyway, this is not a large boat, and the rigging looks basic to me (not super oversized off-shore gear). At the same time, I believed him. I know even a Cal 20 has been sailed to Hawaii once.

So, if we roll the clock back to the 70s, when you found Hawaii with a sextant or you didn't find it at all, were the sailors simply braver than most small boat sailors today, or did they just have less sense? Obviously, they survived. Maybe the trips weren't pleasant, but they made it and went again. Perhaps Robin Graham was a bad influence on them.

Today, however, even with the chartplotters, gps/epirbs, ssbs, liferafts, radar, generators, water-makers, etc., it seems like taking a Columbia 22 to Hawaii, twice, would be extremely unlikely. Is it that we're simply more informed and careful nowadays, or simply over-cautious and more likely to have the preparation kill the voyage than the seas?

Jim H


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I think that a lot has changed in sailing. 

The people who would take on voyages like sailing to Hawaii in a Columbia 22 were far better sailors than a lot of the sailors out today. They were sailing for the love of sailing, and saw it as a craft, unlike many of today's sailors. The sailors back then were much more serious about good seamanship, and saw it as a necessity, unlike many cruising sailors today, who see their sailboat as a lifestyle accessory. 

I think that radar, generators, watermakers, EPIRBs, GPS, SSB, or liferafts are not necessities, but luxuries, and people were successfully making transoceanic voyages for a long time without these devices.

I think that too many want to have the luxuries of their land-based lives, and not give up any of these luxuries, while still having the ability to sail from point A to point B. This may be why so many feel that it is necessary to have a 40'+ sailboat, with all of the above, to even go on short coastal cruises.


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

The 70's? How about now? I can't help but go back to this fellow's story.
http://www.laurig.com/articles/bill/frameset.html


----------



## jerryrlitton (Oct 14, 2002)

sailingdog said:


> I think that a lot has changed in sailing.
> 
> The people who would take on voyages like sailing to Hawaii in a Columbia 22 were far better sailors than a lot of the sailors out today. They were sailing for the love of sailing, and saw it as a craft, unlike many of today's sailors. The sailors back then were much more serious about good seamanship, and saw it as a necessity, unlike many cruising sailors today, who see their sailboat as a lifestyle accessory.
> 
> I think that too many want to have the luxuries of their land-based lives, and not give up any of these luxuries, while still having the ability to sail from point A to point B. This may be why so many feel that it is necessary to have a 40'+ sailboat, with all of the above, to even go on short coastal cruises.


Now substitute sailing with flying and sailboat with airplane and I feel your pain dude.

Jerry


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

Regardless of the skill of the crew, sailing a Columbia 22 to Hawaii would be such a foolish undertaking that I doubt the truth of the story. While built fairly heavily (as many boats of that era were) she is absolutely not designed or rigged to go offshore. She is so slow (the Columbia 22 carries a PHRF rating of 264 here in the Bay Area) that it would certainly require a passage of 3-4 weeks. And she is so small that I doubt enough provisions could be stowed for four crew for a 3-week voyage. Not to mention the incredibly cramped quarters for the crew on such a journey.

I know of which I speak. I owned one for years. An overnighter on the Bay with the wife and two daughters was plenty enough for me.


----------



## yotphix (Aug 18, 2006)

Whether someone has all the requisite skills but inadequate gear or the inverse, which seems quite common these days, luck probably has as much to do with many successful passages as anything else. Plus, you don't know what you don't know!


----------



## capn_dave (Feb 17, 2000)

*Again Dog yer right on*

I think fear has alot to do with it also. It is an excuse not to shove off. I have heard them all. like After I get my radar, my GPS is broke, on and on. I don't think that I have ever left the dock with my boat 100 percent.

I have sailed with Harry Heckel on his boat Idle Queen. For those of you that don't know Harry, He is the oldest person to sail around the world. (See my article in Latts and Atts October 2006) The Idle Queen dosent have much on her. NO life raft, No Radar, NO air conditioning,. Gee how could he leave the dock? He is crazy you say. Hardly he is as sharp as a tack. He is a seamen, with the skills to match. I truly believe he could take a log canoe and cross oceans.

Fair Winds

Cap'n Dave


----------



## eryka (Mar 16, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> I think that a lot has changed in sailing.
> 
> I think that too many want to have the luxuries of their land-based lives, and not give up any of these luxuries, while still having the ability to sail from point A to point B. This may be why so many feel that it is necessary to have a 40'+ sailboat, with all of the above, to even go on short coastal cruises.


I'm with you on this one! Too much confusion about "need" vs "want." It always amazes me how people ask how can have lived aboard a 33' for years without TV or microwave ...


----------



## msl (Jul 4, 2001)

*WWP 19 to Hawaii*

Bill Teplows trip to Hawaii.

http://www.wingo.com/billsvoyage/technotes.html


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Perhaps because of modern communication technology, people nowadays think too much, do too little. People now are more aware of all the extra stuff they could have before venturing offshore and seem to wait until they have it ALL before leaving. People who prepare for the worst case don't seem to realize that the worst case might only happen once in many many trips and then only if you are reckless because you are "prepared" for it.

A nice downwind, trade winds passage in a Columbia 22 seems like a reasonable thing to me. With modern weather forecasting the likelyhood of encountering really bad weather on that route is pretty small.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I asked sorta this same question on another thread because as a somewhat beginner, it's hard to know where the line is between guts and sense. It's easy when it comes to stuff like tv and a microwave, no of course I don't need or even want those. But when it comes to stuff like radar on an offshore trip, it's harder to know what you can get away with. One wants to sail both ballsy and intellegently. 


"Be bold and mighty forces will come to your aid." -Goethe. 

Either that or mother nature will send a storm that will sink your boat. 


I say go for it. You will always wonder if you don't give it a shot, and when you succeed you will be psyched.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

IMHO, radar is a luxury, especially on a smaller sailboat, where the power requirements are harder to meet. Of course, if you sail in areas, like the Gulf of Maine, where fog is a constant companion, then it rises from being a luxury to being a semi-necessary device.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Taking a 22-anything transpacific is a bit of heubris, especially since pacific long-term weathercasting wasn't as good in 1970 as it is now.

Navigation wasn't limited to sextant then, RDF was common and if I was "looking" for Hawaii I'd use RDF as well as a sextant. It still works today. Considering that even "casual" sextant use can get you a five-mile position circle at sea (if the wx gods are kind!) and that the Hawaian Islands are much larger than that, AND blessed by a wicked tall number of volcano peaks...I don't think they're a small target.<G>

Certainly a larger and safer target than, say, Bermuda. With or without GPS.

(And besides, even in 1970 you could follow the jet contrails heading into Hawaii. No on-board electronics needed.<G>)


----------



## lonebull (Jun 10, 2006)

Possibly advertisement and advertisement masked as articles has conditioned the modern day sailor to believe one needs more than a solid hull, rig and rigging, and cow sense to prepare for a voyage. We are a tenatious lot. Basically sailing and sailors have not changed. The perception as fed by media is a new ingredient though. Add to that those would be experts with no real experience and you have the ideal marketing medium where the decieved become the decievers. I do agree there is alot to be said for effort towards comfort and safety, but catching every pink elephant that may fall from the sky?? As for fear.....don't ask for more days in your life, but more life in your days.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Taking a 22 ft. boat across oceans even with high seamanship and navgation skills, still carries an element of risk most of us would not find acceptable. I would use the tragic death today of the "Crocodile Hunter" to illustrate the point that when you put yourself in dangerous situations...skill counts a lot and luck counts perhaps even more.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I'm not saying that going on a bluewater voyage in a 22' boat is an ideal situation. But, I would argue that you don't need to have a fully-equipped 36'+ boat, with two GPS chartplotters, radar, EPIRB, SSB, refrigerator, genset, watermaker, 42" LCD flat screen HDTV with gyro stabilized satellite dish, and all that to make the voyage either. 

Some of the safety gear and navigation gear makes sense to have aboard. An EPIRB and GPS are reasonably low cost and very reliable, so going without doesn't really make much sense. But a lot of the other stuff are really just luxuries, that have little, if anything, to do with the ability of the boat to cross oceans.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I would like to personally thank Jim H for providing Sailing Dog yet another opportunity to call someone stupid! Sailing Dog: Since you are such a knowledgeable and experienced sailor, why don't you take a 22 foot boat across the Pacific with just a Sextant. No GPS and no Radar. And no Sailnet.


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

gc said:


> A nice downwind, trade winds passage in a Columbia 22 seems like a reasonable thing to me. With modern weather forecasting the likelyhood of encountering really bad weather on that route is pretty small.


Did you read the initial post? The guy claims he sailed the Columbia 22 to Hawaii _*and back* _two seperate times. Not only that, he did it 30-some-odd years ago, before the casual sailor had weather forecasting services available to him.

Roundtrip to Hawaii and back on a 22-foot boat built for Southern California with a crew of four does not sound "like a reasonable thing" to me.


----------



## capn_dave (Feb 17, 2000)

*Surf Would a*

28.5 Irwin count? No Radar, No GPS, no SSB, I did have a compass, a clock and a sextant. I did not cross the Pacific but I did get the boat to the Marshall Islands. Oh by the way I started from Florida. As far as I know the boat is still there.

I fail to see where Dog called anyone stupid. I will let him nail ya he's a big boy.

Fair Winds


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

The polynesians dint need no steeenkin' sextant or compass!!!


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I would also offer up J. Slocum, St Brendan in a hide boat 'tween the Old and New Worlds and lets us not fort the good Capt. Bligh - who did a 3000+ nm trip in a 23 foot lifeboat.

Though I would guess if the Coast Guard had caught wind of something like that, they would have terminated the voyage - even back then.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Surfesq seems to have a problem with being able to read. But then again, he's one of those sailors who needs a 42' boat, with a 42" LCD HDTV, and every gadget known to man before he'll even put the boat in the water.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Sailing Dog: Let's face it...Admit you are too much of a ***** to sail a 22 foot sailboat across the Pacific with just a Sextant. But you are man enough to call everyone on this site stupid. Unlike you, I have sailed across an Ocean.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Capn Dave: You are missing the point...I celebrate anyone with the balls to sail anything across an ocean. I think Sailing Dog has not sailed more than 100 miles offshore. But don't believe me. Type the word "stupid" on this search feature for this site. You wll find Sailing Dog regularly uses the term to describe other sailors.


----------



## Jim H (Feb 18, 2006)

Hmmm. I think I preferred Sailnet before every thread was subject to Fight Club-ization. Stick to PMs for personal stuff, please.

Fstbttms is right to question the validity of the original story-- history detectives may find it was exaggerated over time. Maybe the boat was shipped back from Hawaii, maybe it only went once with two, maybe never at all. My sense is that it did make it, but I haven't hired private eyes.

Still, I think there are enough simliar stories to warrant the question. In fact, I bet there are more similar trips than are commonly known. One of my favorite stories is that of Ed Hart's -- http://www.solantamity.com/Extraneous/MuggingsPlus.htm. He went to Hawaii in an Islander 24. Then a Cal 25. Then he circumnavigated in a Cascade 29 (a $10k investment...).

I also like this Cal 20 that went to Hawaii: http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/5471/chalupaprep.htm

Then, of course, there's the Cal 25 that circumnavigated (a $15k investment), with a growing family enroute: http://www.setsail.com/s_logs/martin/martin.html

I like Nigel Calder's take on this. In the introduction to his Cruising Handbook (2001), he notes that he's never crossed an ocean, and maybe never will. He has more than a few bluewater miles, though.

His advice about those "researching" the latest $3,000 navigational aid before taking off is that it's likely evidence of their lack of confidence in their seamanship. Spend the $3,000 on something that will improve your confidence, like a course or an offshore training passage, he advises. I think this also ties to the "fear" comments made in this thread. Maybe the thread's title should have been "More confidence, or less sense?"

Jim H


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Jim: You don't make the Rules. And, my point is relevant to this thread. The most prolific purveyor of advice on this Site is Sailing Dog. (aka Mayor McCheese). Anyone who disagrees with his point of view is "stupid" to use his words. (Meanwhile giving advice on the best flat screen TV on another thread seeking advice on same). Yet, he has never sailed more than 100 miles offshore. So you have to take his "advice" with a grain of salt. Sorry, it had to be said because his pointed criticism and hollow opinions have grown tiresome. 

Anyone can sail any boat anywhere in the world. That point has been proven over and over again by countless people. There is no doubt that one can sail a 22 foot sailboat anywhere under any conditions. But what is the point? It reminds of a bright idea some hippies in California had a few years ago: They decided to sell "natural" apple juice. Guess what happened? Children died because they forgot that Louis Pasteur was a hero for inventing a little thing called Pasteurization. The point is Yes, quaint gadgets like Sextants are fun but they are obsolete. Use the tools that are available.


----------



## chrondi (Mar 24, 2004)

"The people who would take on voyages like sailing to Hawaii in a Columbia 22 were far better sailors than a lot of the sailors out today. They were sailing for the love of sailing, and saw it as a craft". This epitomizes the reasons why guts got the upper hand over sense in those days. On the other hand, every sailor will tell you that you should not sail a 22 footer to Hawaii if you don't feel to have enough confidence and if you do so being inexperienced/ill prepared for such a huge task you are just stupid!


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

I fail to see, yet, why one would care much about what OTHER people's motivation is for owning and/or sailing a boat. If someone has the money, and wants to buy a half million dollar boat and load it up with as much hi-tech gear as possible, who cares? Why sneer at them and say "oh, but they aren't REAL sailors like me..."?
The same thing happens in many endeavors. You ever take a look at the stuff Boy Scouts use to go camping these days? Or mountain climbers? Or how about a simple bicycle? It seems you cant find a simple bicycle in many places, you have to have 20 or 30 gears, three or more suspension points, disc brakes....but guess what, its still just a bicycle underneath all that crap.

Why not celebrate a loose brotherhood of people who just love boats? Thats what the people here have in common, I think. They like boats.

petty back stabbing, name calling, denigrating someone else's choices of navigational instruments? Making a big deal for DAYS on end over whether someone wants not only a tv onboard, but (GASP! HORRORS!) a FLATSCREEN HDTV to boot! why, thats outrageous! Next thing you know, that greedy consumer will put something else new on his boat!! what an infantile, immature, and basically mean-spirit that all reveals.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Views expressed here are the posters opinions. Why is that so hard to understand? Opinions vary, and what ever expertise is intimated, should, like all things on the internet be subject to "cavet emptor". And just as opinions vary, so do peoples choices. What seems a luxury to one, my seem a necessity to another. There's no need to put someone down for their opinions or choices. One can disagree without such shennagins. Not only is it childish, it never fails to take the thread off topic. Make your point, dispute someone else's INTELLIGENTLY if you can, but dispute their point, not the person.

Regards,


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

PB: For once I actually agree with you! Wow....better make a note. That was the point I was making..well sort of. I mean how is that little "lecture" relevant in anyway to the topic at hand? Other than satisfying your apparent need to be a School Marm it really serves no purpose.

Yes, I have a flat screen TV on my boat because I can. And by the way, there is nothing better than spinning on a hook on your boat watching the Skins. (I wish it was 42"). I have done my share of roughing it. Camping under plastic tarps as a Boy Scout, long sails on little boats because that was all I could afford. I admire people who take these longs sails on lousy boats. But I am also entitled to think they are nuts! I say if the Techology is available use it. It's a heck of lot easier to find Bermuda with a GPS than it is with a Sextant. And I have done both.


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*Confession*

I now feel compelled to confess that I also too put a flat screen tv on our boat. If it helps any we're planning to watch the Pirates of the Caribbean sequel DVD on it when we get our hands on a copy. 

We haven't sailed across any oceans and we don't plan on it either. My sailing hat is off to those who endeavour to take on such a task in whatever kind of small vessel. After over 1100 skydives I feel that I may have used up most of my luck so we'll restrict our voyages to coastal and island hopping. Now go ahead and call me a sissy if you want.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Good for you Neal. It's your boat, your life. Live it to please yourself, not some one else.


----------



## bsfree (Oct 25, 2001)

10 years ago when I bought my first boat I dreamt of sailing away and ending my days in the South Pacific. I too thought I couldn't go anywhere without all the "toys". Just as I became debt free, and able to buy the things I "needed", events happened and I had to sell the boat. Now I have another boat and have spent the past year or so working on her to bring her up to par. I have a flat screen (15") because it's so much easier to accomodate than a chunky 13" tv. I figure the boat will be ready by next spring, and have no idea if I ever will make it to the South Pacific. But Catalina for long weekends and Santa Monica bay is fine by me, if I never do anything else. I still think about being self sufficient and sailing the oceans, but as time goes by I doubt it more and more, besides I'd miss the Simpsons and House too much. 
I read these threads with much interest, as recreational sailors we have a lot in common, and it's really no surprise that refridgerators, flat screens, gps etc are debated for their pro's and con's. Personally, I want the best of both worlds, to have the "toys" and a boat that is capable of more than I probably am. It may make a difference that I live on my boat, and of course want my comforts, but my reasons for buying a boat in the first place are still strong, and even if the dreams remain just that, I love the life and the comaradery of the people in the marina, and have forgiven myself if I do no more than be an armchair sailor going on little jaunts.
I'd like to thank you guys for what are sometimes quite stimulating discussions, and always of interest to someone.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

Another navigation device back then, as well as now, was your VHF radio. You sight a nearby ship and ask him for a fix. I suspect some sextant sailors might not relish admitting this, but many seagoing ship officers recall it, and were happy to help out during an otherwise boring watch.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

Neal, its okay as long as you fit in a "Captain Ron" session between new movies.

As for the rest of it, I dont understand people who nominate themself to the ranks of "real sailors", decide that they and they alone can define the real sailors, and then in the next breath attacks his fellow sailor.

Its a shame to have to unwrap a bunch of immature drivel to get to the good points that are actually being made, sometimes.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Neal: I will say it....You always have to wonder aobut your masculinity when Panty Boy sticks up for you. I think the Mayor might try to win you over to the dark side next. 

Canibul: You are kinding going a little swishy Dude...Watch the line. This is a Whine-Free Zone after all. 

BsFree: Nothing wrong with the Flat Screen on a boat. I am amused by the number of people who think you can't have modern conveniences on a boat. 

Does anyone really think Sir Robin Knox Johnston, who is getting ready to do a solo navigation at age 67, will not have some form of entertainment on board? Or for that matter should he only use a Sextant because that is what he used the first time he circumnavated? He will have more high-tech crap on that boat than you can shake a stick at. It doesn't make it less dangerous. He still has to round the horn. The only difference is maybe he will do it a bit faster and he will know exactly where he is at. Ironically, the ones screaming the loudest about technology are the ones who never leave the Harbor!


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

Swishy? Being called swishy by esq seems to be a little bit like being called ugly by a frog.

So, by your lights, and considering a hypothetical situation, someone who sailed with the wind at their back across an ocean is a better sailor than the one who sails halfway across with the wind, and then tacks back against it? Even though both sailed the same distance, and one had tougher conditions, your argument is that the guy who coasted is a better sailor because he made a passage...
Or are you going to do another 180? Man, a snake would get dizzy trying to follow your logic sometimes.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Canibul: Oh you are a bit Swishy. Just what kind of meat are you eating anyway with that nickname? 
Work with me here, I am trying to help you Dude.....Put down the Bong and step away. The reefer is making you paranoid and your toker logic is freaking people out Man. Don't quite understand your point. When you sober up give it another go.

Here, I will go slow for you. The people on this site who criticize others for using too much technology are day sailors. Why is that?


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*the bottom line*

What about an EPIRB ? Do the purists out there think that would be cheating the sailing elements ? Like the GPS, the EPIRB is totally dependent on the satellites as well as a 24/7 staff to follow-up or the EPIRB would be worthless anyway.


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*agreed*



Surfesq said:


> Neal: ...I think the Mayor might try to win you over to the dark side next.
> 
> ...


I think the Mayor already agreed with me once. At this point though we probably don't agree on what exactly that was.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Canibul said:


> As for the rest of it, I dont understand people who nominate themself to the ranks of "real sailors", decide that they and they alone can define the real sailors, and then in the next breath attacks his fellow sailor.


Real sailors don't have to nominate themselves. As you may have noticed, some here, never address the points made, yea or nay, just put down the poster. So trying to respond is pointless.


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

Folks, I would attempt to make the trip from Seattle to Hawaii in my Venture 21 if I thought I could get away with it but losing both my wife (whom I love) and my house, etc. etc. keeps me from trying. Ya can't make no money sitting in the middle of the freakin' Pacific in my line of work. That being said, if somebody else told me they were gonna try it I'd probably think they were daft. Funny how that goes. Me? I'm crazy enough to do it but that's just me. Who the hell cares what equipment someone does or doesn't put on their boat. It's THEIR FREAKING BOAT!


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

CharlieCobra said:


> Who the hell cares what equipment someone does or doesn't put on their boat. It's THEIR FREAKING BOAT!


Hear hear!

Dewey


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

I think I tried to say exactly the same thing a few posts back. You know, before I was accused of being 'swishy", then a bong-smoker, and finally a drunk.

Guess if those are the only people stupid enough to sometimes question the unparalleled wisdom of the mighty Surf guru, then I am probably in pretty good company. So, break out the smoke, the rum, and lets go cruising...??? nah, doesnt fit. I dont think I would have lasted 35 years working offshore with that kind of approach.

He needs to polish up his personal attacks a little, but thats okay. Until he sails a small unequipped boat to Hawaii and back without electronics, he's all just theoretical anyway, isnt he?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Panty Boy: You and Canibal should get a room... Geez....
By the way Panty Boy: What the hell is "Sea of Dreams" all about? Why don't you just put the name of the Lake where boat is tied up?

Now Canibul back to your original point. Just because people sailed a fricking log canoe across the Pacific does not mean that you don't get to use modern equipment. Why is that such a difficult concept for you to agree with?


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

My original point???? Would you please, as a favor, go back and read my post, # 28 in this thread? Is this another 180?


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Surfesq said:


> Panty Boy: You and Canibal should get a room... Geez....
> By the way Panty Boy: What the hell is "Sea of Dreams" all about? Why don't you just put the name of the Lake where boat is tied up?


Since you asked an actual question, I'll give you the courtesy of a reply. The lake I'm on is Clear Lake, TX, which just happens to connect to Galveston Bay, which just happens to connect to the Gulf of Mexico. I sail for 5-8 hours at least every third day on Galveston Bay. During Sept and Oct I'll be going down to Galveston, Matagorda Bay and Port Aransas. I'll be going offshore from Galveston south, not down the ditch. November will find me heading to Florida for the winter, then following spring up the East Coast, and back south with the fall. That, is my Sea of Dreams. Living how I want, doing what I want. Scoff and sneer to your heart's content, but it takes a small person to belittle another.


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*plumb bob*



Surfesq said:


> ...
> Now Canibul back to your original point. Just because people sailed a fricking log canoe across the Pacific does not mean that you don't get to use modern equipment. ...


Ok since you guys keep bringing up the hypothetical log canoe I've got to say something. There actually was a Venezulan guy about 10 or 15 years ago who did sail across the Pacific with a dugout log canoe and a plumb bob to sight the stars at night for position. Laying on his back it took him about 30 seconds with the plumb bob to shoot the stars within 1/2 degree. Then he'd sail to the right latitude for the island he wanted and go west. That got him within 30 miles, so he then used clouds, birds, and wave reflections to find the island over the horizon.

He started out with a sextant but lost it one night when the canoe capsized a few hundred miles from South America. Seems that the open canoe was very tender.

I'd say that we should all be able to agree at least at one end of the spectrum he was an example of a real sailor.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

PBzeer, thats all my old stomping grounds. Grew up there.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

"Love, exciting and new....Love, it's waiting for you...Love Boat..."

It's touching watching your kind bond.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

....Not that there's anything wrong with that. 

PB: No problem with you living on a boat or sailing around. It sounds pretty good. I just like busting your balls. 

But now I have Canibal. Dude: I was referring to Post 28. I am definitely on the Technology Side. I have never waivered from that position anywhere on this site at any time. As I have said many times, I have sailed to Bermuda using only a sextant and a paper chart and I have sailed with GPS, laptop, autopilot and weather routing linked together. I prefer the latter. But that's just me. 

When I sailed to England, (I apologize for not turning around halfway and coming back!!), I had only the benefit of a handheld GPS and paper charts. (And Radar). I did have my sextant with me for backup. I used quite a few AA batteries on that trip. 

What amuses and Irks me is this concept that anyone who uses technology is some kind of yuppie puss. Thats just silly bullshit in my opinion. Todays greates sailors use all of the technology available. You still have to sail the boat! 

As for the flat screen...I am not giving it up!


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Boringly predictable as usual, your replies never fail to remind of Al Franken or Michael Moore. I can't help but wonder if it's Fruedian that you display the transom of your boat with your name. Funny how you rag on sailingdog, and then don't even have the honesty to actually reply to the post. Not suprising you'd know the Love Boat theme though.

Now it's back to ignoring irrelevant posters and let them wallow in their insignificance.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Oh Panty Boy....Please don't go Postal on us.


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*appetite*



Surfesq said:


> Canibul: Oh you are a bit Swishy. Just what kind of meat are you eating anyway with that nickname?
> ...


Canibul, is that mysterious land you've found in Fiji perhaps ? I know they don't like to talk about the "long bone" and "long pig" meals that some enjoyed there a few generations ago, although some once considered those to be as you say, "acceptable alternatives".


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*it's okay really; it won't hurt you*



Surfesq said:


> ...
> What amuses and Irks me is this concept that anyone who uses technology is some kind of yuppie puss. Thats just silly bullshit in my opinion. Todays greates sailors use all of the technology available. You still have to sail the boat!


Something else to consider is that some people are afraid and/or intimidated by technology. Perhaps they 'dost protest too much. Have we hit upon that nerve here ?



Surfesq said:


> As for the flat screen...I am not giving it up!


Surf please, don't even joke about doing that !


----------



## yotphix (Aug 18, 2006)

Hey smurfette! Sextants are obsolete since the invention of gps. Sails are obsolete since internal combustion. And oh yeah, Narrow-mindedness is obsolete since the invention of tolerance and acceptance!


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

I am laughingly concerned about Surfette. I think maybe someone else reads the posts to him and he has a short term memory problem. He also has some serious sexual identification issues, tending to turn anything he perceives as a mental challenge (everything) into the equivalent of a verbal vomitus, while congratulating himself with his perceived cleverness. Very obviously a latent homosexual, and very uncomfortable with it. 

I wonder what medication he has to take when he knows he will have to function socially? I think most people, if forced to be in his presence for long, would drag his obnoxious ass out-of-the-closet and throw him overboard pretty quick.

Its a shame, really, because the boy does have a valid point from time to time, like, once in 97, and then again in 02, briefly.

Bottom line here, I pretty much voiced my support of technology in post 28, and he got on this gay, dope smoking, drinking thing after that, while I was actually in agreement with the technology issues. Strange. He needs help, but unfortunately, if its me that gives it to him its gonna double his dental insurance.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

There's really no reason not to have technology on a boat if the wallet and batteries can sustain it, though it could easily be argued it isn't necessary. I find it more a question of more reckless, than guts though. Guts is what it takes to do something you don't want to do, because you have to, such as in a crisis situation. Or as a volunteer in some useful endeavour. To go off and deliberately put yourself in harm's way, just for the thrill of it, is merely selfish and reckless, not gutsy. There's nothing wrong with pushing yourself to your limits. That's how you get better at something. Beyond that though, and you're flirtin' with disaster.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Canibal: (aka Bucaneer), You keep going on about homosexuality...Are you obssessed? What is this, Brokeback Sailnet? Geez Dude. I think I agreed with your infamous Post#28 like two days ago. I support your somewhat latent view that techology is a good thing. Again, put down the Bong and please try to focus Dude. 

PB: Again I agree with you. Twice in two days. I must be getting soft. 

Dikphix: Of course the combustion engine replaced the sail numbnuts. But sailing was not discredited as form of navigation. The Naval Academy no longer teaches the Sextant. Just a minor thing really unless you want to know where you are give or take 30 miles! lol. I know how to use a Sextant Dikphix. And, I am teaching my 5 year old how to use one. But this is the thing Dikphix. It is an obsolete technology that has been proven unsafe overtime. It's fun, interesting and gives you a great understanding of our Celestrial System. But that is its only usefulness in a modern world. Unless you are just trying to find a Continent of course. But then you could just sail East from New York and probably hit either Europe or Africa. So why use any navigational equipment right Dikphix?

I say use whatever technology is out there. The point I keep trying make to you fellas is that the top sailors in the World who accomplish the most amazing feats are loaded with technology. So why knot?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

*Again, Surfesq is more interested in talking trash than getting the facts right. *The US Naval Academy is still teaching the use of the sextant. See this story in the NYT. What they are no longer requiring or teaching is the ability to do the calculations necessary, and are using celestial navigation software to do the calculations.

Apparently, his mouth is in gear, but his brain is not.


----------



## eryka (Mar 16, 2006)

S-dog is right, while USNA dropped celestial as a *requirement* about a year or two ago, it is still offered as an elective. It is still *required* for a senior skipper designation. On the sailing trips that Dan leads, and every one I've been on, GPS and radar are available, but we still turn them off occasionally, the mids are required to show they can use hand-bearing compass to plot fixes and keep a course on paper charts.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*Mayor McCheese*

Mayor: Well Mayor McCheese, congrats. I was thinking of this article, which I actually had to google, which I suppose you did as well. But I do concede the correction. I remember reading the article but did not see the correction. No doubt it was buried somewhere in the back of the paper! lol.

But Mayor, if you had read carefully what I said, I know that's difficult for a guy of limited intelligent like yourself, you would have noticed that I still use my Sextant and in fact am teaching my 5 year old how to do it. (We use the computer for calculations). I believe its a valuable skill. I don't reject the old ways, but I don't understand relying on something obsolete exclusively. That's just my opinion.

George Mannes <[email protected]>
Thu, 21 May 1998 15:26:16 -0400 
> ANNAPOLIS, Md. (AP) -- The computer has sunk the ancient art of celestial
> navigation at the Naval Academy. In the new academic year, midshipmen
> will no longer have to learn the often tedious task of using a
> wedge-shaped sextant to look at the stars and plot a ship's course.
> Instead, the academy is adding a few extra lessons on how to navigate by
> computer. Naval officials said using a sextant, which is accurate to a
> three-mile radius, is obsolete. A satellite-linked computer can pinpoint
> a ship within 60 feet. [...]
(http://www.sjmercury.com/business/tech/docs/058935.htm)


----------



## Jim H (Feb 18, 2006)

eryka said:


> the mids are required to show they can use hand-bearing compass to plot fixes and keep a course on paper charts.


This is good to know. My wife and I will be tested on similar skills for the ASA 105 certification: http://www.asa.com/asa_standards/standard_coastal_navigation.html

Jim H


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I agree with everything Jim and Eyrka just said. I know I have advocated in the past that rudimentary navigation skills, plotting, line of site fixes, even Sextants are critical skills. I think you need to understand the basics in order to grasp more complex issues. Particularly when you get in open water and you want to start utilzing more complex technology like weather routing for example.


----------



## eryka (Mar 16, 2006)

The first time they get onto the Bay at night, and are trying to distinguish a nav light from the headlights of a car on shore, you understand how much more situational awareness is necessary to use paper charts, etc, than chartplotters. Personally, I want *all* the tools I can have, in my sailing toolbox -- tho I learned to use a sextant more for the mathematical elegance of the solution than because I expect to navigate my lifeboat with it <G>


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Saying that 4 people couldn't make a passage in 3 weeks might not be accurate. My grand father 3 back....sailed from Oslo (Christiana) in the 1860's...3 families...on a 30' sailboat that they built...took 7 weeks. One of the families lost a baby on the way over...Landed in Nova Scotia.... So....unless your there...one never knows.
DLM


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

While this thread isn't "Fight Club", I see some of the mentality has creeped in here. Let's keep that behavior in the club thread shall we? All this hollering when most of ya agree, geesh. You can sure tell when Surf gets agitated from all of the typos. So, who's gonna sail a sub 25 footer to Hawaii soon?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Sorry Charlie....lol.


----------



## banshee (Jun 29, 2006)

seems like the "Club" has a new home!


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

Hmm...notice any clues to this mystery yet?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Look out Bucaneer has an evil plan. I hope it does not involve your kinky biblically scorned acts with other men. Because if it does, count me out.


----------



## Parley (Jul 13, 2006)

The P.O. of my C-27 took her to Hawaii and back twice from S.F. Bay. I believe him as he was very proud to show me pics of both trips. I also know another C-27 on S.F. Bay that has been to Hawaii and back. Although I do not plan on taking this boat offshore as it is not the purpose for which she was built (shroud/stay/chainplate attachments being the biggest issues), I have no doubt that I could safely sail her to Hawaii. In fact, my son wants to do exactly that for his senior project.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

Surfesq said:


> Look out Bucaneer has an evil plan. I hope it does not involve your kinky biblically scorned acts with other men. Because if it does, count me out.


you really just can't help yourself, can you. Were you abused by a neighbor or uncle or something?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Nah, I just like picking on sissies.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

I suspect the only thing anyone lets you pick is your nose.


----------



## lamb0174 (Jul 17, 2006)

*And now, back to the topic at hand...*

Some people may say that anyone trying to make an offshore passage in 22' boat is crazy, but then they are among good company. With the motality rates that crews experienced during the 15th-18th century, the sailors of antiquity were definitely a little crazy.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

he started it, ma..


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I wouldn't have a problem using a 22 foot boat for something like sailing to Bermuda. I don't know if I would sail it to England or say Hawaii. But anything is possible. The book I am reading, "My Old Man and the Sea" tells the story of a father and son sailing an engineless small boat using a sextant so it can be done. But why?


----------



## jerryrlitton (Oct 14, 2002)

Why hike Mt Kilimanjaro when you can take a helicopter there&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Surfesq said:


> I wouldn't have a problem using a 22 foot boat for something like sailing to Bermuda. I don't know if I would sail it to England or say Hawaii. But anything is possible. The book I am reading, "My Old Man and the Sea" tells the story of a father and son sailing an engineless small boat using a sextant so it can be done. But why?


Have a stiff drink ready towards the end for when you read about his hands and friction


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Finally.....Jerry you hit the nail on the head. Yes, you could take a helicopter to the top. Or you could hike it in leather boots with laces and canvas jackets covered with wax. But are you less of a man if you hike it with modern equipment?


----------



## Jim H (Feb 18, 2006)

Surfesq said:


> Finally.....Jerry you hit the nail on the head. Yes, you could take a helicopter to the top. Or you could hike it in leather boots with laces and canvas jackets covered with wax. But are you less of a man if you hike it with modern equipment?


Surf, you seem exceptionally concerned about what makes one more or less than a man. It's one of your more endearing traits. 

Anyway, using modern equipment doesn't make you a wimp. So relax. What it means, however, is that you are following in the footsteps of those who had a harder row to hoe. Out of historical perspective and humility, their achievements deserve our respect. In many cases, we benefit from their trials and sometimes deaths, and we should be minimally conscious of that. Not inferiority-complex-ridden, but conscious.

It seems a self-centered thing to say "everything is equal, regardless of time and gear and history." I'd like to think that we are achieving things that future generations will benefit from, even if our achievements aren't spectacular. If not, where do our kids position themselves and base their goals (hopefully not just repeating the past).

So, honestly, I'm lost when you claim someone is insulting all of us by saying '70s sailors were "better" than today's sailors. I'm not "folding up shop" even if I beileved the statement. Many weren't, or is it that there were far fewer? In the end, though, they didn't have tools and options that we benefit from, and if for nothing else I can respect their accomplishments for that. Heck, I can do that without feeling slighted.

Footnote: I think it's very cool you're teaching your daughter how to use a sextant. I also think my son and daughter might read our posts here at some point in the future. It's worth being careful. If you can, keep me out of your name calling cycles.

Fair winds,

Jim H

p.s. I had a phenomenal night sail tonight. Sorry if that's affecting this post.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

jorjo said:


> Have a stiff drink ready towards the end for when you read about his hands and friction


Pretty lonely passage, huh?


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

"Surf, you seem exceptionally concerned about what makes one more or less than a man. It's one of your more endearing traits."

Boy you got THAT right. And we don't even need to go into his LESS endearing ones....


----------



## jerryrlitton (Oct 14, 2002)

In my opinion it is not a matter if it makes you a man but when accomplished does it give you a sense of satisfaction. That you were able to step out of your comfort zone and expand your horizons so to speak and push yourself a bit. I think you mentioned pushing yourself or a concept like that in the earlier posts in your "Fight Club" thread. That is what drives me more times then not. Very few people if any would actually know you even did it, just you and God. But on the flip side, when I fly my airplane or helicopter all available navigation gear is operating to give me/us maximum situational awareness.

Jerry


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Jim: Don't worry. You will notice that I only take shots at people who are intellectually weak. As for my daughter and the Sextant, children want to learn and get excited when they are involved. She wants to know when we are on a Port Tack or why we are tightening the sails. It's exciting to see her learning. 

I do take issue with a couple of points you made Jim. I am not obsessed with machismo. Although I do enjoy pointing out the obvious when someone excudes a certain femine air. However, there is an element of testerone in any aspect of adventure. That is what fuels any man who desires to test his skills against nature. 

I also think you are missing my point on this topic. I am not saying that accomplishing a dangerous task is less noble now because the equipment is superior. It certainly less dangerous now than it used to be. The Everest example: Look how many people have now summitted? Sure its an accomplishment and many people die. But they are wearing state of the art equipment and acending on fixed lines set by others. It's not nearly as challenging. 

Sailing is the same these days. It is still an accomplishment to sail across the Ocean. And in many ways still very dangerous. But its not as dangerous when you have GPS, Radar, Sat Phone, etc. The boats are better as well. 

That all being said, I personally don't see the point of duplicating a task with the same equipment. I understand why people would want to do it. But it's not for me. I like the equipment. It's fun and challenging to use it. I take a different approach. I like to single hand very much and intend to do a long Ocean Passage alone in the Spring. But I will use the equipment that is available. That's just my opinion. I am not saying its better or worse.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Surfesq said:


> I am not obsessed with machismo. Although I do enjoy pointing out the obvious when someone excudes a certain femine air. However, there is an element of testerone in any aspect of adventure. That is what fuels any man who desires to test his skills against nature.


Wonder how a Ellen MacArthur or the late Susan Butcher would see that comment? Or are you implying they are butch? And what in blazes is a "feminine air"? And given that such a thing could be gleaned from mere words, who elected you arbitor of such?

It seems there's always someone who can't just give their opinion, but have to make it personal as well, rather than stand on the merits of their opinion. And though they are free to act so boorishly, it shows a lack of respect and civility for the other members of this community. You aren't the only only Surf, just the most blatant one.


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

I could see you two at the yatch club. You in your blazer, Surf in his Columbia and me? I'm at the bar with baggy jeans and a bright yellow shirt that says "Bite Me!"


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Panty Boy: What is your opinion on this topic???? I have tried to help you become a Man so many times over the past few months but you just cannot do it. You are that skinny kid with his pants pulled up high on the playground who ran and told the teacher and then wondered why the other kids mocked him. Stop playing School Marm and weigh in on the topic. 

As for your "point," You know I have a tremendous amount of respect for Dame Ellen McArthur. Frankly, I think she would join me in laughing at you. 

Susan Butcher: Don't know much about her. But then usually on weekends I am not watching Dog Racing on Espn 115!!!!


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Thank you for proving my point. I knew I could count on you. If you bothered to actually read what is said, you would see that I did weigh in on the topic, and managed to do so without the need of personal comments.

ESPN? Unlike you, the first thing I did was take the TV OFF my boat. Not put one on it. 22 years in Alaska tends to make one aware of people doing all manner of outdoor activities, as well as engaging in them. I learned long ago, I don't have anything to prove to anyone. And if I did, somehow, I doubt acting like a spoiled child would prove much that was benifical.

I would though, suggest that if you desire to "help" anyone become a man, you learn to be one yourself first. While not a prerequisite, it is helpful to actually know what you're talking about.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Panty Boy: You are a shivering little Bunny Rabbit holed up in that Dinghy you call a boat somewhere on a fricking lake!! 

Come on Panty Boy tell us how you feel about the topic at hand rather than lecturing. Your piercing little girlie voice is tiresome.


----------



## Ronbye (Nov 16, 2005)

I for one, consider this story to be totally true. I also agree that the sailor of the seventies and earlier is in all likelihood better prepared in terms of skills than sailors of today. The main reason is technology. Sailors today and I am one of them, have more access to the technology as a result of proven reliability, ease of use, small equipment size and of course affordability. Sailors today rely on that technology more because it is easier and somewhat provides a sense of safety and security while underway. (not necessarily a good thing to do) The skills that are important for sailing offshore before the availability of electronics for the masses came to be are still required, I.e, chartwork, sail handling, weather knowledge, and Col-Regs. But the emphasis on those skills are not. Now you have to be computer savy and your comfort needs are greater. Celestial Navigation using a sextant is one skill set that is being lost with the advance of technology. I also think that we are going to see paper charts go by the wayside in the very near future. What a shame.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I agree with you Ron. However, I don't think paper charts will go away. I can't imagine going to Sea without a hard copy back-up. Way too dangerous.


----------



## chrondi (Mar 24, 2004)

Dear friends,
I'm afraid that this thread has gone far and irreversibly astray. At first, there was the question of the true meaning of seamanship (old mariners vice new, rudimentary vice sophisticated equipment). Now, members quarrel about manhood (I imagine women reading this forum have the laugh of their lives). An objective external observer would just pose the following questions:
In what ethics code is it written that using state of the art navigation aids and technology will make you a lesser sailor, a less respected member of the marine community?
Why should you be barred from watching your favourite TV-program while on board?
Why should you be deprived of a comfort you can afford?
How can you justify installing a radar on a 20-footer when you lack the appropriate power supply?
Is it wise to venture offshore totally relying on your electronic gadgets? What if something fails at the worst moment (Murphy's Law!) and you are reduced to the essential?
Do you need to use a sextant to prove that you are a genuine sailor?
Do you really need to prove that you are a real sailor, and by what means?
By openly demonstrating your superior seamanship, do you feel a real man?
What has the gender question to do with the sea?
Just a few hard questions without obvious answers.
Please now all please stop and enjoy the sea breeze, either securely tied in a marina berth or hundreds of miles away from the nearest land, on board a mega-yacht or even a 12-foot dinghy, try to realize that the sea has the power to unite you and SHE IS THE REAL MASTER, not you!


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

PBzeer said:


> There's really no reason not to have technology on a boat if the wallet and batteries can sustain it, though it could easily be argued it isn't necessary. I find it more a question of more reckless, than guts though. Guts is what it takes to do something you don't want to do, because you have to, such as in a crisis situation. Or as a volunteer in some useful endeavour. To go off and deliberately put yourself in harm's way, just for the thrill of it, is merely selfish and reckless, not gutsy. There's nothing wrong with pushing yourself to your limits. That's how you get better at something. Beyond that though, and you're flirtin' with disaster.


As I said, if you bothered to actually read (or could it be a problem with comprehension?) you would see I have addressed the topic. The subject is not that complicated. Beating on one's chest doesn't make one a man. Apes can do that.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

Chrondi, I was thinking along the same lines. Its like trying to carry on an intelligent conversation in a restaurant with a loud boorish oaf with Tourette's sitting at the next table listening in... 

I was thinking about sailors of the 70's vs today. I am sure many of the people that were young and active then are still active today. Wonder what they have on their boats for navigation etc. NOW?


----------



## chrondi (Mar 24, 2004)

Indeed, you have addressed the topic early enough in this thread, but nobody has listened and stopped to argue ... and fight against each other about nonsense!


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I agree Chroni. The fact that Panty Boy and Bucaneer choose to live alternative lifestyles should not be an impediment to their ability to sail. I also agree that it is their right to huddle in Port in their tiny little boats and lecture other people on Sailnet.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

correction, make that a "loud, boorish, repressed homosexual with Tourette's"..


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I am an open minded guy Bucaneer. Again, I don't care if you bat for the other team. Just try to say something relevant to the thread or at least clever. You are really starting to bore us.


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

Canibul said:


> sailors of the 70's vs today. I am sure many of the people that were young and active then are still active today. Wonder what they have on their boats for navigation etc. NOW?


Here's a question I have an answer for.

What I used to have: rdf, vhf, sextant, tables and attendant liturature, charts, charting tools, chronometer, poiloting tools (bearing compass, suchlike) mental knotlog (the old sumlog would get eel grassed at regular intervals, so I learned to spit in the water and estimate speed, accuratly too!). Minimal battery systems for nav lights as "Athena" had tiny electrical
consumption.

What I now have: less the rdf, all of the above plus; Radar, GPS, Chartplotter, Autopilot all interfaced w/controls and displays at both upper and lower stations, vhf 2 stations interfaced with GPS for emergency system position broadcast. SSB also interfaced. various wind, speed, depth stuff. Very complicated redundent set of battery and charging stuff to keep all that crap (and the luxury thingys) a goin. Balmar killer alt, true charge 40+, dedicated eng, and gen set starter Batts. I might have missed somthing but I think thats about it.

Dewey


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

all on a 39 ft. boat? What do you consider the "luxury thingys"?
do you use the SSB for internet access?


----------



## chrondi (Mar 24, 2004)

Dewey,
do you still use RDF? It sounds like navigation class from the sixties!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I will risk Chiming in here for a moment on my thoughts. Maybe some agree - though I dare say many do not. However:

Can you sail to Hawaii on a 22 footer? What about England? Can you round the Horn and drop anchor in Alaska on something smaller than a 30 boat without electronics, and generators, and so forth...

ABSOLUTELY!!

My personal feeling is that we have all been fooled into thinking you must have this big yacht, massive electronics with coutless backups... and don't go to sea on anything less sea worthy than a Valiant because Hunters and Catalinas and Benes just aren't strong enough... Radar?? Are you crazy? Going to sea without a radar is nuts! WHat if one of those ships pops up? Watermaker? How on earth can you live without a watermaker? You cannot drink sea water...

I Dissagree Strongly. 

I have the income to buy those things... but I know my way around them too. I remember a broker I highly respect telling me once: Boats have gotten so expensive because of people. Back in the 70's, everyone thought a 35 footer was a big yacht. Now, anything less than 40 feet is small. Is that true? Well, it makes sense to me.

If you can afford all that other stuff, buy it. Why not??? IF YOU USE IT RIGHT IT WILL MAKE YOU SAFER. But too often people put all this emphasis into the things they THINK they must have to go offshore... and not enough emphasis on the things they SHOULD have: Like knowing your boat. Know how to dead-reckon. Learn the little tell-tales on the weather and the clouds. Learn how to really pilot your boat in a storm. Many of the electronics of today are nothing more than a crutch to make people feel more confident in their abilities (or lack of). THose are the people the Coast Guard risks their lives for.

Do I have all of those gadgets? Yep. I love 'em too. Do I have to have them? Nope. I could get by without them. And I think if we as sailors could convince a world (where 8 year old kids MUST HAVE cell phones and Gameboys) that you don't have to have all that junk to see your dreams, there would be a lot more people into sailing. Good seamanship does not get plugged in. It takes time and education and practice. 

The men of the 70's and the centuries before got by with only that phylosophy. To them, thier boats were advanced. 

Just my opinions though...

- CD


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

Canibul said:


> all on a 39 ft. boat? What do you consider the "luxury thingys"?
> do you use the SSB for internet access?


LOL! pretty funny huh?

Old "Athena" a 1964 S/S had not so much as pressure water. Everything is a luxury on "Heart of Gold", a very roomy Freedom 39 pilothouse Schooner.

180 gallons water, dedicated shower, 15 gal water heater, Two reverse cycle air conditioners 15,000 btu's each, windlass with three control stations, 7.7 KW diesel gen set. This is luxury to me.

Havent tried internet access thru SSB as yet, am still shaking down the vessel and have no puters on board cept for some bis related stuff (wifeys not retired yet).

Dewey


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

chrondi said:


> Dewey,
> do you still use RDF? It sounds like navigation class from the sixties!


The new equip was less rdf.

Dewey


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I think you make an excellent point Chrondi. In fact, I would quote Captain 
Aubrey: "What a wonderful modern world we live in." (From Masters and Commanders). 

I go back to what I said several days ago. Sir Robin Knox Johnson had an absolute state of the art boat when he completed the first Round Alone. He is now racing again but now on a 60 footer with all of the available technology. 

I don't criticize either viewpoint. I just favor using technology for myself. Although I would note that I have a 30 year old boat....I am spending my free time modernizing it. Anyway, at the end of the day, you still have to sail the damn thing. There is no getting around it! 

On the boat size issue, I think its just a matter of baby boomers wanting to use boats as Condominiums. The serious blue water boats, i.e., Shannons have not changed much in design or size.


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

Do you have a watermaker on board as well, to keep the 180 gallons topped up?
This is not an idle question. I am essentially looking around, cash in hand, to buy a boat. I have toned down my initial inclination to buy one of the "mid-size" South African Cats, after a couple years of research while wife and I navigated through everything involved in selling home in US and moving to tropics. Boat was shoved to back burner for a while. now am back on it big time.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Surf,

Assuming you were talking to me and not Chrondi - 

Yep (on the boat size). It is a manner of the times. I don't blame people for wanting all the creature comforts... why not!! What is wrong with that!!!???? I cannot see a thing wrong with it (if you have the money). 

I have said this in many threads, but bears repeating: People that have not spent a lot of time on boats just have no comprehension of the implications of adding even the smallest of items we take for granted on land. Here is one: A Washer Dryer. Anyone can correct me if I am wrong, but here goes:

Washer/Dryer Combo. 1500-2000. Now, those don't run off of love. They have to be inverted or have a generator. Inverter: 2000. You invert that power, you better be able to have a lot of extra juice for back-up. Extra batteries, 800. Unless you want to buy a generator (15000), you will have to add a nice alternator and charge reg on it: 1000. Now, unless you want to be running your diesel all the time just to charge your batts, (which is not good for it) better get alternate power sourcs: Solar power and Wind Gens: 5000 (and this does not include the mounting bars for them). Well, those washing machines do not wash with sea water... better have a good mechanism for getting more fresh water: Water maker, 5000.

ALL OF THESE PRICES ASSUME YOU DO IT YOURSELF.

So, for a grand total of $16,000-$31,000, you can now have your clothes washed on board while at anchor.

Or, for $5, you can go to Walmart and buy a bucket to wash your clothes, that will second for a head, and third for washing the boat. 

Hmm, let me think a moment... SHHH!! I am thinking.

Nah. I will go for the washer dryer. What the hell. What yacht would be without it or an ice maker???


----------



## Harryeod (Sep 4, 2006)

Canibul said:


> Why not celebrate a loose brotherhood of people who just love boats? Thats what the people here have in common, I think. They like boats.


Well said!!


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

Is there a post somewhere in which you go through that same cost exercise for an icemaker?


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

No, sorry Canibul, that was far too exhausting. I also forgot to add in the cost of Tide. Oh well, Life is not perfect.

Or wait... do you get the Tide for free when you are at sea???


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

Canibul said:


> Do you have a watermaker on board as well, to keep the 180 gallons topped up?


My intentions for this vessel are for local and coastal cruising north. While I would not rule out making passages on her, that was not my primary goal. Also using her for passagemaking is not nesesarily cruising.

No watermaker and wont be on this vessel. Unlikly on the next (if there is a next). They are nice when they work, a pain when they don't. Like anything else. The damn boat is complex enough, my current desires and intinerary would make a watermaker superfluous.

I have had heat stroke once and heat exaustion once, and have become quite sensitive to it. Mexico, S.Pacific and other dry hot areas I would avoid as a cruising ground. Making a passage through them I would not aviod. Hanging out there would make a watermaker desireable.

Carefully asses you choice of watermakers they are not all cut from the same cloth and bigger is not nessearily better.

Dewey


----------



## Canibul (Sep 1, 2006)

My primary area will definitely be the TCI, and its dry here. I think probably Harbor Island Bahamas will be as far North as we venture, and that far only because we have good friends there. Other areas are of course from here south and west. 

I see what you mean about watermakers, as well. I am also researching an RO system for the house we are building here. A lot of choices. Spectra looks good. they sure got a cool animation on their site, anyway.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

what about the gut who sailed the atlantic in a 9 foot 3 boat?????????


----------



## Parley (Jul 13, 2006)

Interesting thread. I think the answer to this question is as varied as the people it is asked of. We all have different levels of risk aversion or risk taking. What this boils down to is the level of risk one is able to comfortable take on. That level is a function of knowledge, skills and experience. We are all different in these regards. 
As a point of reference (at one end of the spectrum), and in the spirit of the recent alignment with "Good Old Boat" magazine, there is a wonderful article in the latest issue regarding John Guzzwell and "Trekka". Trekka is a home built 20' wooden yawl that Mr. Guzzwell solo circumnavigated in. Extreme? Well, considering the cockpit is nothing more that a footwell, imho, yes... for me (not neccessarily so for someone else).


----------



## lonebull (Jun 10, 2006)

Yes, you can sail long distance in small vessels. There are certain realities one must address before attempting to do so. Certain realities one must accept as part of the endeavor. Preparation for a voyage in any size vessel is paramount. Assessing your capabilities and the vessels correctly will go a long way in reaching the "other side" safely. As said in previous post, levels of risk acceptability is a personal matter. Have sailors changed? No. Some will go were others will not. Is one traveler more "adventurous" than another because of gear / or lack of? Possibly, but who really cares? This ain't the suburbs. Posturing may suit well in a group, but ultimately we all face the elements on an individual bases, with our individual talents. Just sail, man.


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

feta said:


> what about the gut who sailed the atlantic in a 9 foot 3 boat?????????


I beleive that was "God's Tear". successful transat, aborted transpac.

Dewey


----------



## TrueBlue (Oct 11, 2004)

This inspired me to do a little research. In 1993, Hugh Vihlen crossed the Atlantic in a 5'-4" sailboat named "Father's Day". That takes some guts.










More interesting small boat feats here:

http://www.famoussmallboats.com/


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

Cool site True,

Refreshed my memory about "Gods Tear", Forgot about her shipwreck at the end of her transat.

Remember Gary Spiess and "Yankee Girl". He went from boat show to boat show on exibit with the "Girl" touting Dinty Moore beef stew (GAG!). Well i guess any sponsor is better than no sponsor.

Who can forget Sven Lunden and "Bris", his unforgettable articles in Cruising World were ummmmm incredible (you youngsters can substitute wack for incredible). Lets see, he doubled the horn solo, later cruised the tiny craft double with his young belgium bride (how did they fit???), actuall devised a method to fit bris with Wheels and bicycle gears so he could pedal her around less hilly areas when back in Europe. I often wondered about the vessels name, he was certanly NOT jewish. LOL!

Dewey


----------



## Parley (Jul 13, 2006)

T.B. - That is a fascinating site. I must ask the question: Of the recent crossings, what would possess a person to want to cross oceans in boats so small one can not even lay down? Masocism? Small boat is one thing (I know it is a matter of perspective), but miniscule is a whole other endeavor. I'm not questioning the ability of either boat or sailor. I'm questioning why put oneself thru that on a boat you can't even stretch your legs out. All I can say is: WOW.


----------



## Dewey Benson (Jun 28, 2006)

Parley,

Yeah that 3 footer is a tad cramped! I get all tweaked up in my sabot!

Dewey


----------

