# Real Cruisers verse Internet Arguers



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Don't some ever get tired of the same bah bah bah "discussions" of the small fraction of "blue water" danger sailing? Doesn't it seem that any cruiser sailing around doing day hops or 1-2 passage cruises on a comfortable boat is made out on forums to be some type of lower life form? 

I bet by far more cruisers fall into the category of day cruisers that in the distance cruiser world. These are the cruisers normally not sailing more than 50 miles a day between stops. They are out to travel and see things, not spend weeks out in the water. Yes they sometimes spend a couple of days out on a passage to get to a new area, but they are smart enough to wait for the right weather to do so.

Lets stop suggesting these cruisers and their comfortable boats are some lower life form and start giving them their due credit for being the majority of real cruisers verse internet arguers!


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

Don0190 said:


> I bet by far more cruisers fall into the category of day cruisers that in the distance cruiser world. These are the cruisers normally not sailing more than 50 miles a day between stops.


Based on a lot of data and research from my volunteer work at the Seven Seas Cruising Association (SSCA) including three years on the Board of Directors and a year as President I can say with assurance that your observation is correct.

That doesn't make discussion about passage making any less interesting or the reality that many more people will dream of crossing oceans than ever do.

I fully concur that there is no excuse for denigrating those whose cruising dreams and plans are more benign. Those who choose to motor the US AICW and hop to the Bahamas may still be interested in those fewer people who cross oceans, or even just jump offshore from Norfolk to the Abacos. Why "grade" people based on what makes them happy?

This is NOT about being politically correct. It is about being courteous and respectful of others. If you expect etiquette in an anchorage you should express it on the Internet.

For those that find reading about distant shores and the people who visit them and a tremendous resource for the cruising sailor whatever their horizons may be I recommend SSCA (http://ssca.org).


----------



## svzephyr44 (Jun 26, 2000)

I admit I am a little confused. Perhaps as they say "beauty is in the eye of the beholder." I am unaware of "cruisers" putting down people who coastal, ICW, whatever. As far as offshore cruising goes, "many are called but few are chosen." I was totally unprepared mentally for the challenge of offshore cruising. Not only solo sailing 100's of NM offshore, but the days of boredom as you make your 100 or 120 miles per day. Of course then the exciting moments when the weather hits or something breaks. I have never, to my knowledge, put down anyone who does not choose this life.

If I was going to [rant on] if would be those who have an opinion on everything and knowledge of nothing. Unfortunately IMHO there are a fair number of them on this and every other sailing/boating forum. [/rant on]

I agree. One should be polite, share knowledge (real knowledge) and as the Seven Seas Cruising Association says: Leave a clean wake. Not only on your boat, but in your life and your Internet postings.

Fair winds and following seas


----------



## krisscross (Feb 22, 2013)

That "small fraction of blue water danger sailing" is very relevant because it can kill you and all those on board. It may be just that one day in 5 years of cruising, but it can be a last day for all those on board. Those who lived through such dangerous hours tend to keep it in their memory and bring it up from time to time.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Poor Don...


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

MikeOReilly said:


> Poor Don...


Have no idea what you are talking about. My guess is you are just trying to find a way to get an argument of some type going.


----------



## Stu Jackson (Jul 28, 2001)

Much of it may be where you choose to "hang out" on the internet. This forum and, say, sbo, have more coastal cruisers, while cruisersforum has more long distance skippers. 

In all cases, though, elektricty seems to be a bane for sooo many. None of us were born electricians, we spent time learning, and now, with the internet, there's really no excuse to start a thread with: "I know nothing about elektricity, it scares me, I refuse to crack a book, but I have a lot of old wiring. What do I do?"

THAT'S the crap that REALLY riles me. :devil:devil:devil


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Very interesting way to put things.
I've always said, "Rocks sink many more boats than the sea." IMO there's a lot more danger in sailing onshore than offshore. Offshore sailing is more like 99.9% sheer boredom and .1% sheer terror, than some form of " "blue water" danger sailing".
Perhaps there is a cockiness and a bit more roll in the gait of those who have crossed oceans under sail, but prejudice for those who haven't, I don't see it. 
Almost everybody I encounter here in the Antilles has done at least 1000 miles of open water sailing, just to get here. Some may not consider that 'crossing' an ocean, but it's offshore sailing just as much as a run from the Canaries to St. Lucia, and it CAN be 1000 miles of pounding to windward, rather than the gentle downwind run of a TransAt.
However, in all my travels I think the AICW is by far one of the most fun AND challenging 1000 miles one can do on any boat. Who in their right mind (unless they've not done the AICW) would consider that a simpler, safer voyage than Charleston/Norfolk to the VI? What is it every sailor wants most when things get difficult? "sea room" There ain't much of that in the ditch, and there are a lot more extremely vicious thunderstorms in the ditch than one would encounter going from Charleston/Norfolk to the VI.
I respect anyone who can do the AICW without damaging their vessel or running aground with a 5'+ draft. Now THAT takes attention and concentration! It's not like letting your boat wander a dozen miles off course over 2000 miles, through inattention or laziness ("Naw, I don't feel like rigging the preventer just now, so hold that course until I do. Thanks").


----------



## Siamese (May 9, 2007)

Yeah, I'm going to challenge the premise here. I don't think there's an attitude here or elsewhere that coastal cruisers are a lower life form or in any way less than bonafide sailers. It may be the _perception_ of some coastal cruisers that they're held in lower regard, but it's a fallacy of their own making.

I'm a coastal cruiser on the Great Lakes, and have a respect for those who sail across oceans, but I don't have any real desire to do so myself (or fear of it for that matter). My sailing consists mostly of daysailing out of the marina that my house is adjacent to, and the occasional trip up the coast for a few days. I'm entirely happy with it, and wouldn't change, and if anyone were to think my style of sailing is deficient they'd be the fool. You're in charge of your own self esteem.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Personally, I don't think there is a bias against coastal sailors on SN - it's much more a bias against the boats...which you get on most sailing forums.

That said, I've probably been challenged more than anyone to measure the "Offshore Wienie" by dudes who feel the need to brag about their miles...miles that have never made them any less wrong. But it's always fun.


----------



## sharkbait (Jun 3, 2003)

Capta is right about the ICW. I go to the Bahamas every year from Pamlico Sound area and refuse to use the ICW.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> MikeOReilly said:
> 
> 
> > Poor Don...
> ...


Actually, you may have mis-read Mike's post, he might be expressing sympathy, and acknowledging that he feels your pain...

Certainly, any objective observer of this forum can plainly see how one-sided the argumentation is, and how beset the Real Cruisers who hang out here have become by the relentless onslaught of name-calling and dismissal of opinion and experience by a small but vocal minority of assorted "excitable hens", "old scared dudes", and "chuckleheads" who happen to sail 30+ year old "tanks", solely because they can't afford anything better, or newer...

;-)


----------



## mikel1 (Oct 19, 2008)

I had the same take as Jon did on Mikes post . . . but I'm NOT getting in to anything here!


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

'*Actually, you may have mis-read Mike's post, he might be expressing sympathy, and acknowledging that he feels your pain...
*"

A bit more time cruising, offshore or inshore helps one develop a thicker skin....


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

JonEisberg said:


> Actually, you may have mis-read Mike's post, he might be expressing sympathy, and acknowledging that he feels your pain...
> 
> Certainly, any objective observer of this forum can plainly see how one-sided the argumentation is, and how beset the Real Cruisers who hang out here have become by the relentless onslaught of name-calling and dismissal of opinion and experience by a small but vocal minority of assorted "excitable hens", "old scared dudes", and "chuckleheads" who happen to sail 30+ year old "tanks", solely because they can't afford anything better, or newer...
> 
> ;-)


Now, now. I don't refer to my respected peers as "chucklehendudes" solely because they sail old tanks that they can afford. I do so when they relentlessly insist that production boats suck. The latter has nothing to do with _their_ boat. It has everything to do with their ridiculous mantras about _others'_ boats (including mine). See the difference?

Oh and I love the "Real Cruisers" badge you pull out above. That's a nice touch - and exactly what I was talking about earlier. I'm sorry the members of this club feel so "beset" by my continuous correction of their misstatements. Would some vegemite or a nice hat help?










Heh-heh.


----------



## sharkbait (Jun 3, 2003)

Nice hat


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

sharkbait said:


> Nice hat


Heh-heh. The one and only Bob Perry gave me that hat and the Vegemite when the boys and I really needed it. He's a good man.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> *Oh and I love the "Real Cruisers" badge you pull out above. *That's a nice touch - and exactly what I was talking about earlier. I'm sorry the members of this club feel so "beset" by my continuous correction of their misstatements. Would some vegemite or a nice hat help?


Sorry, you misunderstood my use of the term, my fault for not enclosing it in quotes, I suppose... I was using it to identify the group Don was referring to in his subject line, that 'Silent Majority' of cruising sailors (apparently "Real Cruisers" don't argue on the internet ;-)) who comprise the bulk of the way most people use their boats... Coastal day hops, rarely sailing more than 50 miles at a stretch, and preferring to "travel and see things, not spend weeks out in the water..", and so on...

Oh, and they're also "smart enough to wait for the right weather..." before leaving port, in apparent contrast to their Bluewater Brethren...

;-)


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

I have numerous world cruiser customers, friends and folks I know through the club or industry and from what I see these folks are humble people willing to listen and help out anyone at the drop of a hat. I actually see the weekend warrior as quite often the most unaccepting, there is only one way to do things, "pontificators" types I come across.

At a seminar last year, during a break, I heard a guy who had not cruised anywhere ask one of my world cruiser customers about routes for crossing the pond. Frank was very patient and asked "what month are you looking to go?" To which he responded "What does that matter I only care about the best route." Frank tried to be nice, and was extremely humble and patient, but the guy was just belligerent and looked at Frank and said "Seems like I asked the wrong guy for the best route." Funny thing is Frank and his wife have crossed the pond about 13 or 14 times and this guy had never left Casco Bay. He was asking the right guy but chose not to listen to a simple question from which Frank could have given him excellent input.

I actually had one guy telling me how much he knows and trying to tell me how to do my job, when he had asked me there for a systems audit & to get a quote on making her "cruise ready".

The entire time I was auditing his electrical system, and crawling all over the vessel, he kept yapping AT me, not talking TO me. I found it entirely entertaining because was he was actually quoting my own articles while talking down to me about my own stuff that I had written. His quote was high enough to cover my "pontification fee" just in case I had to endure his pontification again.. He never called back and that was the intent...:wink

I also work very closely with a guy who is a two time round the world single handed racer. I have never once seen him brag or talk down to someone about sailing or cruising or coastal cruising..... Having done the roaring 40's twice, solo........ Well he's one of the nicest guys I know and no chip...

I suspect part of the issue is like my buddy used to say; "If you get drunk and go looking for fights you will always wind up in one.."


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Here's my other hat...










I don't wear it as often as the other one. Too much windage.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

There are only 2 times when the blue water thing gets on my nerves. Generally, long distance cruisers have a lot of hours of all types under their belts and know plenty.

1. Boat selection. Boats that are not built for high latitudes are poo-hooed. Since 99.5% of boats will never go more than 500 miles from home, this makes no more sense than the old school hiking guru who believed boots must be made of rough-out leather and weight 5 pounds a pair, because that is what made sense with crampons in his day. In fact, light weight approach shoes and even sneakers make more sense for 98% of hikers. By the same logic we would all drive HVs, since it will snow hard a few days each year; the other 360 days of the year there are many better vehicles. I would argue that a boat that is suitable for the high latitudes almost by definition is too heavy, deep in draft, and perhaps under canvased for fun local sailing. It probably features a small cockpit and small ports. Horses for courses, and I have no need for a blue water boat at any price. I'd rather have a smaller, fun boat, just as I like a smaller, fun car (wife drives the dull SUV). My first boat, a beach cat, was sure more fun to drive than my current boat.

2. Arrogance on subjects that have nothing to do with passage making. In fact, a coastal sailor that moves every night gets a great deal of practice in piloting and anchoring, compared to someone that makes long crossings and then sits in harbor for weeks or months. The coastal sailor's experience will be tied to a specific region, but is likely exhaustive in that area; I don't know much about anchoring in coral, but I have a close relationship with soupy mud and oyster shells.

And don't we all have a certain bias towards power boats.


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

Don, has anyone on here with some notable lunatic exceptions ever suggested anything otherwise?

I do acknoweldge though that in some threads the baby has perhaps been thrown out with the bath water. "Boat X is not a good option for a circumnavigation" quickly turns into "boat X is a crap boat " and that is unfortunate and not the case.

There is nothing wrong and everything right with having a boat that is well suited and comfortable for weekend sailing if that is what you do. Most offshore boats would be a PITA as weekend sailors. There is of course also absolutely nothing wrong with being a weekend sailor or a coastal cruiser if that is what currently suits your lifestyle and desires. You are in good company, the Pardeys have been weekend sailors for a couple of years now.

BUT if the discussion is about bluewater sailing and the suitability of man and vessel to undertake such a venture, AND if someone who has never left the ICW starts emphatically declaring to all how offshore sailing works, then yes they will be rightfully dressed down.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

I'm scouring my memory, and I can't recall an instance where I've ever been treated shabbily by a blue water sailor, at least not face-to-face.

If anything, I catch some occasional flak from the racing community for not knowing every single esoteric feature or technique of race boats.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

pdqaltair said:


> 1. Boat selection.


I think one should consider the source of the poo-hooing. *grin* Those of us who have spent time at high latitudes tend to be less judgmental I believe than those who sit in armchairs and pontificate. When someone asks me about what boat they should buy or what equipment they should install my interest is in their near term plans. Get off the dock as quickly as possible and go sailing. You may find your plans will change.

There are certainly sailors with many globe-girdling miles who have very strong opinions (John Neal comes to mind) but I suggest no more than in the general sailing population and perhaps fewer. Holding fast to unfounded opinions is not a survival characteristic in extreme conditions. Have an informal discussion or sail with Nigel Calder, Evans Starzinger, Beth Leonard, or Jimmy Cornell and you will reach the same conclusion.



pdqaltair said:


> I would argue that a boat that is suitable for the high latitudes almost by definition is too heavy, deep in draft, and perhaps under canvased for fun local sailing.


I'd be happy to talk about that. A little insulation and a diesel heater don't slow you down much. There are many good choices.



pdqaltair said:


> 2. Arrogance on subjects that have nothing to do with passage making.


For starters, people can be buttheads. It is unfortunate.

I wholeheartedly agree that there is a significant difference between sailing offshore and the often quite different experience of inshore cruising. I have had the privilege of sailing many craft and spend more time keeping my close quarters skills polished than anything else.


----------



## sharkbait (Jun 3, 2003)

1


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I don't recall many putting down the coastal cruisers. Afterall, the blue water cruisers are coastal cruising most of the time, when they arrive where they are going.

The stubborn arguments are over what boats are appropriate for blue water passages. It's somewhat a personal decision, as are the consequences. The head pounder is when advice is given to wear your seat belt (boats with better blue water characteristics) and the counter is that tons of people don't and aren't dying everyday. Dumb argument. You wear your seat belt anyway. It's then spun to say those that suggest a seat belt hate all cars without them. You get the idea. I'm pretty sure it's done only to create massive views and long threads.

As for experience, it's not about how many miles or how much of one's lifetime has been spent on cruising. However, if one has none, it's hard to take their perspective seriously. Would one go to a surgeon that's never done that type of surgery, fly in a plane with a pilot that has never flown that model, just because they've engaged in years of internet discussion and think they get it?


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

I think this is a perception versus reality thing, and a little bit of the blowhard "it's being done, so clearly it must be reasonable" head in the sand thing that even some of us coastal guys start rolling our eyes at.


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

Don0190 said:


> Doesn't it seem that any cruiser sailing around doing day hops or 1-2 passage cruises on a comfortable boat is made out on forums to be some type of lower life form?


No.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Have done a bit of both and in recent years get to hang out with both.

Would note at SDR or OCC get togethers there is none of this. On brand dedicated forums there is none of this. It is solely goal directed conversations. No ego. 

A couple of weeks ago finally learned how to tie a bowline one handed. I was taught by a kid who races skiffs. That kid has never been on the water for more than a few hours at a time. You never know where knowledge will come from so always be open to it.

Landfalls and coastal cruising are more stressful for me. But once you're out of helicopter range everything, every seeming little detail is important. It's a different ballgame. Those who don't appreciate this are more prone to catastrophe. This gut appreciation is accrued by doing various passages not by Internet surfing. Respect those who have the devils in the details mentality. You might learn something that will save you grief or even your life. 

The ocean is not as dangerous as the hard edges.


----------



## SV Siren (Mar 8, 2013)

Interesting subject. I say this from the perspective of a relative newbie, who will admit that I know very little compared to many others. I have been a member of several forums for some time now, and have noticed a few times how someone with boat cred will paint with broad strokes their opinion on one subject or another. I do not engage those discussions, as I do not have enough knowledge to speak on such subjects, but I have to admit seeing others discuss counter points quite well. Armchair sailors are dangerous, at least the ones who have not gone out and done it. The ones who have, and are now IN the armchair, who now post from said chair, are the ones I can respect, as they have been there. 

I sail the Great Lakes region, and have to say that the only bias I have noticed is that those who do not sail the Great Lakes underestimate the conditions that can and do come up, and the danger that it can pose. 

I hang out in two different marinas, and it is very interesting the difference in the two sites. One is a rather usual marina that is only occupied only on weekends, with a mix of your usual blowhards, and those who aren't. The second one is a relatively small marina where you see sailors there all days of the week, who are out there on the water all the time. This group of folks are the best I have ever come across. Willing to do almost anything for you, whether it is help, offer knowledge, or just shoot the breeze.

I find there are usually two types of people, those who actually listen, and those who don't, when you are conversing with them. Both will offer advise, solicited or not, but I have to take it with a grain of salt, and do my own due diligence. Research, whether talking to others, reading in its many forms, and trial and error is my way of learning. Not many people I know will say that reading anything by Nigel Calder is a waste of my time.

I have sailed with captains who have logged no time at all, and those who have been sailing for 40 years and have logged tens of thousands of miles, and all points in between. It was the one that had the most experience that scared me the most, he knew almost nothing mechanically, and I suspect hired out everything, maintenance wise, that involved actual work(He had lots of money back in the day). That said, I suspect that he was the exception to the rule. 

"Real Cruisers vs Internet Arguers".....I would rather title it as "Real Sailors vs Internet Arguers"....my reason being, that you usually don't have to be a "real cruiser", whatever that definition may be, to know your stuff, many sailors I know would not fit the traditional definition, but are truly good sailors in their own right.

Just my $.02

Carry on...


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

sharkbait said:


> Capta is right about the ICW. I go to the Bahamas every year from Pamlico Sound area and refuse to use the ICW.


I'm always a bit surprised whenever I hear this, and I hear it a lot... ;-)

Sure, the Ditch can be a real PITA at times, but I've never viewed it as being particularly _Challenging_... If you're simply _paying attention_, it's not very likely you're gonna get into much trouble... Then again, I grew up on Barnegat Bay, so running aground is not something entirely foreign, or particularly frightening, to me ;-) And, trust me, running a sailboat with 6' draft down the ICW is not even remotely as stressful as running a sportfish or motor yacht at 25 knots, and the consequences of a mistake or a moment's inattention don't even _begin_ to compare...



outbound said:


> The ocean is not as dangerous as the hard edges.


Or, sometimes even pretty far removed from the "edges"...

Far and away, the scariest occurrence in my life of boating happened a few hundred feet above sea level, near the town of Ft. Plain on the Erie Canal...

Absolutely incredible, what 8 inches of rain in a couple of hours can do to such a 'protected' waterway...

;-)


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> Have no idea what you are talking about. My guess is you are just trying to find a way to get an argument of some type going.


No Don, I was pointing out in hopefully a humourous way, that your premise is false. As far as I can see, people aren't denigrating cruisers who happens to own a production boat and only go short-hop coastal cruising. In fact, I think the more accomplished members here are usually some of the most respectful and open in their responses. They may not agree with you, but I don't see them treating you (or me) as a "lower life form."

As others have said, if I were to hoist a chip on my back about _not getting no respect_ from others, it would be far more aimed at some of the newer or arm chair sailors and cruisers who know it all, and have the right answer for everything.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

IMHO, listening to people who have more experience than you is always helpful. But like everything, when an opinion is offered it's most useful when you know something about the person's background, biases and specific experiences. It's hard on the internet, because you're reading stuff written by people you don't know.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Internet_dog.jpg

For myself, I'm on this site because it's fun. I'm too old to get worked up about this stuff.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Maybe I am a bit tired after the 3 days sailing regatta and can't quite get the main thrust of Dons post. However, I would cheerfully smack a few people in the head if they said crap about my boat, or my sailing style, to my face. But the gutless cowards can't because I am in a sailing destination and they are still at home with their hands in their trousers.

But, as I said, I am a bit tired...


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Maybe I failed in my writing, if so sorry. (didn't stop some of the regular arguers though)


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

Good and fun discussion.



sharkbait said:


> I love making up names for boat parts , such as calling my boom pendant a flappy-doodle.


The vocabulary associated with sailing is immense. Sometimes I block on a term. "That" and a pointed finger may be the best I can do at the moment. *grin* Twing? Barber-hauler? Same darn thing used on the sheets of different sails. For crying out loud. Yes, vocabulary is important. It is all we have to support communication. Often communication itself is the priority - note the US Navy has returned to "left" and "right" for helm commands; port and starboard are used to refer to sides of the ship.



Minnewaska said:


> I don't recall many putting down the coastal cruisers. Afterall, the blue water cruisers are coastal cruising most of the time, when they arrive where they are going.


Agreed. When everything goes well coastal cruising is more work than sailing offshore. When something goes wrong sailing offshore gets interesting.



Landcruiser said:


> I sail the Great Lakes region, and have to say that the only bias I have noticed is that those who do not sail the Great Lakes underestimate the conditions that can and do come up, and the danger that it can pose.


There is a story, perhaps apocryphal, that Ted Turner used to denigrate Great Lakes sailors until he sailed the Chicago-Mac. The story goes that he made a public apology for all his statements about sailing the Great Lakes. True or not, the story makes clear at least to me that one should be careful about one's own assumptions. "There be dragons there."



Landcruiser said:


> I find there are usually two types of people, those who actually listen, and those who don't, when you are conversing with them. Both will offer advise, solicited or not, but I have to take it with a grain of salt, and do my own due diligence. Research, whether talking to others, reading in its many forms, and trial and error is my way of learning. Not many people I know will say that reading anything by Nigel Calder is a waste of my time.


Nigel is a good example. I know Nigel, not well enough to say we are friends but he returns my phone calls and email and once asked me for advice. The last was a bit of a shock. *grin* When you are talking to Nigel whether one-on-one or during Q&A in a larger forum it is clear that he is listening to you. His books and articles and talks are good and engaging only in part because he is a good speaker and writer. Mostly they are good because he actively listens and answers your questions.



JonEisberg said:


> Sure, the Ditch can be a real PITA at times, but I've never viewed it as being particularly _Challenging_... If you're simply _paying attention_, it's not very likely you're gonna get into much trouble... Then again, I grew up on Barnegat Bay, so running aground is not something entirely foreign, or particularly frightening, to me ;-) And, trust me, running a sailboat with 6' draft down the ICW is not even remotely as stressful as running a sportfish or motor yacht at 25 knots, and the consequences of a mistake or a moment's inattention don't even _begin_ to compare...


Agreed my friend. But all that docking and anchoring and fueling not to mention the bars and restaurants - what a hassle. Seriously I'd much rather be offshore.

Sometimes the ICW is the best route. When it is I run it. Then I go straight through. The other professionals do so I started to do so as well as long as I have current electronic charts and radar. It makes crew selection more challenging but night operation on the ICW is practical IF you are experienced and attentive (your point) and properly equipped.



capecodda said:


> IMHO, listening to people who have more experience than you is always helpful. But like everything, when an opinion is offered it's most useful when you know something about the person's background, biases and specific experiences. It's hard on the internet, because you're reading stuff written by people you don't know.


All good points. I would add that the best adviser is one who knows the difference between fact and opinion and labels his or her thoughts accordingly.



lillia28 said:


> I tend to be the type of sailor everyone hates: I use my boat as a floating condo, I only sail on calm sunny days, my best race finish was "not last", the heel angle is limited by the no spill line on the wine glasses. And yet I have always been treated kindly and been given good sometimes great advice.


I don't hate you. *grin* As long as you're having fun I'm good. The more condo sailors there are the more stuff gets bought so the bigger the market is the more competition there is the better the prices are for me. Anyone who thinks prices on marine material are high should think about what they would be if all the condo commanders gave up and went home.

EDIT: Darn I forgot something important. Reidel makes some really nice stemless wine glasses that fit nicely in most boat cup holders. Good stuff. Don't spill your wine.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> As for experience, it's not about how many miles or how much of one's lifetime has been spent on cruising. However, if one has none, it's hard to take their perspective seriously. Would one go to a surgeon that's never done that type of surgery, fly in a plane with a pilot that has never flown that model, just because they've engaged in years of internet discussion and think they get it?


Well that's a breath of fresh air. Totally agree. Now who is this bastard that has no miles or time cruising, but only years of internet discussion, that thinks they get it?

Let me at 'em.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

I've never stayed offshore more than a couple of nights tops, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once when I made port ;-)

I just scanned this thread, it's fun even though the original premise may not have panned out. It seems we all just get along...


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Over time have learned that when people are concerned about you and respect your intelligence they may argue with you. When they stop and don't correct you is when you need to worried. Unfortunately sometimes depending on style this can be misinterpreted. 

Find you can learn from all kinds of people even the ones you find difficult or disagree with. Find what gets in the way more often is your hubris not theirs. Sure there are jerks and trolls but even those may have a nugget of knowledge you don't possess. 

Pro captain once told me the most dangerous crew is someone who owns a boat because of the possibility they don't know what they don't know and think they do.


----------



## Minnesail (Feb 19, 2013)

smackdaddy said:


> Here's my other hat...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's a downwind hat.


----------



## Cap-Couillon (Jan 2, 2013)

{RANT}
I am sooooo tired of reading threads that are just folks "pissing on the bar stool" I come here to learn something I don't know (and yes, after over 30 years of living aboard and cruising here and there, there is a LOT I don't know) and offer my opinion to those who ask. That opinion, is usually worth just what you pay for it, but I don't need some armchair sailor debating every point I make. Dat's my opinion (from my experience) like it or lump it... You ain't gotta agree, but trying to pick a fight just for something to do on a slow night is counter productive and usually causes thread drift and does the OP no good in general. 

Inside, outside who cares.... people got questions. Try to answer them to the best of your knowledge or shut up.. If ya wanna argue, get on F***book

**/RANT}


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Cap-Couillon said:


> {RANT}
> I am sooooo tired of reading threads that are just folks "pissing on the bar stool" I come here to learn something I don't know (and yes, after over 30 years of living aboard and cruising here and there, there is a LOT I don't know) and offer my opinion to those who ask. That opinion, is usually worth just what you pay for it, but I don't need some armchair sailor debating every point I make. Dat's my opinion (from my experience) like it or lump it... You ain't gotta agree, but trying to pick a fight just for something to do on a slow night is counter productive and usually causes thread drift and does the OP no good in general.
> 
> Inside, outside who cares.... people got questions. Try to answer them to the best of your knowledge or shut up.. If ya wanna argue, get on F***book
> ...


Don't frequent anything smack starts is my suggestion.
Like him or not, he's an inveterate s$&@ stirrer.


----------



## sharkbait (Jun 3, 2003)

1


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

I don't think I've ever been around anyone in an anchorage, marina or around the hard that made fun of any sailor in a serious way. It just doesn't happen where I've hung out. I always see friendly sailors be they new or old and experienced be they coastal, local or full Blue water. Just the internet is where I see it. I certainly have more interest talking with serious Blue Water cruisers because that's what we do, but always try to be friendly to all. I do see really poor kept boats both coastal and blue water boats that I'd like to say something not so pleasant to the skipper. But I keep my mouth shut most of the time. The few times I've tried to help someone with a poorly kept vessel I get a ration of BS. 

I do stink mouth skippers of unseaworthy boats when they get the traveling young people to crew for them on passages. Most young people who pay to crew have no experience and are unknowingly putting themselves in danger. I let them know how bad the boat they signed up for is. Hopefully I have helped a few change their minds about going on the unseaworthy boat. Never had a hassel with skipper after telling his crew about the bad boat, a few glares but that is it.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

sharkbait said:


> I just hate steering all day.
> For me it's so much easier to head outside for a 100-150 nm run.


Perhaps you need a better autopilot?

;-)

_Of Course_ it's easier, and faster, to run outside... And I'm amazed more people don't do so, at least once south of Beaufort/Morehead City...

But every once in awhile, it sure is handy to have the option of making progress inside, and my point is only that I think the alleged 'difficulty' of doing so is generally overstated...


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

hannah2 said:


> I don't think I've ever been around anyone in an anchorage, marina or around the hard that made fun of any sailor in a serious way. It just doesn't happen where I've hung out. I always see friendly sailors be they new or old and experienced be they coastal, local or full Blue water. Just the internet is where I see it. I certainly have more interest talking with serious Blue Water cruisers because that's what we do, but always try to be friendly to all. I do see really poor kept boats both coastal and blue water boats that I'd like to say something not so pleasant to the skipper. But I keep my mouth shut most of the time. The few times I've tried to help someone with a poorly kept vessel I get a ration of BS.
> 
> I do stink mouth skippers of unseaworthy boats when they get the traveling young people to crew for them on passages. Most young people who pay to crew have no experience and are unknowingly putting themselves in danger. I let them know how bad the boat they signed up for is. Hopefully I have helped a few change their minds about going on the unseaworthy boat. Never had a hassel with skipper after telling his crew about the bad boat, a few glares but that is it.


Hear hear.


----------



## shananchie (Jan 29, 2014)

I have to admit that those of us who live and sail near the Intracoastal are often amused/puzzled by the many ICW warriors who plod along by motor, oblivious to the bright sun and gentle breeze that are calling all of the local sailors out to the ocean.

In South Florida, there are roughly 40 bridges from Port St. Lucie to downtown 
Miami, most of them drawbridges. It is a long, boring, urban trek, and you end up doing doughnuts for 30 minutes every time you miss an opening. It's not exactly a great sailing adventure. People do this trip in kayaks and dinghies. It's like driving I-95 at 5 knots.

The bigger sailboats sometimes get an ugly surprise when they get down to Miami and discover their 60-something-foot mast doesn't fit under the 55-foot fixed bridge there.

So my observation is this:

If you have a nice east/southeast wind blowing, you have the chance to unfurl that those sails, slip out an inlet and eat up the miles. You can have a nice day on the ocean and duck back in to anchor. Or you can triple your mileage by continuing to sail along the coast at night instead of checking in at an expensive marina.

You don't need to be a bluewater sailor to enjoy a nice coastal sail. People make this trip in McGregors and Compacs all the time.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

outbound said:


> Pro captain once told me the most dangerous crew is someone who owns a boat because of the possibility they don't know what they don't know and think they do.


That's why a lot of delivery skippers won't do owner aboard.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Grew up on fish boats so know about haywire and really stupid. I cut my BW teeth as a youngn all over the world on some of the damnedest bad athed examples of how not to go to sea and enjoyed it. Only in cautious hindsight do I realize how it might have been different.If I could do it again, I'd do it again. in a heart beat.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Dave they miss out on some really nice owners and an opportunity to share their knowledge. Owners vet captains. Captains vet owners. Seems fair.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

outbound said:


> Dave they miss out on some really nice owners and an opportunity to share their knowledge. Owners vet captains. Captains vet owners. Seems fair.


It is fair. Some of my most positive and memorable deliveries have been owner aboard.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

While I might hire someone to deliver my boat without me, I doubt I'd hire someone where that was a requirement.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

SVAuspicious said:


> Minnewaska said:
> 
> 
> > I don't recall many putting down the coastal cruisers. Afterall, the blue water cruisers are coastal cruising most of the time, when they arrive where they are going.
> ...


Reading the logs posted during Jimmy Cornell's Atlantic Odyssey rally, things have certainly gotten "interesting" for a number of boats... What struck me was the number of autopilot failures very shortly into the passage, including a bit of embarrassment for a sister ship of Jimmy's new Garcia Exploration 45 They were forced to abandon the rally and divert to the Cape Verdes, where they will be stuck for a few weeks waiting for a replacement to be shipped out... Had they been coastal cruising instead, they simply could have kept plugging along, and arranged to have it shipped to somewhere on down the line...

One Beneteau somehow managed to get 3 other lines or halyards wrapped around the top of their furler, taking it out of commission. They managed to lower the genoa, but not without getting it in the water and caught underneath the boat for some time... Then, they had to wait 3 days until conditions moderated enough to send someone up the rig to try to sort it all out. Had they been coastal cruising, that probably could have been done while tied up in a marina within 24 hours...


----------



## chuck5499 (Aug 31, 2003)

I don't know if I am classified as a blue water cruiser or not. Out 8 years, sailed the entire Carib, both east and west side, Atlantic crossing and now year 3 in the Med. We did 1,800nm last year with 40 ports of call so short hops except for a couple of long runs around Italy to save Schengen days. The year before I think it was 2,500nm and 35 ports of call. Do we know what we are doing - not really but we seem to get there. 

What I find a bit disturbing is when someone asks a question and we respond and get a lot of negatives from folks who sole sailing is the ICW, Cheaspeake Bay, or Great Lakes and who leave one port and go out and come back to the same port. We have published out cost data - 6 years worth - only to get negative comments from folks who have never been 50nm from their home port or in some cases do not even own a boat but they have read a book or checked on line who they can do it cheaper. 

What we give is our thoughts and works for us and to get poo pooed by people who have yet to go anywhere is just a bit annoying. We have helped a number of would be cruisers off the forums and given them what worked for us and our thoughts on things and some of these folks are actually now out cruising. But it is surprising the number of people we have said pm us and we will give you some thoughts in detail and never heard a thing back. 

I guess the other thing that is a bit annoying is the person who does not have a boat or for that matter never sailed and decided to do a circum nav and wants to know the best watermaker in one posting and the next the best anchor or something similar. 

We have taken to selective comment as it appears many do not do their homework or just posting to hear themselves talk. 

just our opinion


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

i have found the worst dissing to be from desk jockeys with little or no time at sea or even in a sailing boat other than taking asa 101-104... 
those who have actually made passages in an ocean or gom have been without sight of land and know what is there and not there, and what is fiction and ....
but the desk jockeys have no clue other than books and word of mouth. when these diss a sailor, it gets me a lil growly, as information doesnt exchange, it is sailing over their heads. yet they argue against the exerienced soul in favor of their chosen book or simulator which may not be accurate for the realities of this lifestyle and mode of travel. .
everyone does coastal cruising, even the deep water sailors..how do ye think they got there to the deep water--fly???? lol

as for types of boats and where they can or cannot go-isnt the boat, it is the sailor....


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

JonEisberg said:


> Reading the logs posted during Jimmy Cornell's Atlantic Odyssey rally, things have certainly gotten "interesting" for a number of boats...


My point exactly. When nothing goes wrong coastal cruising is more challenging. The first time something breaks and you have to deal with it on internal resources alone sailing offshore becomes the greater challenge. When coastal cruising you can "always pull in somewheres and ask directions" if there is a problem.

What I have found distressing as I have spent more and more time on boats in advance of rallies is the lack of preparation and the condition of the boats. Sure there are boats that are "Dave ready" to go when I walk aboard. There are others who know that they have three things (or whatever) that arose during shakedown on the way to the start. There are many more who seem to be oblivious to just how much risk they face.

For example a boat that is three days from a rally start, NMEA 2000 electronics and no location information on VHF and SSB that require NMEA 0183. Sorry - can't get a converter box in time. Next year I'll stock them and my prices will be higher to account for COM and that much more "stuff" I drag around with me.

Also for example are the people who show up with a long list of shakedown failures. How long ago did you decide to sign up for the rally? Why is your shakedown on the way to the start? Get off the dock. Go sailing. Test the bejeepers out of everything. Do a better job selecting your installation technicians. You really do want someone who does more than open up boxes and plugs things together, because in the end that won't work well.

That goes to Jon's observation about autopilot failures. In my experience most are due to installation shortfalls either mechanical (so leaks or structural issues) or electrical.

Rant over. For the moment.



chuck5499 said:


> What I find a bit disturbing is when someone asks a question and we respond and get a lot of negatives from folks who sole sailing is the ICW, Cheaspeake Bay, or Great Lakes and who leave one port and go out and come back to the same port.


The "ignore" function on SailNet and similar capabilities on other fora are a big help. That allows you to not have to even see the silliness and ignorant posts and still contribute to the broader sailing community.



chuck5499 said:


> We have taken to selective comment as it appears many do not do their homework or just posting to hear themselves talk.


Add in the ones who enjoy generating controversy for warped reasons of their own.


----------



## jsaronson (Dec 13, 2011)

Luckily, we are far more tolerant here than at SA!! 

I ignore the "I never sailed before. What boat should I buy?" threads.

I've done 2 Cat 1 races and am prepping for a third, so I know what it takes to prepare a boat to go offshore. I would not purchase most production boats on the market, but I wouldn't own most cars sold either. My priorities are different than most.

I don't begrudge coastal cruisers, but like most who have written here, I have no tolerance for the pretenders who have never lost sight of land or been without cell service.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Never the less one should have a strong interest in bringing the now coastal folks along. They spend the money and if we can bring them along so they do an occasional off shore passage the services we need will have more people using them and will continue to exist. Hopefully at less expense.
If not for altruistic reasons, which should be sufficient , it is in your best interest to increase the cruising community.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

Being a centrist on all of this I've seen 2 extremes, both of which I ignore.

1 - Inexperience trying to argue from a position of no experience, and having no respect for those who do.

2 - Experience discouraging those starting out from doing anything until they repeat whatever hard nocks
we've gone through to get there. 

The right answer is in the middle. Yea, I don't want to advise anyone in a way that gets them hurt or worse,
but I also like to encourage people to join the hobby which BTW does not have a healthy growing population
of new participants.

Sailing is fun, not brain surgery. This is the internet. Relax and have some fun. Yea, try to be responsible
in your advice, but IMHO this web site, sailing in general should be fun for everyone. 

If it isn't, why keep doing it? Sailing doesn't solve world hunger, cause world peace, or create wealth.

For the money, cannot be, you can generally make more money flipping burgers than working in the marine industry,
and if you're a consumer like me you're ripping up $100's in the shower to keep the your addiction going.

It's got to be fun.


----------



## MarcStAug (Nov 2, 2014)

When I first became interested in sailing a man once said to me, "It doesn't matter if you sail across the marina, across a bay, down the ICW or across an ocean. Distance doesn't matter. It only matters that you are out on the water enjoying yourself."


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Back before internet, sailed ( in Oct )a 42' MapleLeaf down the coast. After a real kicking , made to the Civic Marina in 'frisco. A season salt on a Tiwan special in the next slip looks over his highball and tells us 'Pishtosh ,we got some of the biggest waves in the world right here in San Fransisco bay. That wisdom has lasted the rest of my life.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Capt Len said:


> Back before internet, sailed ( in Oct )a 42' MapleLeaf down the coast. After a real kicking , made to the Civic Marina in 'frisco. A season salt on a Tiwan special in the next slip looks over his highball and tells us 'Pishtosh ,we got some of the biggest waves in the world right here in San Fransisco bay. That wisdom has lasted the rest of my life.


Hey Capt Len, I have a great Canadian story for you.

Year 2007, San Diego Yacht Club. Some Canadian friends were tied up in the berth beside Dennis Connors personal sailboat. The Canadian's had not seen Dennis for the 2 days they had been there. One evening walking up the dock still dressed in their old work shorts and shirts, real messy, the Canadians see Dennis walking down the dock towards them. Dennis gets to them and stops, looks at them shakes his head and says," Excuse me but we don't dress that way here". The Canadian couple looked at each other for a second or two and one of them explained to Connors that, "Hey we are Canadian!" Dennis still shaking his head smiles and says," That explains it then. True story, my wife and I have met so many down to earth Canadian sailors and most are really good at what they do, sail long distances.

Cheers


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

outbound said:


> Never the less one should have a strong interest in bringing the now coastal folks along. They spend the money and if we can bring them along so they do an occasional off shore passage the services we need will have more people using them and will continue to exist. Hopefully at less expense.
> If not for altruistic reasons, which should be sufficient , it is in your best interest to increase the cruising community.


Not just the coastal cruisers - even the condo commanders help keep volume up and prices down. They also keep services available. Rather than make fun of those people we should hug them and tell them we love them.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

SVAuspicious said:


> My point exactly. When nothing goes wrong coastal cruising is more challenging. The first time something breaks and you have to deal with it on internal resources alone sailing offshore becomes the greater challenge. When coastal cruising you can "always pull in somewheres and ask directions" if there is a problem.
> 
> What I have found distressing as I have spent more and more time on boats in advance of rallies is the lack of preparation and the condition of the boats. Sure there are boats that are "Dave ready" to go when I walk aboard. There are others who know that they have three things (or whatever) that arose during shakedown on the way to the start. There are many more who seem to be oblivious to just how much risk they face.
> 
> ...


Certainly saw plenty of that in Portsmouth last month in the lead-up to the 1500... I think many folks were secretly thankful that the departure wound up being delayed by several days, to give them a bit more time to get ready... Ourselves included... ;-)

One thing that struck me, was how common it seemed for many boats not to be fully set up for _SAILING_... It amazes me that anyone would undertake such a passage without a downwind pole, for example...

When we passed Cape Henry on the morning of our departure, we had ideal conditions, NW breeze in the low 20's. We were sailing wing & wing, DDW towards our chosen waypoint for entering the Stream (which turned out to be considerably further N and E of the rest of the fleet) Several miles ahead of us was a Catalina Morgan 440 sailing on a heading close to ours, under their mainsail alone...

In short, our V-42 chewed them up, and spit them out, we caught them and left them in our wake at a shocking rate... At the Rally Debrief in Tortola, the boat's skipper admitted one of his first 'upgrades' he was gonna make to the boat, was to obtain a whisker pole... Well, it would have been a hell of a lot easier to do that in the States, than having to do so now down island... ;-)

I think this sort of thing is somewhat common, due to the fact that when coastal cruising, so many simply fire up the engine when sailing conditions turn less than ideal, or you might have to get a bit creative with a sailplan, or do some extra work to keep the boat moving under sail... Not always an option on a 1500 mile passage, of course, no matter how many jerry cans of diesel are lining the rail... ;-)

Even the boat I was on, which had made numerous trips up and down the East coast under previous ownership, was surprisingly lightly equipped for downwind sailing... I'm not sure the pole had ever been used before. We had to cobble together setups for both leading the end boom preventer back to the cockpit, and setting up fore and afterguys for the pole, which always ended up in having to cleat 2 lines to the same stern mooring cleat, a very poor arrangement, but there were simply not enough winches, clutches, or cleats back there to handle such rigging... I dreaded having to jibe on that trip, not having such lines already set up on both sides of the boat made for an incredible PITA having to walk everything around to the opposite side of the boat, and re-lead it back to the cockpit every time we jibed...

I still think one of the most commonly underestimated aspects by those who have not done a longer passage offshore, is how quickly wear and tear, and issues like chafing, can pile up offshore. That was one of the main takeaways from the Rally Debrief, virtually all of the 'rookies' in this year's 1500 expressed surprise at the sort of wear and failures that occurred, and how quickly... And no one was immune; ALTAIR, the Saga 48 formerly owned by Rick and Julie Palm, was making something like its 8th or 9th passage south, suffered their traveler blowing up during the heavier weather the second night out... They were able to effect some sort of repair, but it seriously hobbled them for the rest of the passage, and they were reluctant to bring the main to full hoist the rest of the way...

Sounds like many in the ARC have seen similar issues, even the biggest and fastest of the first finishers in St Lucia, according to this poster over on CF:



> The big boats from the ARC (direct) are coming ind now. I'm surprised to see so much damage on the monohulls. Many are taking down forestays, a lot of broken goosenecks.
> 
> 380 S2 ARC 2015 - Page 4 - Cruisers & Sailing Forums


One of my biggest fears is that of a gooseneck failure... One of the reasons I don't like sailing big boats, I don't know how the hell you deal with something like that on a larger boat, without exposing yourself or your crew to considerable risk... Especially, considering the ridiculous heights some of these booms are being set at these days...

What button do you push in that event, aboard all these 50+ footers that are "so easily handled by a couple" today ?

;-)


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

Jon and other's advice, based on way more experience than I have, is much appreciated.

Although my experience is more limited, we have owned 5 boats and we have done a few offshore passages. During the 10 years we owned a 52, we did quite a few. I completely concur that when things go bad on a bigger boat, it's hard particularly with a small crew. We had a jib furler fail on the 52. Our crew consisted on me, my wife, and luckily my rigger on that trip! It took both me and my rigger buddy all of our strength to get the jib on deck. The dead weight of the sail is more than I can move myself, never mind loaded up on a failed furler.

There's lots of advantages to size, including a more comfortable ride and faster hull speeds, but I found myself taking additional crew on offshore passages...beyond my wife and myself, incase something failed. When everything worked, single handing was no problem. Shorthanded, or couple crewed, IMHO it's easier to handle a problem on a smaller boat.

Lot's of people disagree with this assessment.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Also surprising how things work loose. We've had the pin for the gooseneck work loose on first passage with sdr. It had double nuts and torqued tight with lock tight. Had builder speak with vendor. They supplied a new bolt which was drilled to accept a pin. Still, torque nut and use blue on threads. No problems since.
Had CF spin pole drop off mast at night in the bumpies. Still retained by fitting holding it to the track on the mast. Lashed it to rail until sun came up then sorted it out. At destination needed some work to be made right.
Had fitting that holds upper part of vang assembly to boom fail. Rivets snapped then weld failed. A bit of dyneema and some creative thinking made it usable. Upon returning home went to vendor and they replaced with a cast machined fitting with no welds. Has worked fine since.
Have replaced furler line ,vang line and a reef line. Chaff happens. Usually at night when you can't see something is rubbing. Given I think the cover not just the core adds strength and I've had lines fail under load I replace lines. Exception is when it's near an end so if line was reversed chaff would be in the tail.
I know it's a dead horse but I don't like lines running under decks or where they are hard to see. PITA to do the multiple daily chaff walks anyway. Why may it harder or impossible to see the lines.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Smack has it right IMO - it's about the boats. Frankly I've never understood the attitude that heavy duty offshore boats are the standard against which all boats should be judged.

A boat should be judged against its intended use, which as the OP says, is mostly short hop coastal cruising and daysailing. By that standard, true offshore boats don't perform all that well in most cases - tight spaces, excessive stowage, small companionways and cockpits and so forth.

One wouldn't take a minivan in the Dakar rally or use a Smart car for transcontinental travel so why should you use a Cape Horner for island hopping?


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

I'm not the greatest sailor in the world, far from it but I have been doing it for over 40 years some pretty serious world cruising. But I think I can give some good advice here since the thread is going in this direction.

DON'T TRUST any boat be it a coastal cruiser, a real blue water cruising boat, an old rebuilt boat or a brand new one. I have a brand new boat, one of the best built boats in the world today and I don't mind saying=
A boat is a *****, a real *****. The moving wind and ocean dictate this. Every good sailor should be paranoid at all times! That does not mean you can't enjoy yourself. One must love sailing far more than all the problems that arise or else one would go crazy and no one would live this crazy life of repairs and cost.

And you are right Auspicious, it is amazing how many people leave for a destination unprepared, that includes me more than once. 

My pet peeve is how many sailors do not take care of their boats while on passage or even sailing coastal let alone before they leave the dock. How many skippers walk their deck just before night watch starts? How many skippers walk their decks after first light and check for breakage, look for nuts, bolts shackle pins on deck. How many skippers allow their crew to listen to music on head phones while on watch? MAN, that is asking for a serious disaster as with most problems one will hear a problem way before the problem is a total breakage situation.

Cheers


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

jsaronson said:


> Luckily, we are far more tolerant here than at SA!!
> 
> I ignore the "I never sailed before. What boat should I buy?" threads.
> ...


I would encourage the more experienced sailors to help the newbies figure out what questions they _should_ be asking at those early stages where, of course, we've all been.


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

Real Cruisers Verse

Hey, what is this, another "production boats and limits" thread?

The tag line on the right (Recent Discussions) shows:

"Real Cruisers verse..."

So I came here expecting some more fun limericks or other verse by "real cruisers"!

Well, anyway, here is my verse proving that* I'm a real cruiser *and giving some of my credentials.

*Real Cruiser's verse...
*

I learned boat design in the tub

form stability gets to the nub

with its entry so fine and its big wide behind

My duckie is no sailing scrub

I'm a genius at blue water too

I help others as you know is true

I spread it around

and prove my facts are sound

I want others to do as I do

I've read lots of books on the sea

I'm now quite the expert you see

when others speak up

I will tell them what's what

and prove no one is smarter than me

I know my boat's really the best

I'm sorry for all of the rest

I'll argue and fight till they know that I'm right

with my knowledge they'll be so impressed.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

SVAuspicious said:


> Not just the coastal cruisers - even the condo commanders...


You know - it really would be better if you just refer to sailors as sailors. There is no need to be derogatory about boats or people who sail them.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

hannah2 said:


> DON'T TRUST any boat be it a coastal cruiser, a real blue water cruising boat, an old rebuilt boat or a brand new one. I have a brand new boat, one of the best built boats in the world today and I don't mind saying=
> A boat is a *****, a real *****. The moving wind and ocean dictate this. Every good sailor should be paranoid at all times! That does not mean you can't enjoy yourself. One must love sailing far more than all the problems that arise or else one would go crazy and no one would live this crazy life of repairs and cost.


+1

This is some of the best insight I've seen on this forum. It is EXACTLY true.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

skygazer said:


> Real Cruisers Verse
> 
> Hey, what is this, another "production boats and limits" thread?
> 
> ...


You've got talent, Skygazer! And I don't care if you've also got it in the "real cruiser" category or not!


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

capecodda said:


> It took both me and my rigger buddy all of our strength to get the jib on deck. The dead weight of the sail is more than I can move myself, never mind loaded up on a failed furler.


Reminds me of a story by a local - he was setting up the old Charisma (early 70's, S&S 56') on the hard in Greece for launch when the owner arrived. He had to use the coffee grinders to winch the jib out of the fore hatch onto the deck.

I wonder the same thing about all these "Easily handled by a couple" big boats - yeah, sure - when everything is just right. I never wanted a boat bigger than I could muscle everything on.

What the hell do they do on those mega sailboats when the hydraulic furler blows up in a rising wind?


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

smackdaddy said:


> You know - it really would be better if you just refer to sailors as sailors. There is no need to be derogatory about boats or people who sail them.


Yeah - save that for the barbarians who drive power boats. :wink


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Just hearsay so for what's it worth. Ginormus Russian yacht visiting Vancouver. Owner and guests decide to take the sailing dingy on davits (a 40 ftr) for a run. Out into the open and turn into Howe Sound .Owner says why is the engine running? We are out for a sail. Captain shuts it down. As they approach Squamish at the end of the inlet they find the winches need the engine ,which won't restart. Had to cut halyards and stuff Ha!!


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

SloopJonB said:


> ...I wonder the same thing about all these "Easily handled by a couple" big boats - yeah, sure - when everything is just right. I never wanted a boat bigger than I could muscle everything on....What the hell do they do on those mega sailboats when the hydraulic furler blows up in a rising wind?


This is one of the reasons I appreciate the approach that says, go with the _smallest_ boat you need, not the _largest_ one you (think) you can manage.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

JonEisberg said:


> One of my biggest fears is that of a gooseneck failure... One of the reasons I don't like sailing big boats, I don't know how the hell you deal with something like that on a larger boat, without exposing yourself or your crew to considerable risk... Especially, considering the ridiculous heights some of these booms are being set at these days...
> 
> What button do you push in that event, aboard all these 50+ footers that are "so easily handled by a couple" today ?
> 
> ;-)


Having suffered a goose-neck failure in pretty rough weather you are right to worry.

Dropping the sail and taming the boom had to happen fast and efficiently and we never saw it coming. One minute a double reef in 25-32 knots the next a flailing boom.... I was very happy my buddy Jay was with me because if was just my wife and I things might have had a different outcome.. That piss-poor design was definitely modified.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> You know - it really would be better if you just refer to sailors as sailors. There is no need to be derogatory about boats or people who sail them.


"Chuckleheads" excepted, we can presume?

;-)

In fairness, I think Dave's post you snipped deserves to be read in its entirety...



SVAuspicious said:


> Not just the coastal cruisers - even the condo commanders help keep volume up and prices down. They also keep services available. Rather than make fun of those people we should hug them and tell them we love them.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

JonEisberg said:


> "Chuckleheads" excepted, we can presume?
> 
> ;-)
> 
> In fairness, I think Dave's post you snipped deserves to be read in its entirety...


Heh-heh. Hey, if I get hassled for it, I get to hassle back. Them's the rules.

Now go away you Chucklehendude.


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

SloopJonB said:


> What the hell do they do on those mega sailboats when the hydraulic furler blows up in a rising wind?


I've mentioned before that I've had hydraulics fail quite a few times on other types of equipment. Usually total failure. But yesterday I had a stuttering underpowered failure.

I love the power of hydraulics (superman!), but am not interested in betting my life on them. Or my enjoyment. I'm leaning more and more towards small and simple. In fact, I'm going back in time for design.

Hope I don't go back to wooden boats though, I just couldn't keep up with the maintenance. I love my plastic fishing bobber boats. Just want them a little deeper, rounder, and longer keeled.

I still get an excited flutter in my belly whenever I see a true deep full keel sailboat on the hard where I can admire the shapeliness and lines of her.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I think some here have just drifted into posting "whatever" in the name of becoming internet argurers


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Whatever. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Sailormon6 (May 9, 2002)

smackdaddy said:


> You know - it really would be better if you just refer to sailors as sailors. There is no need to be derogatory about boats or people who sail them.


"Believe me, my young friend, there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats. Simply messing... about in boats - or with boats. In or out of 'em, it doesn't matter. Nothing seems really to matter, that's the charm of it. *Whether you get away, or whether you don't; whether you arrive at your destination or whether you reach somewhere else, or whether you never get anywhere at all, you're always busy, and you never do anything in particular*; and when you've done it there's always something else to do, and you can do it if you like, but you'd much better not." Wind In The Willows

For those of us who's passion is messing about in boats, what difference does it make if we never leave the bay or the lake, or the dock, for that matter? If one is happy living aboard at the dock, or working endlessly on his boat, or building the boat of his dreams in his back yard, who cares?

How does it make any sense at all if you denigrate me because I don't make long ocean passages, and I denigrate you because you don't race, and we both denigrate people who just cruise the bay, or who would rather work on their boat than sail it? It's all good!


----------



## Shockwave (Feb 4, 2014)

Jon, kind of going back to my original theme. If a builder builds boats with brass through hulls, not bronze or Marlon seacocks why would you trust the goose neck or the rigging or a host of other unseen items? This is the crux, these boats are fine for passages, till there not. Are they designed for the cocktail circuit or voyaging?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> ....One of my biggest fears is that of a gooseneck failure... One of the reasons I don't like sailing big boats, I don't know how the hell you deal with something like that on a larger boat, without exposing yourself or your crew to considerable risk... Especially, considering the ridiculous heights some of these booms are being set at these days...


Obviously, prevention is the first answer to all concerns, of any kind. Preventers are the first that come to mind for most, but I wonder how many actually go inspect their gooseneck. I'll just make a friendly bet that most never walk up and look at the thing. Double or nothing that many failures had cracks or weaknesses, before they left the slip.

I've never had a gooseneck actually break. I have had just about everything else break....

So, I'm trying to imagine this reported terror. Presumably, the sail is up. It would seem like the topping lift, hanked sail and rigid boom vang would keep a broken gooseneck from dropping the boom on the crew's head. Can't I tie a rolling hitch around the boom and then wrap it to the mast. I can see that the trauma might have messed up the furling system, by tearing the bolt out of the furler. As I think about it, the rigid vang may be a real necessity.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Now we are getting into the purview of folks like Jon, Kill and Hannah. There are basic realities about boat construction, training garnered from real world experience, seamanship and boat maintenance habits that have real world impact not concerned with internet ego massaging.

We walk the deck
Every time we get on the boat and every time before we leave.
Change of watch. Except at night but then at day break. Do run a dive light around when not having night vision for a bit isn't key. 
Every new noise. Even at night unless isolated and understood. 
When anything seems untoward to anyone on the boat.

This occurs coastal, offshore, in a slip or on a hook. 

Why? Because 40 years ago I was ragged on to the point my ears were red. About this and then that. Person doing it didn't care about my feelings at that moment but did care about my life. I'm forever thankful some one cared that much.

Think not infrequently the person misconstrues the situation when a key bit of knowledge or wisdom or experience is related. People need to realize the sea doesn't care about your pedigree, initials after your name, stock holdings or net worth, nor what you did in the past.

Only two rules apply. 
If you didn't bring it with you -you don't have it.
If you don't know what to do or can't do it bad things will happen.

Parsing everything you read, are told, are taught is judgmental but this isn't arrogance. It only is when it's ego driven instead driven by desire for new knowledge .

I could give a rats behind if I get a new piece of the puzzle from B, K,M,J or a first time poster. Even picked up good stuff from BS. What I care about is whether it's useful and bear out as correct when put to use.


----------



## sharkbait (Jun 3, 2003)

1


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

Shockwave said:


> Jon, kind of going back to my original theme. If a builder builds boats with brass through hulls, not bronze or Marlon seacocks why would you trust the goose neck or the rigging or a host of other unseen items? This is the crux, these boats are fine for passages, till there not. Are they designed for the cocktail circuit or voyaging?


Because mast, boom and goose neck comes from selden regardless of boat being swan, c&c or bene?

Same as harken winches etc.


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

outbound said:


> I could give a rats behind if I get a new piece of the puzzle from B, K,M,J or a first time poster. Even picked up good stuff from BS. What I care about is whether it's useful and bear out as correct when put to use.


When I was a young lad* I made up my own proverb*, like a proverb in the bible but one I dreamed up.

I'd found that "know it alls" could not learn anything, because they would have to admit first that there was something they did not know. I'd learned that you never know where you might hear something useful "out of the mouths of babes". Humility was the quickest way to knowledge.

So here is my proverb, hope it's not too subtle for you:

*"Wise men listen to fools, but fools don't listen to wise men"
*
Applies pretty well to a lot of discussion on this board.


----------



## Shockwave (Feb 4, 2014)

Spec'ed appropriately?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

I have a proverb:

Dudes that make up proverbs and spout truisms are usually egotistical blowhards.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> I have a proverb:
> 
> Dudes that make up proverbs and spout truisms are usually egotistical blowhards.


Did you just make up a proverb? Circles within circles, wheels within wheels ... Whoa man, you just blew my mind. :eek


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

hannah2 said:


> My pet peeve is how many sailors do not take care of their boats while on passage or even sailing coastal let alone before they leave the dock. * How many skippers walk their deck just before night watch starts? How many skippers walk their decks after first light and check for breakage, look for nuts, bolts shackle pins on deck.* How many skippers allow their crew to listen to music on head phones while on watch? MAN, that is asking for a serious disaster as with most problems one will hear a problem way before the problem is a total breakage situation.
> 
> Cheers





outbound said:


> *We walk the deck
> Every time we get on the boat and every time before we leave.
> Change of watch. Except at night but then at day break. Do run a dive light around when not having night vision for a bit isn't key.
> Every new noise. Even at night unless isolated and understood.
> ...


I'm sure many here are tired of my harping about the importance of good deck and cockpit ergonomics, I realize I'm a broken record on the subject ... Perhaps I'm just a klutz whenever I set foot on a boat, and simply need all the help I can get ;-) But I'm surprised at the attitude that seems to becoming increasingly prevalent today, that safe decks don't matter as much anymore, and that with all controls being led aft, there should be no reason to ever leave the cockpit to begin with...

Or, if you must, a tether makes it all good...

;-)



smackdaddy said:


> JonEisberg said:
> 
> 
> > Again, perhaps it's just me... So, which deck would you prefer to take a stroll forward on some dirty night in the Stream?
> ...





JonEisberg said:


> smackdaddy said:
> 
> 
> > And on this Michael thing...sorry dude you can't wiggle out of your own hysterical hyperbole. Here's what you said a few posts ago
> ...


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

smackdaddy said:


> I have a proverb:
> 
> Dudes that make up proverbs and spout truisms are usually egotistical blowhards.


Perhaps you imagine this was directed at you? NOT! Sorry, but I don't think of you as much as you may imagine. Actually you never crossed my mind, I was thinking that I did learn some things from Brent Swain.

I said when I was a young lad. Long before the internet.

But I did in fact notice that you could not learn from Maine Sail. I learn something from almost everything he posts.

Most proverbs were made up by King Solomon. Generally considered the wisest man that ever lived. And the richest. And he had total power of life and death over all his people.

Guess you are better than him.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

skygazer said:


> Real Cruisers Verse
> 
> Hey, what is this, another "production boats and limits" thread?
> 
> ...


_EXCELLENT..._ Definitely worthy of more than a polite 'golf clap'...

;-)

However, you'll have to do better than that, it anyone expects a Know-It-All Gasbag like yours truly, to tone down the expression of my _OPINIONS_...

;-)

We hear ad nauseam on sailing forums variations on the theme "It's the SAILOR, not the BOAT, that matters in the end." As I've admitted, perhaps I'm just a klutz, or simply a crappy sailor who will never get the hang of it... But I need all the help I can get when I'm out there, and based upon my own experience, some boats make it _FAR_ easier to get the job done - safely and comfortably - than others...

_For ME..._


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

MikeOReilly said:


> Did you just make up a proverb? Circles within circles, wheels within wheels ... Whoa man, you just blew my mind. :eek


Did it blow hard? :wink


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

The prevalence of never leaving the cockpit marketing is abhorrent. If your offshore and not walking the deck checking your boat regularly your are incompetent or ignorant and possibly both. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

Shockwave said:


> Spec'ed appropriately?


You do have a point...


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

In my youth, he replied,
i took to the sea
And often stood watch with the best.
The experiences thus gained
Has lasted the rest of my life


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

skygazer said:


> When I was a young lad* I made up my own proverb*, like a proverb in the bible but one I dreamed up.
> 
> I'd found that "know it alls" could not learn anything, because they would have to admit first that there was something they did not know. I'd learned that you never know where you might hear something useful "out of the mouths of babes". Humility was the quickest way to knowledge.
> 
> ...


I was thinking that this one seems to be along very similar lines. But I don't have your talent for making up my own proverbs so I had to cut & paste. Maybe this will disqualify me from also being labeled an "egotistical blowhard."

*"I sometimes would rather look stupid and learn, than always try and look smart but remain stupid."*


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

skygazer said:


> Perhaps you imagine this was directed at you? NOT! Sorry, but I don't think of you as much as you may imagine. Actually you never crossed my mind, I was thinking that I did learn some things from Brent Swain.
> 
> I said when I was a young lad. Long before the internet.
> 
> ...


You obviously missed the joke. You might need to lighten up a bit.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Priceless: 

In a previous discussion re deck ergonomics, I once mentioned that a particular boat that was pictured was not one I would care to "take a stroll" forward in sporty conditions... You responded with something to the effect of "Why on earth would you ever want to do that?"

Speaking of priceless, was that a fine example of a Hinckley under the top pic of the Hunter 49?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

JonEisberg said:


> I'm sure many here are tired of my harping about the importance of good deck and cockpit ergonomics, I realize I'm a broken record on the subject ... Perhaps I'm just a klutz whenever I set foot on a boat, and simply need all the help I can get ;-) But I'm surprised at the attitude that seems to becoming increasingly prevalent today, that safe decks don't matter as much anymore, and that with all controls being led aft, there should be no reason to ever leave the cockpit to begin with...
> 
> Or, if you must, a tether makes it all good...
> 
> ;-)


Let me see. How do I put this?




























And just so you know, she's a REAL cruiser on this particular Hunter 49...










So maybe you should take some lessons. Sounds like you have some underwear to wash.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Yes that was a Hinckley Southwest 52. A fine yacht. Side decks you could navigate at night without the skills of a gecko. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Except for the blue trim, that doesn't look like the Hinckley I saw a few posts ago at all. But who's the gal?


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Bleemus said:


> Yes that was a Hinckley Southwest 52. A fine yacht. Side decks you could navigate at night without the skills of a gecko.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


To say nothing of staring at it on my computer for the next half an hour.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Bleemus said:


> Yes that was a Hinckley Southwest 52. A fine yacht. Side decks you could navigate at night without the skills of a gecko.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk





















I have to be honest, it's a pretty boat in it's own way. But I'd never want a boat like that. Seriously. Just doesn't appeal to me.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> I have to be honest, it's a pretty boat in it's own way. But I'd never want a boat like that. Seriously. Just doesn't appeal to me.


You can almost see the value of the boat plummeting as we speak.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Sailormon6 said:


> "Believe me, my young friend, there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats. Simply messing... about in boats - or with boats. In or out of 'em, it doesn't matter. Nothing seems really to matter, that's the charm of it. *Whether you get away, or whether you don't; whether you arrive at your destination or whether you reach somewhere else, or whether you never get anywhere at all, you're always busy, and you never do anything in particular*; and when you've done it there's always something else to do, and you can do it if you like, but you'd much better not." Wind In The Willows
> 
> For those of us who's passion is messing about in boats, what difference does it make if we never leave the bay or the lake, or the dock, for that matter? If one is happy living aboard at the dock, or working endlessly on his boat, or building the boat of his dreams in his back yard, who cares?
> 
> How does it make any sense at all if you denigrate me because I don't make long ocean passages, and I denigrate you because you don't race, and we both denigrate people who just cruise the bay, or who would rather work on their boat than sail it? It's all good!


I like your post sailormon6, But isn't it sad when sailors don't like messing with their boat and yet have the ego to think that nothing will go wrong with their boat. Messing with your boat is so much a part of what it is all about.

Thanks


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> I have to be honest, it's a pretty boat in it's own way. But I'd never want a boat like that. Seriously. Just doesn't appeal to me.


I'm curious why you would not want that boat Smack? I agree with you but I think we may have different reasons. It certainly is one of the most beautiful boats ever built.

Cheers


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

hannah2 said:


> I'm curious why you would not want that boat Smack? I agree with you but I think we may have different reasons. It certainly is one of the most beautiful boats ever built.
> 
> Cheers


She is beautiful in a traditional way. No doubt. BUT...

She's stupid expensive. She's relatively slow. The companionway steps have the same problems these guys decry in production boats. Though she has a great forward cabin with the centerline queen option, the rest of the interior seems pretty cramped...especially for such a big boat. The old-world, slat-board finishing doesn't appeal to me. It just feels like an old dude's boat.

Nothing wrong with that, of course. It just ain't for me.

But, I do agree with Jon, a dude can definitely get his walker all the way up those decks without having to clip in.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> I have to be honest, it's a pretty boat in it's own way. But I'd never want a boat like that. Seriously. Just doesn't appeal to me.


I agree... Too big for me, and I don't want a boat I'd become a slave to, or be hesitant to bring alongside a decrepit pier in a place like this...










Still, I sure like those side decks and coachroof handrails, however...

;-)


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

I agree with Smack - I wouldn't want that 52 either - now a 70......

As long as it came with paid crew to keep up the varnish.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

JonEisberg said:


> I agree... Too big for me, and I don't want a boat I'd become a slave to, or be hesitant to bring alongside a decrepit pier in a place like this...


Dude - I just run my Hunter right INTO those decrepit piers!


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

SloopJonB said:


> I agree with Smack - I wouldn't want that 52 either - now a 70......
> 
> As long as it came with paid crew to keep up the varnish.


Good lord. That thing makes me shudder. Could you imagine the sanding party?










And just think about that inmast furling in dirty conditions in the Stream? Definitely not a blue water boat. Heh.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

SloopJonB said:


> I agree with Smack - I wouldn't want that 52 either - now a 70......
> 
> As long as it came with paid crew to keep up the varnish.


That is a work of art. I hated how Hinckley and Little Harbor embraced the in mast furling for awhile. I worked on a boat with it for a few years and I wish I had back all the hours I spent repairing in mast furling issues. Other than that a marvelous photo. Thanks for sharing.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

smackdaddy said:


> Dude - I just run my Hunter right INTO those decrepit piers!


Careful there Smack - you're sounding suspiciously like Brent.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Smack
They are not slow on passage.
They are available without teak decks or teak covered houses.
You can have sunbrella covers for the rest of the teak.
The interior works just fine on passage OR WHEN ACTUALLY sailing.
Rolling furling mains are an option. Know one with CF mast and slab reefing.
Most folks always clip on when going forward on passage.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

SloopJonB said:


> Careful there Smack - you're sounding suspiciously like Brent.


Honestly, I didn't mean to pull a BS. But we sure did smack that bulkhead that day. No damage at all to the Hunter. BS should build his boats like Hunters. Obviously.

I will admit - though I think they look great - I was very happy we didn't have a plumb bow.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Pure boat porn at its finest. But yeah, probably best to look but not touch.

ProFurl electric furler for the headsail.


----------



## XSrcing (Aug 22, 2015)

I just accept that I don't know everything about anything. That includes knowing who I should and shouldn't listen to. So I listen to everyone.

Anyways, found this under a flower pot in my house. Worth reading?



















Published 1975.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

If you want a REAL SAILOR - this chick was it...no question:










She'd put all you guys to shame.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

I'm betting she was better looking than them too.

RIP Flo.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Gentlemen, please. This started out as a decent thread. Not every thread needs to be turned into an adult playground and the deliberate provocation is getting really, really old.


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

Capt Len said:


> In my youth, he replied,
> i took to the sea
> And often stood watch with the best.
> The experiences thus gained
> Has lasted the rest of my life


Capt Len, I'm glad you weighed in!

You are the one who came up with the idea that it would be more fun if we posted in limericks or verse.

I even imagined you may have been the one who started this "Real Cruiser's Verse" thread.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

XSrcing said:


> I just accept that I don't know everything about anything. That includes knowing who I should and shouldn't listen to. So I listen to everyone.
> 
> Anyways, found this under a flower pot in my house. Worth reading?
> 
> ...


For some guys 1975 is still "modern".


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

I thought, maybe, but you chose to quote me, so felt the need to say, hey, wait, I was defending you here


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Capt Len said:


> 'Careful there Smack - you're sounding suspiciously like Brent.' Not to worry Jon ,no confusion there. Brent's got some ocean under his belt.


Heh-heh. No worries Len. I just get tired of dudes following me all over SN calling me a troll and trying to stir up the mods to ban me when it's really _them_ doing the actual stirring. This exact thing happened over at CF with Exile and a couple of other dudes there - so, yeah, I do have a bone to pick on that issue. And I won't let it go when it's tried.

That said, I'm very used to this kind of thing. I just let it play out so people can see for themselves.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Oh please stop. I just deleted the sniping posts that I have time at the moment to find. Move on.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

DRFerron said:


> Oh please stop. I just deleted the sniping posts that I have time at the moment to find. Move on.


Stopped, and moving on.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> For some guys 1975 is still "modern".


And, for some guys "modern" is by definition "better"...

;-)

Were keels falling off 'State of the Art' multi-million dollar yachts back in '75?

Or, how many were abandoned by their professional crew 200 miles into their maiden offshore passage?










And, was CRUISING WORLD running articles on "What to Do When the Freighter Arrives"?

;-))

How To Get Rescued at Sea | Cruising World


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

^^^Okay - that was good. I'll give you that.

In 1975 no one knew any of the answers to your questions. Those answers and the skippers just went down with the "multi-million dollar yachts".


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

XSrcing said:


> I just accept that I don't know everything about anything. That includes knowing who I should and shouldn't listen to. So I listen to everyone.
> 
> Anyways, found this under a flower pot in my house. Worth reading?
> 
> ...


Yes, definitely worth reading! I knew Dave ("Dr Dave") Parker and he was a true sailor (a true doctor, too). Boy did he have tales to tell! I cherish my copy of the book which he signed a few years before he passed.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

smackdaddy said:


> For some guys 1975 is still "modern".


?? What's your point?? :wink

It may not be modern but it sure don't seem like 40 years ago.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Boy did he have tales to tell!


I hope to never have tales to tell, just stories. I'm happy and comfortable saying this and will leave tales others to use to sell books.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

smackdaddy said:


> ^^^Okay - that was good. I'll give you that.
> 
> In 1975 no one knew any of the answers to your questions. Those answers and the skippers just went down with the "multi-million dollar yachts".


Not really - offshore voyaging was not what it is now. Chichester got *Knighted* for his singlehanded RTW trip less than 10 years before that.

Crossing oceans in small boats was a rare and unusual accomplishment in any form back then.

The first keel ejection I ever heard about was Drum in the 80's and that was due to improper casting (not J'ing the bolts) rather than inadequate construction like now.

Seems to me that a major component of these failures is the drive for bigger & cheaper boats. Back then a 30' was a "big" boat and now 35' - 40' is regarded as entry level by many.

Remember when the Queen of England was the only person in the world to have a true "ship" for a yacht? And even then it had been built to be easily converted to a hospital ship.

Now any major tech geek or Russian kleptocrat has one or more that size. Paul Allen's biggest is 3 times the disp of the old Britannia.

That has filtered down to "our" boats but to do it they've been cheapened and lightened, hence disposable keels and such.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

SloopJonB said:


> That has filtered down to "our" boats but to do it they've been cheapened and lightened, hence disposable keels and such.


Wow! You're a brave man. But maybe it was tongue-in-cheek. If one of the BWC had said such a thing . . . . 

But it does bring up a point I've often wondered about. Wasn't Jon E.'s Allied, to use one example, considered a moderately priced "production" boat in its day? Ditto for many Pearson's & others? Did those boats suffer the same sort of disapproval & scrutiny that the production boats built for today's market endure?


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Yep. To hear many tell it I took my life in my hands every time I stepped aboard my old Columbia 43 yet the next owner survived a storm off the west coast of the island that shredded its sails.

For those who don't know it, that coast off Tofino is just about as nasty as it gets - true "Graveyard of the Pacific". A lee shore with nothing but the North Pacific between it and Japan. Many of the residents make their living hosting "Storm Watchers" who go there just to see the violent weather.

A lot of people base their idea of quality in a boat on the finish work rather than the construction. BITD when production boats like Col's & Pearsons were being slagged as Clorox bottles those same people regarded Taiwanese clippers (Leaky Teakies) as the epitome of salty seaworthiness.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

SloopJonB said:


> Seems to me that a major component of these failures is the drive for bigger & cheaper boats. Back then a 30' was a "big" boat and now 35' - 40' is regarded as entry level by many.
> 
> That has filtered down to "our" boats but to do it they've been cheapened and lightened, hence disposable keels and such.


I generally agree. The drive is definitely toward bigger in the yacht market. And there is always pricing pressure in any product development that has to be made up somewhere.

But I don't think these things are inherently "bad". I do think that it really puts tremendous pressure on the builders to get the equation right. Oyster missed that mark on this boat, clearly. But many other builders are getting that balance right.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

SloopJonB said:


> Yep. To hear many tell it I took my life in my hands every time I stepped aboard my old Columbia 43 yet the next owner survived a storm off the west coast of the island that shredded its sails.
> 
> For those who don't know it, that coast off Tofino is just about as nasty as it gets - true "Graveyard of the Pacific". A lee shore with nothing but the North Pacific between it and Japan. Many of the residents make their living hosting "Storm Watchers" who go there just to see the violent weather.
> 
> A lot of people base their idea of quality in a boat on the finish work rather than the construction. BITD when production boats like Col's & Pearsons were being slagged as Clorox bottles those same people regarded Taiwanese clippers (Leaky Teakies) as the epitome of salty seaworthiness.


OK, interesting. So you do think at least part of the critique is derived from modern production boats still being relatively new, and a pretty big departure design & construction wise from more traditional boats? Some of that goes on in the auto, mx, aviation, and many other worlds too, of course. There's always some resistance to change.

But did the "old" Clorox bottles suffer such things as keel & rudder failures? Or maybe we just hear about such things more now, thanks to the internet? And I guess the next logical question is whether today's production boats will enjoy the same type of good rep for seaworthiness in 20-30 years as the Allied's & Pearsons, etc. seem to enjoy now?


----------



## XSrcing (Aug 22, 2015)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Yes, definitely worth reading! I knew Dave ("Dr Dave") Parker and he was a true sailor (a true doctor, too). Boy did he have tales to tell! I cherish my copy of the book which he signed a few years before he passed.


Awesome!


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Exile1 said:


> But did the "old" Clorox bottles suffer such things as keel & rudder failures? Or maybe we just hear about such things more now, thanks to the internet?


Of course more boats lose their keels and rudders now compared to the days of full keeled barn door rudder boats. But I don't feel modern boats have as many keel/rudder problems as it sounds on the internet where you heard about the same problem over, and over, and over , and over, and over................................

1,000 post about a problem on 1 boat is 1 problem, not a 1,000


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Probably isn't known to happen often due to the lack of internet but Once upon a time a Clorox tieoneon with a full keel and barndoor rudder actually left the marina and hit a rock. Not much damage so obviously a candidate for BW. However , when grinding off the leading edge of the keel for reglassing. the sand ran out. Just shows that cutting corners at the yard is not new.but the gap between design limit and safety has narrowed


----------



## sharkbait (Jun 3, 2003)

1


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

sharkbait said:


> The only reason I leave the cockpit is to change/strike the jib or toss the hook out.
> There is nowhere to put your beer on the foredeck. Safety first, please.


Exactly, Check you deck for problems before they become real problems. Safety first, please.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Exile1 said:


> OK, interesting. So you do think at least part of the critique is derived from modern production boats still being relatively new, and a pretty big departure design & construction wise from more traditional boats? Some of that goes on in the auto, mx, aviation, and many other worlds too, of course. There's always some resistance to change.
> 
> But did the "old" Clorox bottles suffer such things as keel & rudder failures? Or maybe we just hear about such things more now, thanks to the internet? And I guess the next logical question is whether today's production boats will enjoy the same type of good rep for seaworthiness in 20-30 years as the Allied's & Pearsons, etc. seem to enjoy now?


We probably hear about it more, or at least quicker now but we weren't exactly in an information void BITD. I remember reading a lot about carbon rudder stock failures in the late 70's but that was pretty new - rudder failures were very unusual and, as I noted, Drum was the first keel failure I heard of.

A couple of examples of how things were different - Sayula, a Swan 65, got rolled 360 in the Southern Ocean during the Whitbread - she came up with rig intact and went on to win the race IIRC.

Closer to home, Sorcery, a C&C 61, got rolled by a rogue wave in the North Pacific and likewise came up with rig intact.

I can't imagine a current top level 65 foot racer doing that. Hell, many of the RTW racers lose their rigs just sailing.

As Len noted (correctly I think) margins are a lot narrower now. I remember design books recommending 5 & 10 fold safety margins on structural elements. Can't say for sure but I bet those are down to 2 or 3 times now - even less on extreme race boats.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

hannah2 said:


> Exactly, Check you deck for problems before they become real problems. Safety first, please.


I'm glad to hear you guys saying that. JonE's description of the whole affair sounded a bit strange to me...



JonEisberg said:


> Again, perhaps it's just me... So, which deck would you prefer to take a stroll forward on some dirty night in the Stream?


I never stroll. I clip in and scootch. And I only do that if it's absolutely necessary.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> Of course more boats lose their keels and rudders now compared to the days of full keeled barn door rudder boats. But I don't feel modern boats have as many keel/rudder problems as it sounds on the internet where you heard about the same problem over, and over, and over , and over, and over................................
> 
> 1,000 post about a problem on 1 boat is 1 problem, not a 1,000


Very good point. And it gets compounded because the info is usually anecdotal, piecemeal, inconclusive, and often biased. So it makes speculation all the easier, and then the inevitable counter-speculation, and suddenly you have a 700-post thread. The internet makes it all too easy.

Then again, keel, rudder, and maybe thru-hull failures are most sailors' worst nightmares. Probably worse than a dismasting because of the higher risk of sinking. Sorta like a wing falling off a private plane in the general aviation world (maybe). Shouldn't be all that surprising that some people might have concerns that similar failures could also occur on the same or similar model boats, even though each incident usually has a unique set of variables.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> I'm glad to hear you guys saying that. JonE's description of the whole affair sounded a bit strange to me...
> 
> I never stroll. I clip in and scootch. And I only do that if it's absolutely necessary.


I actually read Hannah's comment about the importance of regular, preemptive deck walks/inspections for safety reasons as agreeing with Jon & Bleemus, among others. But maybe I missed it.

"Scootch"???


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

How dogs rub the carpet before deworming


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

SloopJonB said:


> As Len noted (correctly I think) margins are a lot narrower now. I remember design books recommending 5 & 10 fold safety margins on structural elements. Can't say for sure but I bet those are down to 2 or 3 times now - even less on extreme race boats.


I guess this is fine in the racing world where presumably everyone knows what they're getting into, but hopefully the margins are higher for basic modern cruising boats. I'm not sure how many boat buyers understand the trade-offs that are required to meet the desired margins for safety, as well as performance & comfort. And first-time buyers are likely to make more mistakes, i.e. groundings, caught in bad weather, over-canvassing, hitting the dock. (No offense Smack, we've all done it). Most of the emphasis with modern production boats seems to be on performance & interior living space. Some argue that mfgs. are just giving the market what it wants, but that seems like a stretch when the only alternatives usually cost at least 4-5 times more.

It seems to me that if someone is willing to give up a knot or two of performance in exchange for a stronger, heavier build, he/she better have a lot of money for a higher-end boat, or be looking at refitting one of the many older boats on the used market.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Don0190 said:


> Don't some ever get tired of the same bah bah bah "discussions" of the small fraction of "blue water" danger sailing? Doesn't it seem that any cruiser sailing around doing day hops or 1-2 passage cruises on a comfortable boat is made out on forums to be some type of lower life form?
> 
> I bet by far more cruisers fall into the category of day cruisers that in the distance cruiser world. These are the cruisers normally not sailing more than 50 miles a day between stops. They are out to travel and see things, not spend weeks out in the water. Yes they sometimes spend a couple of days out on a passage to get to a new area, but they are smart enough to wait for the right weather to do so.
> 
> Lets stop suggesting these cruisers and their comfortable boats are some lower life form and start giving them their due credit for being the majority of real cruisers verse internet arguers!


wonder how the thread got to where it is from post 1


----------



## mariner3302 (May 1, 2006)

My favorite is the portion of "sailors" who post all the "warnings" and BS about the dangers of sailing bluewater. And a bunch more that, as has been mentioned, try to put down a boat designs ability to handle this condition or that. I have had a Tartan 34-2 and Passport 40. All of them got significant singlehanded open ocean, 250 miles offshore long distance passagemaking, and even more coastal cruising. I parted with them and did some land time. Now I am buying a 1990 Macgregor 26S. I live near Myrtle Beach so dock space is pretty expensive. For me, it is a great boat design and capability for what I need. 
Anyway, the point was.... on the trailer sailor websites that I have looked at, there are a ton of people putting opinions out that have NO basis in actual experience. I kid you not, I read a post where a guy was criticizing heavily the Macgregors ability to handle a squall that may pop up or some other mystery of the deep. And a whole bunch of posters piled on and the discussion started feeding itself. Well, the guy that started all this said in a later post that "Well, I have never been on a boat in the ocean but I have read a LOT on the internet and looked at pictures of the boat." blah blah blah It's like going on a forum and the folks with a ton of posts do some sort of cyber put them in the corner deal with new to the forum posters. 
My take on this is simple... first, I don't get into discussions about whether this boat or that is good enough for this condition or that. I have a boat, it's my responsibility to know the limitations AND her characteristics - good and bad, and to operate her within them.
The old adage about not talking with idiots because you'll start acting like one applies. Opinions are just that opinions and you have to weigh these opinions against real life experience.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> I never stroll. I clip in and scootch. And I only do that if it's absolutely necessary.


Problem is you don't know it's necessary until you find something you didn't expect.

We found nuts holding gooseneck on had worked loose. Would have been a total disaster if not found on routine inspection.

Deck walks and inspections should be part of your routine.

Smack- want to keep you around. Please safety first.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

JonEisberg said:


> When we passed Cape Henry on the morning of our departure, we had ideal conditions, NW breeze in the low 20's. We were sailing wing & wing, DDW towards our chosen waypoint for entering the Stream (which turned out to be considerably further N and E of the rest of the fleet).


If I recall correctly you and I have the same basic approach. From the Chesapeake Bay safe water buoy I get as close to 135T as wind permits until across the Gulf Stream. I simply don't understand the folks who follow the beach to Diamond Shoals.



JonEisberg said:


> I still think one of the most commonly underestimated aspects by those who have not done a longer passage offshore, is how quickly wear and tear, and issues like chafing, can pile up offshore.


Which goes back to good boat design, construction, and outfit. There simply isn't enough attention paid to good leads. Yes, chafe is always a problem but fair leads will reduce it to a minimum.

Many production boats leave much to be desired in that respect. Some "bluewater" boats do also.



SloopJonB said:


> A boat should be judged against its intended use, which as the OP says, is mostly short hop coastal cruising and daysailing. By that standard, true offshore boats don't perform all that well in most cases - tight spaces, excessive stowage, small companionways and cockpits and so forth.


A lot depends on how you define "true offshore boats." Oh - I have never heard anyone say they had too much stowage, too much tankage, or too big a battery bank.

As long as you can sleep in the cockpit it isn't too small.



hannah2 said:


> My pet peeve is how many sailors do not take care of their boats while on passage or even sailing coastal let alone before they leave the dock. How many skippers walk their deck just before night watch starts? How many skippers walk their decks after first light and check for breakage, look for nuts, bolts shackle pins on deck. How many skippers allow their crew to listen to music on head phones while on watch? MAN, that is asking for a serious disaster as with most problems one will hear a problem way before the problem is a total breakage situation.


Agreed, but that isn't enough. You have to pay attention all the time. A shackle pin hitting the deck has awakened me below and the watch didn't hear anything. I don't know how you train yourself for that. Similarly the autopilot beeping that it has lost lock should not get me on deck before the watch notices.



skygazer said:


> I've mentioned before that I've had hydraulics fail quite a few times on other types of equipment. Usually total failure.


I'm with you. I lost backstays when the hydraulic backstay adjusters failed recently. That was not a good time. *sigh* We didn't lose the rig but things got a little more exciting than I prefer for a little while. By the way, Amsteel rocks.



sharkbait said:


> The only reason I leave the cockpit is to change/strike the jib or toss the hook out.
> There is nowhere to put your beer on the foredeck. Safety first, please.


You need a bluewater boat then. On Auspicious the bow lights sit in a bracket that makes a dandy place to park a bottle, can, or stemless glass.



Exile1 said:


> I'm not sure how many boat buyers understand the trade-offs that are required to meet the desired margins for safety, as well as performance & comfort.


Times have changed. Really big margins were applied to calculated static loads to account for increased dynamic loads and a safety margin. Today we have really good ways to calculate expected dynamic loads and smaller safety margins are entirely appropriate.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Exile1 said:


> I actually read Hannah's comment about the importance of regular, preemptive deck walks/inspections for safety reasons as agreeing with Jon & Bleemus, among others. But maybe I missed it.
> 
> "Scootch"???


I have gimbaled drink holders at mast and bow.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

outbound said:


> ...We found nuts holding gooseneck on had worked loose. Would have been a total disaster if not found on routine inspection......


I once noticed the cotter pin was missing, that was holding in one of clevis pins on the rigid vang. Without completely revealing my idiocy, I managed to drop the clevis pin overboard, while trying to repair (the clevis had partly worked its way out).

Having spares for stuff that can break (or the skipper can screw up) is a really good idea.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

SVAuspicious said:


> Times have changed. Really big margins were applied to calculated static loads to account for increased dynamic loads and a safety margin. Today we have really good ways to calculate expected dynamic loads and smaller safety margins are entirely appropriate.


Very good point. Not only may help explain differences b'twn different brands of old & new production boats, but also within the same brand. I keep hearing how the older generation of Bene's, Hunter's, etc. had more heavily built hulls. May also help explain why plenty of new production boats do successful bluewater passages, but you hear and see how some seem more vulnerable to groundings, collisions, etc. As has been said, it's all about the type of sailing you do and what sorts of margins you're comfortable with.


----------



## capfrank (Jul 6, 2000)

I agree. One needs to know if the source of information one is listening to, comes from hands on experience of many years, or hear say.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Exile1 said:


> Very good point. Not only may help explain differences b'twn different brands of old & new production boats, but also within the same brand. I keep hearing how the older generation of Bene's, Hunter's, etc. had more heavily built hulls.


I don't believe that the older boats were designed to be stronger. I don't believe they were designed to any specific strength level because there wasn't expertise, experience, methods for doing so especially within the small industry of sailboat building. I think they just built thick hulls because they didn't know they didn't have to.

But it doesn't really matter how much, if any, stronger the old hulls were. All that matters is the current ones that have the benefit of modeling etc. are strong enough. And the 1,000s and 1,000s of boat out there really indicate that for the most part they are.


----------



## goat (Feb 23, 2014)

An acquaintance from work was complaining about his seacocks and being corroded to the point of failure on his five year old Bene. He said the manufacturer used bronze rather than brass and that was the problem. I attempted to correct him saying "don't you mean they used brass rather than bronze?" He replied no, that I was mistaken and this time he'd make sure they were replaced with brass or Marelon. All I could say to that was, "I've heard Marelon is pretty good." 

I don't know if that makes me an internet arguer as I've never had experience with brass or Marelon valves, yet still gave an opinion gleaned from the internet.

Oh well back to my armchair.

Don are we still racing to see who retires first? Could be a close race.......

goat


----------



## XSrcing (Aug 22, 2015)

What I do know is that when I have a customer come in and say, "I read on the internet..." I am immediately skeptical of everything they say. The webernets is full of wildly knowledgeable people and it is filled with a lot of angry people. The angry people are always the loudest and most often wrong.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> I don't believe that the older boats were designed to be stronger. I don't believe they were designed to any specific strength level because there wasn't expertise, experience, methods for doing so especially within the small industry of sailboat building. I think they just built thick hulls because they didn't know they didn't have to.
> 
> But it doesn't really matter how much, if any, stronger the old hulls were. All that matters is the current ones that have the benefit of modeling etc. are strong enough. And the 1,000s and 1,000s of boat out there really indicate that for the most part they are.


Yeah, I've heard that same explanation for the thicker hulls/heavier builds on older boats, and it certainly sounds plausible. But then there are those who claim the newer, lighter builds are all about cost-savings. Next thing you know you have internet arguers and yet another big thread. And there certainly were plenty of high performance cruising boats built BITD, with fin keels, spade rudders, good speed, maneuverability & seakindliness, but were usually a lot heavier than typical production boats built now.

I completely understand the attraction of so many for modern, lightweight, easier to maneuver & maintain production boats, but find it kinda odd that, with varying degrees of emphasis, they all seem pretty focused on lightweight, speed, and interior space. Nothing wrong with that, but if somebody wants maybe higher safety margins, seakindliness, comfort beating upwind on long passages, and maybe some of the ergonomic features described by Jon, Out & others, they seem restricted to only the premium brands that are unaffordable to most. Seems like there's a lot of people buying older boats who want a little more than "strong enough," but could care less about the "status" or "prestige" of owning a premium brand. How about an Outbound, Oyster, HR, etc. type build but with IKEA furniture, functional but middle of the road sail kit, fake or no teak, a basic layout, and production boat value? Surely there are new boat buyers other than the ultra-wealthy who desire such features.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Exile1 said:


> Yeah, I've heard that same explanation for the thicker hulls/heavier builds on older boats, and it certainly sounds plausible.


This is simply untrue. There is a wealth of information on this subject in the book "Heart of Glass":

As far back as 1946, the US Navy had built several test fiberglass boats and determined that fiberglass possessed from three to twelve times the strength in shear as Douglass fir. The Coast Guard built at least 6 forty foot fiberglass boats in 1949. When subjected to tests in 1974, it was found that the strength of the material had diminished only marginally; based on the loss of strength over that 25 year period, they calculated the life expectancy of the boat to be several thousand years.

There are also numerous examples of testing done by early fiberglass boat builders, some scientific and some more colorful, involving dropping boats from cranes and shooting them with firearms. There is also at least one contemporary quote in there from a famous early builder where he directly refutes the idea that they were "overbuilding" the boats because they were unsure of the strength necessary to make them safe. I couldn't find it just now, but I remember it because I too used to think that was the case and this quote struck me as important.

I don't doubt that modern process systems and engineering have made it possible to make thinner hulls, but I don't think the early GRP boats were "overbuilt" because of a lack of understanding of the strengths of the materials.

Anyone interesting in the hows and whys of fiberglass boat building, both historic and contemporary, should pick up a copy.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

mstern said:


> This is simply untrue. There is a wealth of information on this subject in the book "Heart of Glass":
> 
> As far back as 1946, the US Navy had built several test fiberglass boats and determined that fiberglass possessed from three to twelve times the strength in shear as Douglass fir. The Coast Guard built at least 6 forty foot fiberglass boats in 1949. When subjected to tests in 1974, it was found that the strength of the material had diminished only marginally; based on the loss of strength over that 25 year period, they calculated the life expectancy of the boat to be several thousand years.
> 
> ...


Yup, I've heard this explanation too, and usually as a counter to the one Don posted above. It supports the notion by some that the new, thinner laminates may be close to the same strength as the old, but much less costly to produce. But while that strength may be good enough for most sailing conditions, it may be problematic sailing over or into the hard bits.

The detail you provide is interesting, thanks. _Several thousand years??!!_ Suddenly I'm feeling a whole lot better about my own boat turning 30 next year.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Exile1 said:


> Yup, I've heard this explanation too, and usually as a counter to the one Don posted above. It supports the notion by some that the new, thinner laminates may be close to the same strength as the old, but much less costly to produce. But while that strength may be good enough for most sailing conditions, it may be problematic sailing over or into the hard bits.
> 
> The detail you provide is interesting, thanks. _Several thousand years??!!_ Suddenly I'm feeling a whole lot better about my own boat turning 30 next year.


See the refurb CCA thread. There was another that Jeff provided me from the 80s where they cut up a 20+ yo coast guard power boat that had been in routine service until then. They figured 100+ year service life for the hull at that point until greater than 50% strength loss. You can, and should, build lighter as all that extra resin just adds weight with little to no benefit, but you still need to mix carefully, allow to cure without accelerators, and treat your glass right. I'm convinced most modern manufacturers do this better than the old guys, but I'm not convinced some of the other things they do to save money aren't inferior. I'm also convinced that the old ways will, for the vast majority, last that 100+. I'm not convinced the new ones will, because the ability to refit them and some of the stuff we are talking about in the construction methods thread.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

for some it appears that it really is bah bah bah to ensure they don't consider anything other than what they what to believe


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> wonder how the thread got to where it is from post 1


Maybe because nobody's ever heard anyone else "suggesting [that coastal] cruisers and their comfortable boats are some lower life form"?? Certainly agree they are the vast majority, and I'm definitely one of them, although I aspire to longer voyages when time & circumstances permit. Just never personally experienced anything but camaraderie amongst sailors, until I started reading internet forums, that is. 

But if you think the BW guys are denigrating with their opinions & advice, just think of Mark of _Sea Life_ on his Bene 393. Solo Atlantic crossing, and several solo passages back & forth from the US e. coast to the Caribbean. It seems like after every time he completes one of these BW passages, people congratulate him only to have him announce how _EASY_ BW sailing really is!

Not many sailors get to do this, so I always look forward to reading about what it's like and try to learn whatever I can. But I don't see how it takes away from how others sail or what kind of boat they sail in. Am I missing something?


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Exile1 said:


> Yeah, I've heard that same explanation for the thicker hulls/heavier builds on older boats, and it certainly sounds plausible. But then there are those who claim the newer, lighter builds are all about cost-savings. Next thing you know you have internet arguers and yet another big thread. And there certainly were plenty of high performance cruising boats built BITD, with fin keels, spade rudders, good speed, maneuverability & seakindliness, but were usually a lot heavier than typical production boats built now.
> 
> I completely understand the attraction of so many for modern, lightweight, easier to maneuver & maintain production boats, but find it kinda odd that, with varying degrees of emphasis, they all seem pretty focused on lightweight, speed, and interior space. Nothing wrong with that, but if somebody wants maybe higher safety margins, seakindliness, comfort beating upwind on long passages, and maybe some of the ergonomic features described by Jon, Out & others, they seem restricted to only the premium brands that are unaffordable to most. Seems like there's a lot of people buying older boats who want a little more than "strong enough," but could care less about the "status" or "prestige" of owning a premium brand. How about an Outbound, Oyster, HR, etc. type build but with IKEA furniture, functional but middle of the road sail kit, fake or no teak, a basic layout, and production boat value? Surely there are new boat buyers other than the ultra-wealthy who desire such features.


I'll agree with much of what you said here. But I think there are boats being built right now that are well built and the same price of a new Benny. One example is the cruising Pogo. I think the price is reasonable for a fast sea worthy boat that has spartan interior. Ya, I know a lot of Americans think they do not go well to weather are lousy at anchor and so on. But I have talked extensively with owners of Pogos even owners of companies who compete against Pogo and all of them say they do very well indeed and that a lot of people think because of the radical design they do not make it as a cruising boat. I wouldn't hesitate to own one and if we didn't buy our Boreal and what I know now of Pogo I might seriously think about getting one and my wife and I are in our mid 60's.

I would buy a Pogo over a new HR even if I could afford a new HR, The new HR's no longer designed for extended cruising as there is little storage space for gear because they punched out their ends for more living and comfort space.

Cheers


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

SVAuspicious said:


> Times have changed. Really big margins were applied to calculated static loads to account for increased dynamic loads and a safety margin. Today we have really good ways to calculate expected dynamic loads and smaller safety margins are entirely appropriate.


Tell that to Oyster, Bavaria et. al.

The now almost commonplace event of keels falling off seems to have come in lockstep with those "really good ways to calculate expected dynamic loads".


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

SloopJonB said:


> The now almost commonplace event of keels falling off seems to have come in lockstep with those "really good ways to calculate expected dynamic loads".


Commonplace???? I feel that's internet arguing and can recall only 2. Just because we have heard of those 2 so often doesn't make it commonplace.

Please name the boats you know of keels falling off.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

seaner97 said:


> See the refurb CCA thread. There was another that Jeff provided me from the 80s where they cut up a 20+ yo coast guard power boat that had been in routine service until then. They figured 100+ year service life for the hull at that point until greater than 50% strength loss. You can, and should, build lighter as all that extra resin just adds weight with little to no benefit, but you still need to mix carefully, allow to cure without accelerators, and treat your glass right. I'm convinced most modern manufacturers do this better than the old guys, but I'm not convinced some of the other things they do to save money aren't inferior. I'm also convinced that the old ways will, for the vast majority, last that 100+. I'm not convinced the new ones will, because the ability to refit them and some of the stuff we are talking about in the construction methods thread.


Keep in mind that a year in CG service would be the equivalent of decades in a typical pleasure boat.

The answer to "How long will they last?" is a simple "Nobody knows".

Longer than any of us, that's for sure.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Exile1 said:


> Maybe because nobody's ever heard anyone else "suggesting [that coastal] cruisers and their comfortable boats are some lower life form"?? Certainly agree they are the vast majority, and I'm definitely one of them, although I aspire to longer voyages when time & circumstances permit. Just never personally experienced anything but camaraderie amongst sailors, until I started reading internet forums, that is.
> 
> But if you think the BW guys are denigrating with their opinions & advice, just think of Mark of _Sea Life_ on his Bene 393. Solo Atlantic crossing, and several solo passages back & forth from the US e. coast to the Caribbean. It seems like after every time he completes one of these BW passages, people congratulate him only to have him announce how _EASY_ BW sailing really is
> 
> Not many sailors get to do this, so I always look forward to reading about what it's like and try to learn whatever I can. But I don't see how it takes away from how others sail or what kind of boat they sail in. Am I missing something?


Exile, we meet sailors like Mark in their little Beney toys all the time. And we and the entire cruising world have total respect for what they are doing. If their boat is well maintained I'll carry on a conversation, we will tell each other lies, I'll help them do repairs and I'll seriously drink with them in their cockpit somewhere at anchor or in a marina. And people in these cheaply built boats are not pissed at us because we have been lucky enough to own an amazing boat. Guys like Mark love being invited aboard boats like Outbound and I have. They love the tour and spend hours wanting to see more. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. I get the biggest kick out of some of the people posting that think there is some snobbery between owners of different boats of different costs. There is a lot more edginess between owners of expensive boats than between owners of expensive boats and cheaper less well built boats. I'll tell you a story about a French Owner of an expensive European production boat and his dislike because I was an American with a boat every Frenchman wants. He and his wife were motoring by my boat in their dink while at anchor in Antigua. I had my American flag up and happened to be sitting in the cockpit. As they go by the wife says, " Look an American with a Boreal!" Her husband with this incredible frown on his face says, " That's too [email protected]@king Bad!" I cracked up.

The internet is a place for total BS and forums of any kind bring out the big time BS. I'm glad you are telling it like it really is out in the real world.

Cheers


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Don0190 said:


> Commonplace???? I feel that's internet arguing and can recall only 2. Just because we have heard of those 2 so often doesn't make it commonplace.
> 
> Please name the boats you know of keels falling off.


In recent years and just off the top of my head - the racer in Texas, the fleet of Bavarias in the Adriatic, Cheeki Rafiki and the latest Oyster. That's a lot more than two and there are more that I can't be bothered to look up for you.

And I said *almost* commonplace.

Big difference.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

SloopJonB said:


> seaner97 said:
> 
> 
> > See the refurb CCA thread. There was another that Jeff provided me from the 80s where they cut up a 20+ yo coast guard power boat that had been in routine service until then. They figured 100+ year service life for the hull at that point until greater than 50% strength loss. You can, and should, build lighter as all that extra resin just adds weight with little to no benefit, but you still need to mix carefully, allow to cure without accelerators, and treat your glass right. I'm convinced most modern manufacturers do this better than the old guys, but I'm not convinced some of the other things they do to save money aren't inferior. I'm also convinced that the old ways will, for the vast majority, last that 100+. I'm not convinced the new ones will, because the ability to refit them and some of the stuff we are talking about in the construction methods thread.
> ...


Kinda my point. Was just throwing out data and background to add to it.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

SloopJonB said:


> In recent years and just off the top of my head - the racer in Texas, the fleet of Bavarias in the Adriatic, Cheeki Rafiki and the latest Oyster. That's a lot more than two and there are more that I can't be bothered to look up for you.
> 
> And I said *almost* commonplace.
> 
> Big difference.


Back in the 70's and 80's before good communication and epirb if one met with disaster chances are they did not live to tell about what happened to their boat. It did not make national news as it does today. Maybe a short article in the local paper where boat was to arrive and only a month after it was due. Because family of the missing didn't know they were missing for a long time so no report about missing boat. And of course the missing peoples local news paper had something about missing at sea and assumed dead many months after the fact.

I remember arriving in Auckland, NZ in 1973 Via a pretty much strait sail from Bora Bora as the season was late. I made one of those expensive phone calls to my folks back in New England. They said they were just about to call NZ and report me missing. There were two boats mentioned that year in the NZ papers that were reported missing, not a trace so no one ever found out what happened, maybe the Keel fell off maybe they were attacked and pulled under by the giant NZ squid. Today with almost instant rescue we find out what went wrong to most of these boats. Same crap could have happened in the old days as it does now.

Cheers


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

It made it into the sailing mags, not just local newspapers. Our local one, Pacific Yachting, had a "where are they now" column every month - no-one was ever reported missing in it AFAIK.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Don0190 said:


> Commonplace???? I feel that's internet arguing


No it's not. :wink


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

SloopJonB said:


> No it's not. :wink


Is TOO!!


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Please listen to H. and others. 
There is no question a lighter stronger hull can built now than in the past. Examples abound beyond CF. just look at infusion, aramid re inforced or other modern hulls in production. Even in hand laid hulls the resin is a great improvement with blisters a thing of the past. 

There is concern the emphasis for sailboats in series production has shifted. This shift has occurred for Oyster, HR, and many others. It is not restricted to B,H,H,C,J Smack erroneously refers to as production boats. Other than one offs all boats are production.It is not only a price point issue. Look at a new Morris. Convince me a self tacking jib is a good idea when crossing an ocean. 

There is no question a wood epoxy boat gives a strong light hull at relatively modest cost.

There is a sense of community among cruisers in which age or brand of a hull is of little concern. Demeanor, and helpfulness are. There is delight in teaching or learning a new skill. If there is an us and them it is not between sailors. (Excepting some charter boats ). This judgmental nonsense is little seen so far in my experience. 

We're stuck in New England for awhile so went to the OCC/CCA Newport meeting today to hear a lecture about Cooks Endeavor. More sailing experience in that room than on this forum. I'm probably among the least if not the least experienced. No snottiness. In the social time talked about our plans and concerns for future journeys. Listened to and answered respectfully. Receiving further info via email from several. Folks go out of their way and are goal directed. That's one of the great things about many sailors.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

SloopJonB said:


> Tell that to Oyster, Bavaria et. al.


There are really good ways to calculate dynamic loads. If you don't believe that you should avoid bridges and tall buildings.

I cannot speak to how effectively every designer and builder uses the tools available. In many ways using good analytic and design tools is easier to justify for production boats. It costs the same to do a finite element analysis for one boat as a thousand. Spread the cost over more boats and the impact on unit customer price is obviously smaller.

Hunter (for example) can justify several cycles through design analysis to optimize strength to save money on production manuals. Smaller brands with smaller production numbers won't save enough on materials to justify that much work so they use larger margins and turn that into a marketing plus.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

svauspicious said:


> there are really good ways to calculate dynamic loads. If you don't believe that you should avoid bridges and tall buildings.


O/K. (I know, I know - I just couldn't resist)


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Bah, bah bah bah

sad really


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> Bah, bah bah bah
> 
> sad really


"Sad?" Would you prefer people to start exclaiming why coastal cruisers are treated as "lower life forms," as your Post #1 accuses? How about putting down the "boats they sail?" Since we agree the vast majority of sailors are in fact coastal cruisers, that would mean they sail just about every type of boat, no? And since lower-priced modern production boats are produced & sold in the largest numbers, it probably follows that many if not most of the boats sailing coastal and "blue waters" are likely to be lower-priced production boats!

So with so many of you guys successfully out there, who's responsible for your feeling like a "lower life form?" Come to think of it, my boat is pretty "traditional," heavy, has tons of teak, is a ***** to dock, and has less room below than most new modern boats. Shouldn't I be the one feeling "denigrated"?! :eek

I don't read the posts from the BW guys around here saying you can only sail offshore with certain types of boats or those with specific types of features. I'm only reading about boat features & seamanlike practices that, in their _opinions_, they advise having & following. I'm also reading about some of the realities of extended offshore passagemaking that may not be readily apparent to those who do shorter hops, and which they believe make their chosen type of sailing potentially _different_ (not necessarily more dangerous or difficult) from coastal cruising.

So I don't understand what the big deal is. I like hanging out and learning what I can. But you're the thread starter Don, and it's certainly your perogative to try & redirect the discussion any way you see fit.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Bah bah bah bah learning stuff, bah bah bah, saying the same old stuff, bah bah bah


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Not that it matters much and I'm sure most of us don't care one way or another. But maybe Don has big you know what envy.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

seems to matter to lots of people who insisted on changing the thread into the same old bah bah bah


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> seems to matter to lots of people who insisted on changing the thread into the same old bah bah bah


Or maybe just lots of people didn't understand what the thread was supposed to be about, so just started talking about everybody's favorite topic, namely boats.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Don0190 said:


> seems to matter to lots of people who insisted on changing the thread into the same old bah bah bah


Just like TV - you can always change the channel if it bothers you so much.


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

Don0190 said:


> Bah bah bah bah learning stuff, bah bah bah, saying the same old stuff, bah bah bah


Oh yeah! Nothing I dislike more than "learning stuff". I only come to this site to prove that I know it all. 

What's wrong with you people, sharing interesting insights and experiences and helpful tips? ...........


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Bah bah bah bah

is this the part where I say "no you"? :2 boat:


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Don, why did you start the thread? Were you naive enough to think you could make a claim and no one would discuss it?


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> Don, why did you start the thread? Were you naive enough to think you could make a claim and no one would discuss it?


And just how much of the last 7 pages of thread posts have to do with the discussing it? Other than having lots of bah bah bah?


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Exile1 said:


> I'm also reading about some of the realities of extended offshore passagemaking that may not be readily apparent to those who do shorter hops, and which they believe make their chosen type of sailing potentially _different_ (not necessarily more dangerous or difficult) from coastal cruising.


The realities of long distance cruising compared to short hops, weekendsailing and pontificators for old style boats are interesting. 
As Hannah also mentioned, the drivel only happens on the internet.
In a bar someone would get their teeth smacked in if they said to my face what the say on the net. But, of course in real life no one is rude.
Yes, everyone loves jumping on other peoples boats for a beer and grand tour.
I've now done about 20,000nms solo because I don't have a chick to drag along with me... and I don't wait for anyone because then I would never go. So I HAVE to go by myself.

Ok to the realities as I see them:
A weekend sailor has to do his trip on Saturday or Sunday where I can wait for better weather.

Yes we all want a X or Oyster etc but if you wait till u can afford your dream yacht you will never go.
If u wait till the boat is 100% absolutely ready you will never go.
If u wait for someone else u will never go.

My rules for sea:
Go only in the best season. Not 1 week early or late.
Don't drive the boat hard.
Get there with no breakages.
If I go above hull speed I slow down.
Be more rested at sea than on land.
Arrive in port well rested.

My last passage, upwind, no breakage, averaged about 5.6 knots. That's not fast. But who cares because being at sea is fun.

Of course there is an element of luck involved but if the season is right, the boat ok etc etc, the likelihood is that is all gunna be fine.

But that's not what is promoted on the internet. Ratbags promote fear. They do their darndest to make people scared of their own boats and their own common sense abilities.
Its those wankers that I detest.
And you only find them on the internet.










If I do die at sea it will be unfortunate. I don't want to go that way. But doing things differently may not give a worthwhile life.

Mark


----------



## Shockwave (Feb 4, 2014)

At the end of the day, these are just opinions. You have yours, I have mine. If I took offense at every one whose said "are you nuts buying THAT" OR " WTF were you thinking to buy that " then I would be offended by a whole lotta people. But you know what, I like my boat and I'm confident enough in what I like to not let what other people think bother me. This is just a forum where we share what we like or dislike. What's the big deal.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Ok to the realities as I see them:


I think you missed one:

"Crossing oceans is just going for a day sail and forgetting to go home."

I'd like credit for that one as I'm pretty sure I made it up.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Sure like Mark's attitude.

You go man.............






I'll follow.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

so, Alzheimer's can be good?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

outbound said:


> Problem is you don't know it's necessary until you find something you didn't expect.
> 
> We found nuts holding gooseneck on had worked loose. Would have been a total disaster if not found on routine inspection.
> 
> ...


Out - I don't think you understood Jon's post to which I was referring. If you did, you'd be more worried about him than me.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

You know, it's stuff like this...



SVAuspicious said:


> Agreed, but that isn't enough. You have to pay attention all the time. A shackle pin hitting the deck has awakened me below and the watch didn't hear anything. I don't know how you train yourself for that.


...and this...



SVAuspicious said:


> Similarly the autopilot beeping that it has lost lock should not get me on deck before the watch notices.












...and this...



hannah2 said:


> Guys like Mark love being invited aboard boats like Outbound and I have. They love the tour and spend hours wanting to see more. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.












...that just makes me discount EVERYTHING a person writes on a sailing forum...regardless of their CV. I HAVE to assume they are joking.

Good lord. Am I the only one who threw up in his mouth a little bit with these gems?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

markofsealife said:


> of course there is an element of luck involved but if the season is right, the boat ok etc etc, the likelihood is that is all gunna be fine.
> 
> But that's not what is promoted on the internet. Ratbags promote fear. They do their darndest to make people scared of their own boats and their own common sense abilities.
> Its those wankers that i detest.
> ...


+ freakin' one.


----------



## Dean101 (Apr 26, 2011)

sharkbait said:


> The only reason I leave the cockpit is to change/strike the jib or toss the hook out.
> There is nowhere to put your beer on the foredeck. Safety first, please.


Fully gimballed stainless steel cupholders welded to the back of the dorades tastefully done could fix that. And perhaps the beer hat with dual drinking tubes... that would leave one hand for you and one for the boat.


----------



## Caribbeachbum (Feb 23, 2014)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> The realities of long distance cruising compared to short hops, weekendsailing and pontificators for old style boats are ... [snip]
> If I do die at sea it will be unfortunate. I don't want to go that way. But doing things differently may not give a worthwhile life.
> 
> Mark


If we are ever in the same place, I will be buying you a beer.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> You know, it's stuff like this...
> 
> ...and this...
> 
> ...


Oh Smack, you are the life of an internet poster! And why doesn't anyone spend hours aboard your Hunter checking it out? I know you don't want a Boreal or an outbound. :cut_out_animated_em And have you ever been to sea in YOUR BOAT and while in your berth not heard everything that goes on above decks. Sleeping on board at marinas don't count. :captain:

Cheers


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Smack
You already have an offer to be live lumber to passagemake in the Atlantic. Keep it up and maybe Hannah will offer you the same for the pacific.

Don't you finally understand most sailors ultimately don't care what boat your on or where you go. They just care you sail. 

They will constantly search for a better way to do things. Be forever interested in any sailboat. Pick other sailors brains for local knowledge. Any boat in any waters is a good boat as long as it keeps the water out but it is instructive to critique boats not people. Can we talk about boats again. I'm actually starting to miss Paulo. At least it was about boats some of the time. 

BTW- Jons diatribe about ground tackle set ups has nothing to do about blue water. You don't anchor in the middle of the ocean. His discussions about cockpit and deck ergonomics also is not just a blue water issue. Mark is obviously a very competent sailor. He has figured out his boat and goes sailing. Both he and his boat are to be admired. Bleemus and Hannah2 know a thing or two. Hard earned knowledge. Worth analyzing what they say. Maine has a depth of technical wisdom. The list goes on with many other posters. They seem past proving their bones. No longer have interest in that activity. If you and Don think otherwise believe you're mistaken.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

outbound said:


> Smack
> You already have an offer to be live lumber to passagemake in the Atlantic. Keep it up and maybe Hannah will offer you the same for the pacific.
> 
> Don't you finally understand most sailors ultimately don't care what boat your on or where you go. They just care you sail.
> ...


I ALWAYS analyze what virtually ANY and EVERY poster I'm conversing with says. And sometimes I think what they say is right. And sometimes I think what they say is ridiculous. And sometimes both can come from the same poster.

So what exactly are you trying to say? That I should simply give _carte blanche_ to these guys in every area just because they know a thing or two or have hard-earned knowledge or technical wisdom or whatever? No.

I'm usually very picky about what I disagree with. But if I disagree with it, and can provide evidence for why, I don't care who you are, I'll disagree and tell you straight up why.

The quotes I posted above are ridiculous. Even I wouldn't say stuff like that.

As for the live lumber, I've got my own boat - thanks.


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

Gwyneth would sail a Hunter for sure. 

Are we still arguing about arguing?


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

chall03 said:


> Are we still arguing about arguing?


I agree with that ............... wait ................what ?????


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I sat on a jury once and we deliberated all bloody day long. Locked 11 to 1 in favor of guilty. The one holdout juror put us through every single nuance of the trial, even asked for testimony to be read back. Which, btw, is not done like you see in the movies. If you want it read back, you have to hear it all, not just the one sentence. We were recovering the same ground, no one was getting anywhere.

Finally, I say to the juror sitting next to me, let's just stop replying to the holdout juror. Sure enough, that juror repeats one of their questions or re-states one of their opinions and everyone just stares and does not engage. Room is silent for a few exaggerated minutes. The holdout tries to provoke their point one more time, with no reply. Again, these are the same points, the same questions. After another few minutes, they finally volunteer that they supported the guilty verdict. It was all about attention.

Stop responding to the troll and you'll see it here too. If an epic thread goes dormant for a day or two, a nugget is thrown out to re-ignite it. Once you reply, they have all they want.


----------



## paperbird (Sep 1, 2011)

Just to highlight the difference between the internet and face to face. On our fall migration down the coast (some inside, some outside) to the Bahamas this year, we stopped at St Aug to enjoy their Christmas festivities (highly recommended). While there we went to a wings-night happy hour with the St Aug Cruisers Net group. We ended up at a table with all new folks. As we did the usual introductions, the first couple had done 2 circumnavigations, the second couple 3 and the other couple "only 1." Then there was us with a paltry couple thousand miles all in the Atlantic and just one previous trip to the Bahamas. 

The discussions about the people, places, and experiences were amazing. We learned a great deal, and were treated as complete equals despite our meager miles. One of the highlights for my wife was when the guy selling his Deerfoot 61 after many years and many miles leaned over and told her "you have a great boat and all the experience you need. If you want to go around the world, you and the boat would do fine."

Real sailors!


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> Stop responding to the troll and you'll see it here too. If an epic thread goes dormant for a day or two, a nugget is thrown out to re-ignite it. Once you reply, they have all they want.


Very good story and moral.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

paperbird said:


> One of the highlights for my wife was when the guy selling his Deerfoot 61 after many years and many miles leaned over and told her "you have a great boat and all the experience you need. If you want to go around the world, you and the boat would do fine."
> 
> Real sailors!


Yes - real sailors.


----------



## seabeau (Oct 5, 2014)

Minnewaska said:


> I sat on a jury once and we deliberated all bloody day long. Locked 11 to 1 in favor of guilty. The one holdout juror put us through every single nuance of the trial, even asked for testimony to be read back. Which, btw, is not done like you see in the movies. If you want it read back, you have to hear it all, not just the one sentence. We were recovering the same ground, no one was getting anywhere.
> 
> Finally, I say to the juror sitting next to me, let's just stop replying to the holdout juror. Sure enough, that juror repeats one of their questions or re-states one of their opinions and everyone just stares and does not engage. Room is silent for a few exaggerated minutes. The holdout tries to provoke their point one more time, with no reply. Again, these are the same points, the same questions. After another few minutes, they finally volunteer that they supported the guilty verdict. It was all about attention.
> 
> Stop responding to the troll and you'll see it here too. If an epic thread goes dormant for a day or two, a nugget is thrown out to re-ignite it. Once you reply, they have all they want.


 I have on several unfortunate occasions, become involved in county politics in my area and your observation is very astute and very correct, in that many people just want to put their own two cents in, just I am doing right now.


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

If you re-ignite the production boat thread then the terrorists win.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Smack, I'm not sure where you come from sometimes. I certainly respect your brains, you have them. But for the hell of me I have no idea what would make you throw up inside your mouth about what SV Auspicious said and what I said? I guess you don't believe us or you are just trolling.

I realize you probably have never been the skipper of a boat that is making a long passage. Ya I know you have crewed before but it is really something different. I can't speak for Auspicious but when they say they can hear a shackle drop on deck I believe them because I also have the responsibility of the safety of my crew. I'll tell you what, when you are the skipper of a boat with crew you are aware of just about everything that goes on on board your boat. If you are not chances are that a big mistake can happen. You as skipper have to make all the choices that need to be made, you are in charge of the crews safety. When you have a new inexperienced crew member and it is finally time to let them have a night watch you don't sleep. You just lay awake listening to every sound, you hear that crew member walking around the cockpit, you hear his or her tether going in and out of the companion way you hear them making coffee in the galley. You feel every movement of the boat and you are always wondering if there is a wind change or is the wind picking up and am I going to have to go up on deck and reef the main. You are thinking constantly if this crew member is going to tell me that a squall is approaching or can he even tell that one is coming in the dark. You can't sleep worth a damn and that goes on for a lot of days, many days. That is the life of a skipper on a blue water boat, not a lot of fun because you get really tired. Lucky for us we love the passage and the rewards of getting some place beautiful and exotic. 

As for my comments I'm not BSing you! People from all types of boats come by to see our amazing boat. Yes we are really lucky to own her, I still can't believe we own RC LOUISE. Sailors are curious how such a boat sails, they want to know how the dagger boards work, they want to know about our spectra/ dacron sails do. Hell it takes me 20 minutes just to explain how well the prop shaft generator works. There is not an inch of the boat they don't want to see. Usually being good sailors a few beers are in order and more of the great talk of sailing boats. 

Your welcome to barf in your mouth all you want and your welcome to your opinions here on the internet. But you start telling people about your barf problems at some marina or at some exotic anchorage that was a lot of hard work to get too and you will be a lonely guy wherever you sail to. Word spreads fast among the cruisers out there. 

You are always welcome if you happen to see us to come aboard and have a beer and if you want we will show you around, as much time as it takes. Sailors are amazing and friendly people on the most part anyway away from the internet. I sure you are too.

Cheers

Cheers


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

I think all of us love walking down to our boat at the marina a seeing her just sitting there waiting for us to take her out for a sail or do some upgrade on her.

We are amazed at what we can do with our Boreal like anchoring and let the tide go out. In France there are sailors who get together all the time and do such things they get together and party for the whole weekend.
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attac...ent.php?attachmentid=61681&stc=1&d=1450222578


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

It is amazing how easy it is to get off the beaten track with a French aluminum centerboard boat. Here we found our own anchorage in 4.5 feet of water away from the rest of the boats.

Also this boat sails so well at all points of sail. We sail her with the centerboard up a lot of the time even to windward if its below 25 kts and seas are not too big. Her design keeps her from sliding even with the centerboard up. And she is pretty fast for an expedition boat. We get easily 8 kts out of her on a broad reach. One night coming into Panama for two or three hours I had her doing 9 to ten Kts. http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attac...ent.php?attachmentid=61697&stc=1&d=1450223436


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

One last one. My wife and I did the Atlantic crossing with our new boat in 2013. We have sailed the Pacific before and I did it the first time in 1972 as a 20 year old. Much easier today and much more fun with good electronics. This is Tracy and I at 5pm after just doing the Atlantic crossing, pretty tired but we were really stoked to have made it in 19 days.

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61705&stc=1&d=1450223815


----------



## seabeau (Oct 5, 2014)

hannah2 said:


> It is amazing how easy it is to get off the beaten track with a French aluminum centerboard boat. Here we found our own anchorage in 4.5 feet of water away from the rest of the boats.
> 
> Also this boat sails so well at all points of sail. We sail her with the centerboard up a lot of the time even to windward if its below 25 kts and seas are not too big. Her design keeps her from sliding even with the centerboard up. And she is pretty fast for an expedition boat. We get easily 8 kts out of her on a broad reach. One night coming into Panama for two or three hours I had her doing 9 to ten Kts. http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attac...ent.php?attachmentid=61697&stc=1&d=1450223436


 I also sail a pure centerboarder and I find that's its precisely its ability to slide sideways with no ill affects, that makes it so safe in breaking seas. I simply lower all sails, except for a hardened down, scandalized mizzen, raise the board all the way up, then go below and make lunch, play cards or take a nap.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

hannah2 said:


> Smack, I'm not sure where you come from sometimes. I certainly respect your brains, you have them. But for the hell of me I have no idea what would make you throw up inside your mouth about what SV Auspicious said and what I said? I guess you don't believe us or you are just trolling.


As for Ausp's stuff, I was rolling my eyes because he was framing it that he has the ninja skills and his crew doesn't...ninja skills that can't be trained. It was a very...










...moment. And I just tend to laugh at people who are that full of themselves. That's all.



hannah2 said:


> I realize you probably have never been the skipper of a boat that is making a long passage. Ya I know you have crewed before but it is really something different. I can't speak for Auspicious but when they say they can hear a shackle drop on deck I believe them because I also have the responsibility of the safety of my crew. I'll tell you what, when you are the skipper of a boat with crew you are aware of just about everything that goes on on board your boat. If you are not chances are that a big mistake can happen. You as skipper have to make all the choices that need to be made, you are in charge of the crews safety. When you have a new inexperienced crew member and it is finally time to let them have a night watch you don't sleep. You just lay awake listening to every sound, you hear that crew member walking around the cockpit, you hear his or her tether going in and out of the companion way you hear them making coffee in the galley. You feel every movement of the boat and you are always wondering if there is a wind change or is the wind picking up and am I going to have to go up on deck and reef the main. You are thinking constantly if this crew member is going to tell me that a squall is approaching or can he even tell that one is coming in the dark. You can't sleep worth a damn and that goes on for a lot of days, many days. That is the life of a skipper on a blue water boat, not a lot of fun because you get really tired. Lucky for us we love the passage and the rewards of getting some place beautiful and exotic.


I know exactly what you're talking about. Good crew do those same things you list above. In my offshore races and deliveries on other people's boats, I've typically been watch captain. And I take that as seriously as I do being the skipper...especially because the skipper I've sailed with in these races and deliveries is very, very good - and I have huge respect for him. I want to perform, because he trusts me.

The nice thing in that instance, however, is that when I'm off-watch I can relax because I trust him (obviously). But the same is true in return. Even so, when off-watch I'm still in tune with the sounds and motion of the boat (from biners moving along the deck when someone goes forward, to something dropping onto the deck, to sails luffing, to increased heel, etc.). As I said, any good crew would be...trainable or not. BUT I know those on deck know what they are doing (they don't miss the pin drop) - so maybe Dave always sails with clueless crew...we don't.

HOWEVER, with my own boat and my own boys as crew offshore it's a different story. They are kids. They are good sailors, but they are young and not as tuned to potential threats as they someday will be. For example on our offshore run this summer (the first time we'd had our own boat offshore) the bilge pump came on, then came on again in about 30 minutes. The boys didn't notice - but it sent me scrambling. Turns out it was a leaking raw water pump for the fridge. But am I going to brag about my "ninja skills"? No. Because LOTS of people would throw up in their mouths a little.



hannah2 said:


> As for my comments I'm not BSing you! People from all types of boats come by to see our amazing boat. Yes we are really lucky to own her, I still can't believe we own RC LOUISE. Sailors are curious how such a boat sails, they want to know how the dagger boards work, they want to know about our spectra/ dacron sails do. Hell it takes me 20 minutes just to explain how well the prop shaft generator works. There is not an inch of the boat they don't want to see. Usually being good sailors a few beers are in order and more of the great talk of sailing boats.


I have no doubt that people want to see your Boreal. I'd love to tour a Boreal....not for _hours_ maybe, but it would be cool. It was just the way you said it that sounded seriously stuck-up (hence the Gweneth pic...one who doesn't understand why _everyone_ doesn't think she's as awesome as she thinks she is). That's all. I know Mark much better than I know you on this forum - and I have HUGE respect for him and what he's done in that Bene. If I was going to spend hours on ANY boat - it would be his. That was my point.

That said, maybe you and your wife are awesome people - and in that case I'd love to throw back beers and talk sailing with you as well, either on your Boreal or my Hunter. Real life is always quite different than forums.



hannah2 said:


> Your welcome to barf in your mouth all you want and your welcome to your opinions here on the internet. But you start telling people about your barf problems at some marina or at some exotic anchorage that was a lot of hard work to get too and you will be a lonely guy wherever you sail to. Word spreads fast among the cruisers out there.


Heh-heh. Well, everything on this or any other forum is just internet opinion. Your opinion, my opinion, someone else's opinion, etc. And they don't have to all agree - and none of them are infallible. So as long as it's fun conversation - it's all good as far as I'm concerned.

I've met lots of sailors out there - some who are members here, many who aren't. I love hanging out with sailors, here and in real life. We ALWAYS have a blast and rarely have a scruff. On the other hand, I've found that _cruisers_ can be a little tender - especially when they are on the interwebs. I'll have to study that some more as we continue our adventures. Maybe I'll write an article.

If it's those people who decide to deny me their company - I'm more than cool with that.



hannah2 said:


> You are always welcome if you happen to see us to come aboard and have a beer and if you want we will show you around, as much time as it takes. Sailors are amazing and friendly people on the most part anyway away from the internet. I sure you are too.


Yeah, I'll bet we'd have a blast hanging out together. Seriously. Maybe I'll see you out there.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

hannah2 said:


> One last one. My wife and I did the Atlantic crossing with our new boat in 2013. We have sailed the Pacific before and I did it the first time in 1972 as a 20 year old. Much easier today and much more fun with good electronics. This is Tracy and I at 5pm after just doing the Atlantic crossing, pretty tired but we were really stoked to have made it in 19 days.
> 
> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61705&stc=1&d=1450223815


THAT is what it's all about. Goodonya Hannah.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Hannah
Bride showed me your H.S. picture.........beautiful boat


----------



## Shockwave (Feb 4, 2014)

Nice boat Hannah. 

Smack, your talking smack.


----------



## Shockwave (Feb 4, 2014)

Now you gotta back it up.


----------



## SOLPHIAIR (Mar 15, 2015)

svzephyr44 said:


> I admit I am a little confused. Perhaps as they say "beauty is in the eye of the beholder."


May I be so bold as to fix your quote.

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder."

Cheers
~SOL


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> I know Mark much better than I know you on this forum - and I have HUGE respect for him and what he's done in that Bene. If I was going to spend hours on ANY boat - it would be his.


Thank you 
And if your boobs were just a bit bigger... I would respect you in the morning


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

That is one sweet boat Hanna!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Thank you
> And if your boobs were just a bit bigger... I would respect you in the morning


Like this?


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> Like this?


Lol. Not quite. Is that Jack Nicholson?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Lol. Not quite. Is that Jack Nicholson?


Yep. Here's Johnny!


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

seabeau said:


> I also sail a pure centerboarder and I find that's its precisely its ability to slide sideways with no ill affects, that makes it so safe in breaking seas. I simply lower all sails, except for a hardened down, scandalized mizzen, raise the board all the way up, then go below and make lunch, play cards or take a nap.


That's interesting that you use just your mizzen to heave-to. That makes it so much easier than a cutter rig.

We experimented a lot while doing sea trials with heaving-to. When we asked the company while the boat was being built if they or anyone who had a Boreal had ever heaved-to, they knew of one guy from Norway who may have. I was concerned that the boat would not heave-to well being a centerboard boat knowing a lot of fin keeled boats don't heave-to well. But we would take her out in 25 to 35 kts of wind and 6 to 8 foot seas while waiting in the Canaries for a weather window and practice. What we found that the boat is the easiest boat we have ever owned to Heave-to.

With center board down, main reefed to 3rd reef, stay sail up and helm all over she did very well. We could stay at or about 17 degrees apparent off the wind which we thought was very amazing. We would move forward about 1 to 1.5 knots and boat was very easy going.

But we kept trying different things and pulled the center board all the way up and didn't have the helm all the way over. Things even got better as we heaved-to in a more traditional manner where boat stayed around 17 degrees off wind maybe a little more off wind but she slid side ways at about 1 kt and did not move forward at 1 to 1.5 kts. What she was doing is making a nice slick off the windward side. If we do ever have to Heave-to in bad weather I think I would go with this second choice for sure. We will go with the centerboard down and the movement forward when nearing the windward side of land if we are near land and have to wait for daylight next morning to go in.

As far as sliding goes we did get crunched going into Panama. Had a 15 footer break on the bean and go over the boat from about beam to stern. Right over the doghouse and up to the boom. Cockpit filled up, emptied fast. What a noise and vibration when that wave broke on the hull and deck but the boat just slid sideways and then continued on course like nothing ever happened. Glad I was in the doghouse at the time and the water tight door was shut.
I think with our old boat a Mason 44 we may have been tripped and knocked down at least to the spreaders.

What boat do you have?

Cheers


----------



## seabeau (Oct 5, 2014)

hannah2 said:


> That's interesting that you use just your mizzen to heave-to. That makes it so much easier than a cutter rig.
> 
> We experimented a lot while doing sea trials with heaving-to. When we asked the company while the boat was being built if they or anyone who had a Boreal had ever heaved-to, they knew of one guy from Norway who may have. I was concerned that the boat would not heave-to well being a centerboard boat knowing a lot of fin keeled boats don't heave-to well. But we would take her out in 25 to 35 kts of wind and 6 to 8 foot seas while waiting in the Canaries for a weather window and practice. What we found that the boat is the easiest boat we have ever owned to Heave-to.
> 
> ...


 I actually can heave to several different ways. In addition to the rear drift I can also side drift rearward and forward with the addition of a tiny storm staysail on a two ft. lift., either way she makes a nice slick. I'm sure you know you could always take a small storm jib and rig it to lift on your backstay. Laying dead into the wind as I do, I have had a moment when the bow went up, the boat backed down into the trough and the stern went under and took in quite a bit of water. Reversed Pooped as it were. But not up to the cockpit seats tops. I've been pooped much worse, but its still not much fun. Thank god, I have two large cockpit drains. My boat, like myself is an antique. It is a Presto 36. First designed in the 1880's by Commodore Wirth Munroe from FL. and built in 1984 by a company in Ft. Lauderdale Fl. She's a cutter rigged ketch with a Big honking centerboard, with the rudder hanging from the aft end of an shallow skeg running back to the end of the CB slot. 2'-8" BU and fully laden, she's 30'LWL,36'LOD,40'LOA. 11' beam, 17000 disp.. For coastal cruising, she's just what I wanted. Any sand bar can be my berth, at least until the tide turns.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Been trying to remember the citation of the paper I read concerning behavior of various appendages in extreme circumstances. To best of my memory ( may have been twenty odd years ago) they compared traditional Collin Archer full keel, modified full keel ( guess like a IP ), low aspect fin, high aspect fin, keel/centerboard, centerboard. They noted it was much more complex than just this hull shape appendage characteristic as how righting arm is developed ( form stability v. ballast), size of vessel, inertial forces, top hamper etc. also play roles. i don't recall how they adjusted ballast but seem to recall all models had the same righting. 
However,, my recollection is the traditional hulls faired the worse falling off a wave as they were most prone to "trip" and knock down and pure centerboards the best given ability to slide down a wave. In this situation light displacement hulls dependent on form stability also faired better then heavy displacement. ( would worry about area under the GZ curve).
However, they note wave tank testing is an artificial arrangement. They further noted breaking wave vessel interaction is very complex and appealed for the need for further research.
I since read other sources with that paper in mind. They either do historical data analysis or mathematical modeling. I don't know how to view this issue as the N is quite small and mathematical analysis is only as good as the inclusion and proper weighting of relevent variables and exclusion of the irrelevant.
Nevertheless, vessels such as the Boreal strike me as potentially highly desirable in this regards. One would think with centerboard up and daggerboards down with series drogue deployed to achieve wave train striking one stern corner would be a excellent way to ride out extreme weather. The concern would be movement of internal structures such as engine.
I not sailed in many storms but do note the continued bias by some in this forum that Collins Archer derivatives are the safest and only way to build a boat capable of surviving extreme weather seems very misplaced. From personal experience in some storms and more gales I don't believe there is such an advantage. 
As you can see I have limited knowledge about this. So would be very interested if someone more erudite would explore this subject with a grasp of current thinking.


----------



## seabeau (Oct 5, 2014)

outbound said:


> Been trying to remember the citation of the paper I read concerning behavior of various appendages in extreme circumstances. To best of my memory ( may have been twenty odd years ago) they compared traditional Collin Archer full keel, modified full keel ( guess like a IP ), low aspect fin, high aspect fin, keel/centerboard, centerboard. They noted it was much more complex than just this hull shape appendage characteristic as how righting arm is developed ( form stability v. ballast), size of vessel, inertial forces, top hamper etc. also play roles. i don't recall how they adjusted ballast but seem to recall all models had the same righting.
> However,, my recollection is the traditional hulls faired the worse falling off a wave as they were most prone to "trip" and knock down and pure centerboards the best given ability to slide down a wave. In this situation light displacement hulls dependent on form stability also faired better then heavy displacement. ( would worry about area under the GZ curve).
> However, they note wave tank testing is an artificial arrangement. They further noted breaking wave vessel interaction is very complex and appealed for the need for further research.
> I since read other sources with that paper in mind. They either do historical data analysis or mathematical modeling. I don't know how to view this issue as the N is quite small and mathematical analysis is only as good as the inclusion and proper weighting of relevent variables and exclusion of the irrelevant.
> ...


 There is no doubt in my mind that of the two main fluids in which we sailors find ourselves, it is water that is by far the most destructive to boats and those who sail in them and having your vessel anchored into it via a keel will not, can not enhance its survivability. Survivability to the whims of extremes of ocean conditions can come in many forms. In the Colin Archer tradition, the vessels exhibit an "extreme" structural component built in which in spite of any adverse conditions, would tend to enhance survivability. Even after repeated rolling's and dismasting they will continue to float. How they will get home is another story. They give up speed for survivability. The old "Plank on edge" British sailing vessels, such as the British Chanel cutters, also exhibit these formidable constructions. In other more modern vessels, its their extreme "speed" which allows the crew to simply outrun any perceived dangers. One component of these "Fast' type of survivors is extremely light scantlings and construction and vast areas of ultra modern sails. However if these types of vessels lose some component of their propulsion they revert back to the earlier type of vessels who cannot outrun trouble and their extremely light construction simply hastens their end. However with the advent of more modern materials we are now able to build lightweight fast vessels much stronger than in previous years. Which simply means their survivability reverts back to the Colin Archer type vessels, if they become dismasted. It is readily apparent that in "Breaking" seas, "less is more" in the avenue of underwater appendages for boats, that the ability of the hull in question be allowed to "roll with the punches", IE: to slide across the top of the water, rather than be tripped on her own keel is extremely important to prevent loss of boat or of life. The past centuries, shore to ship, rowed beach based life boats certainly had little if any underwater appendages, for the sea to toy with and they were at the beck and call in extremes of water every time great vessels were driven ashore. Somewhere in the past the yachtsmen's desire for greater and greater speeds has left the majority of sailors with vessels totally unprepared for extreme conditions. There should have been a divergence of boat designs between racers and cruisers but there was not. The inherent safety exhibited by centerboard craft has been known since the 1880's and a well known presentation of these facts are enshrined in a book first published in 1952, and again in 1975 by Vincent Gilpin and titled "The Good Little Ship". Attesting to the designer, Commodore R.M. Munroe's abilities is presented in the Introduction, by L. Francis Herreshoff.


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

Wow, it's wonderful how some people can turn a ridiculous thread into something interesting about boats, instead of the tiresome threads about personalities.

I would not have been here reading but I saw on my email "hannah2" and the words "heave-to".

Yet I didn't really expect intelligent, interesting discussion. 

Way to go guys!!


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

S- it's wonderful to hear about Egret type boats and their experiences but again this is historical data. Wondering if there is anyone out there that can teach us some hard science and engineering.
Would note:
That being a coastie back then was an extremely dangerous vocation. Even here in New England there are monuments dotting our shoreline attesting to the lost of life not only of ships but also Coasties back in the day. 
My understanding of those boats is that unlike modern centerboarders they were relatively narrow with different dynamics.

Think about this as a spectrum. The slack bilged, deep and heavily ballasted boat will tend to stay more upright with a passing wave. The less dependent on form stability the less the contour of the boat will parallel the water surface.
The centerboarder or to carry it further a unballasted multihull will parallel the surface of the water. Both of these types of boats have less in the water. Given a wave is really a circular flow of water less likihood to "trip". 
But think there's a lot more to it. For both centerboard boats and multi hulls, there is a need for payload. We are not pure racers. This creates displacement and more boat in the water. For centerboarders, unlike multi hulls form stability does not suffice so ballast is carried. Once again displacement is increased.
The behavior of boats floating on the surface of the water is quite different than those floating in the water. Think it's easier to work a boat that remains more vertical and has a slower motion. 

Wonder if you and Hannah would be willing to post your GZ curves.

Don- I apologize if this thread drift makes your eyes gaze over. Been trying to communicate that the sea is the sea and boats boats. Never been knocked down "at sea". Have been coastal. You and Hannah or Bleemus sail in the same sea. Unless you sail only in bays on pleasant days this conversation may be helpful to you. Hopefully you never see a storm or rogue wave but think it's not unlikely you have already seen line squalls and T storms. If you race even in a fresh breeze this conversation may be of interest.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

This is now an interesting discussion. I've seen Boreal's cruising in Nova Scotia and the Caribbean. They all had crossed the ditch. Given the shallow waters in my neighborhood, the obviously highly capable boat has always intrigued me.

I'm engineer, but not the right kind to comment technically, but I did own a whale bottom 52' center boarder ted hood design for 10 years. I cannot speak to heaving too in survival conditions, not something we did, but I can speak to how it sailed in normal conditions.

The center board down, she drew 12'. One heck of a blade. Down it would point really well, and board up she drew 5 feet. The rudder also had a "center board" on it, which was extended via a pulley system through a carbon fiber rudder post. I think the rudder board down drew around 7 feet. This rudder was a modification we made during ownership, a 5 foot rudder didn't cut it. Big difference, went to finger tip balance.

It was fun to tuck into places where she looked like she didn't belong.

For sailing characteristics, although it pointed well, it was relatively tender. Upwind, she'd sit on her ear, but she got to a good heal and then would stick there. I'm wondering if the Boreal's behave similarly in normal sailing conditions? From what I've seen out there, I'm a fan of these boats.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

seabeau said:


> I actually can heave to several different ways. In addition to the rear drift I can also side drift rearward and forward with the addition of a tiny storm staysail on a two ft. lift., either way she makes a nice slick. I'm sure you know you could always take a small storm jib and rig it to lift on your backstay. Laying dead into the wind as I do, I have had a moment when the bow went up, the boat backed down into the trough and the stern went under and took in quite a bit of water. Reversed Pooped as it were. But not up to the cockpit seats tops. I've been pooped much worse, but its still not much fun. Thank god, I have two large cockpit drains. My boat, like myself is an antique. It is a Presto 36. First designed in the 1880's by Commodore Wirth Munroe from FL. and built in 1984 by a company in Ft. Lauderdale Fl. She's a cutter rigged ketch with a Big honking centerboard, with the rudder hanging from the aft end of an shallow skeg running back to the end of the CB slot. 2'-8" BU and fully laden, she's 30'LWL,36'LOD,40'LOA. 11' beam, 17000 disp.. For coastal cruising, she's just what I wanted. Any sand bar can be my berth, at least until the tide turns.


Do you have any pics of your boat Seab? She sounds really interesting.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

outbound said:


> not sailed in many storms but do note the continued bias by some in this forum that Collins Archer derivatives are the safest and only way to build a boat capable of surviving extreme weather seems very misplaced. From personal experience in some storms and more gales I don't believe there is such an advantage.
> As you can see I have limited knowledge about this. So would be very interested if someone more erudite would explore this subject with a grasp of current thinking.


I agree with that take on things. Another aspect of this that's interesting to me is that much of the data even being discussed here regarding heaving to, falling off waves, etc. - comes from many, many years ago prior to the advent of products and techniques such as the JSD, etc. It seems to me it's very possible to push heaving-to too far in terms of conditions - like if you are falling off waves.

That's why I really like Hal Roth's book "Handling Storms at Sea". He covers the progression of methods and techniques through the various intensities of conditions using the modern tools we have available. It's a great read.


----------



## Argonauta (May 11, 2014)

skygazer said:


> Wow, it's wonderful how some people can turn a ridiculous thread into something interesting about boats, instead of the tiresome threads about personalities.
> 
> I would not have been here reading but I saw on my email "hannah2" and the words "heave-to".
> 
> ...


Strongly agree!!


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

This circles back to Jons comments about many current production offerings. Several of the techniques Mr. Roth proposes require the boat be so constructed as to allow these techniques. Jons concerns about the details of simple things such as cleats and where and how they are secured is not misplaced. Neither are issues of down flooding. 
These details could be dealt with at little expense at time of initial construction and at greater expense post delivery.


----------



## seabeau (Oct 5, 2014)

outbound said:


> S- it's wonderful to hear about Egret type boats and their experiences but again this is historical data. Wondering if there is anyone out there that can teach us some hard science and engineering.
> Would note:
> That being a coastie back then was an extremely dangerous vocation. Even here in New England there are monuments dotting our shoreline attesting to the lost of life not only of ships but also Coasties back in the day.
> My understanding of those boats is that unlike modern centerboarders they were relatively narrow with different dynamics.
> ...


 I'll guess I'll begin, In the beginning there was Egret, she was by Commodore Munroe's own admission an amalgamation of two of the Northeast's ( his home) best, of the New England Sharpie and the Chesapeake Bay skipjack designs. She was a flat-bottomed, hard chimed extreme shallow water(8" BU) vessel. Munroe designed several boats based on the Egret design, each gaining size as they went. But as everyone knows flat bottomed boats "pound", especially at anchor, so as time and necessity demanded, Munroe's designs became increasingly round bilged, but still retaining as much of the extreme shoal draft that his hulls could accommodate. The first of the round bilged hulls was "Presto" and the name has generally stuck for all of the Commodores' round bilged creations. Which were I believe approx. 12-15 in number. I believe that the largest "version" of this crowd was the vessel "Kona" at 71' LOA and a mere 48" BU. Kona served it owners for over 38,917 sea miles without a serious mishaps, all the while surviving several hurricanes at sea.
The real issues with deep keels of any stripe lay in their response to large breaking waves. When the top of the wave moves faster than the lower sections of the water column, then any object anchored in it (the keel)in the lower section, will be forced over as the breaking top moves faster in relation to the lower bottom. Pure center boarders with their boards up, are not connected to this lower water column, subsequently they have a "safety valve" that allows them to simply flow with the breaking wave instead of against it. 
I have no idea what a GZ curve is(although I can guess) and I really doubt that one for my vessel exists. My boat was built by Perfection Industries of Ft. Lauderdale Fl. in the 1980s' and they have long since been out of business. I have sent my life on the Southeast GA. coast, with its high tides due to the GA. Bight, shallow water and innumerable hazardous inlets to contend with. I probably hold the somewhat dubious distinction of being the most "pooped sailor on these boards. One after another, on 20 second intervals, 12 to 15 times in just one afternoon and the only thing that saved my life was a irritable, aggravating,hard starting, evil little British Seagull 3 hp. motor that I hated but which on that eventful day, absolutely refused with all of its might, to be drowned by the repeated dunking's. I lost count of the times my safety lanyard came up short and in spite of a life jacket beneath it, I was black and blue from under my armpits to my waist for a solid week. Ain't sailing grand? That's my life! It is by no means remarkable that shallow draft vessels would do so well here on the Southeast coast. PS. Although the sailboat that the Seagull was mounted to that day is long, long gone, I still have the evil little bastard and I always will.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

outbound said:


> Been trying to remember the citation of the paper I read concerning behavior of various appendages in extreme circumstances. To best of my memory ( may have been twenty odd years ago) they compared traditional Collin Archer full keel, modified full keel ( guess like a IP ), low aspect fin, high aspect fin, keel/centerboard, centerboard. They noted it was much more complex than just this hull shape appendage characteristic as how righting arm is developed ( form stability v. ballast), size of vessel, inertial forces, top hamper etc. also play roles. i don't recall how they adjusted ballast but seem to recall all models had the same righting.
> However,, my recollection is the traditional hulls faired the worse falling off a wave as they were most prone to "trip" and knock down and pure centerboards the best given ability to slide down a wave. In this situation light displacement hulls dependent on form stability also faired better then heavy displacement. ( would worry about area under the GZ curve).
> However, they note wave tank testing is an artificial arrangement. They further noted breaking wave vessel interaction is very complex and appealed for the need for further research.
> I since read other sources with that paper in mind. They either do historical data analysis or mathematical modeling. I don't know how to view this issue as the N is quite small and mathematical analysis is only as good as the inclusion and proper weighting of relevent variables and exclusion of the irrelevant.
> ...


Yes it is nice to have some good conversations, sorry Don but you have to agree we were pretty much done with the OP. That is unless someone would post a new thread on the subject we are talking about now. Maybe more members would join in if we did post new. But I'm happy just remaining here.

Outbound, your posting of the use of the Jordan Series Drogue and breaking waves as apposed to heaving-to is a good conversation. I believe that Heaving-to is the proper thing to do if you decide go wait out a passing low pressure system. In other words not sailing into a system but holding and letting system pass at a safe distance from where you are at. In heaving-to one must understand that it is only safe to do until waves of any size over I would guess 12 feet start to break. 
I'm not a scientist so I can't give an exact detail of what happens when a wave breaks but I have observed way too many in the last 10 years, more in that time than the 30 years of sailing before. But what I have observed is when a wave breaks its the bottom 1/3 that drops out, (just vanishes) leaving the top 2/3 top heavy with an over hang and creates a free fall of a hell of a lot of water. Sort of like watching a large wave coming into a shallow beach you will notice the bottom dropping out just before it breaks.

When these breaking waves become reality it's time to change from heaving-to to running before the storm. When seas are such that they are dropping out on a regular basis it is wise to put the drogue out. The drogue will do many things for you. 1) it will keep you from rounding up which puts you into a serious situation where possibility of having a breaking wave break on your beam. Another thing is even if a wave does not break in the way I mentioned earlier it still can be very steep and a boat beam to can slide side ways down the face. In doing so a keel boat as it nears the bottom will bury its keel and the movement of the wave forward and onto the beam of the boat will create the perfect trip point.

More later got to go for a doctors appointment.

Cheers


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

CC- you had a decade with a wonderful boat. Never had the joy of sailing a sistership but have been on similar whale body craft. Was struck that it behaved much like a conventional keel boat. The ride was quite pleasant in Buzzard Bay chop. Think this was a reflection that ballast was quite low and hull slack at turn of the bilge. Ends quite tapered with beam not brought aft. Pleasant ride upwind and down.
Would think this is a very different paradigm then a modern centerboard such as currently offered by several European builders. Would appear even these are not pure centerboard boats with in effect a keel box presenting lateral resistance ( hence boat in the water) but also allowing ballast at some distance down from the surface of the water.
Wonder H and S does your ride deteriorate pounding upwind and cork screwing off the wind? Especially curious comparing the Mason to the Boreal. Are soufflés off the menu? Would seem fine enough and have enough mass to ride fairly well.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

outbound said:


> This circles back to Jons comments about many current production offerings. Several of the techniques Mr. Roth proposes require the boat be so constructed as to allow these techniques. Jons concerns about the details of simple things such as cleats and where and how they are secured is not misplaced. Neither are issues of down flooding.
> These details could be dealt with at little expense at time of initial construction and at greater expense post delivery.


Yes, but as always it's a bit more nuanced than simplistic critique of a cleat. For example, to assume a cleat on ANY boat is strong enough to handle storm forces with a JSD is not necessarily a good assumption. That's why you see people adding stuff like this...


















(from _Morgan's Cloud_)










So, Roth's book doesn't really go into a critique of boat design...which, obviously, I appreciate. He focuses on the technique and methodology that can apply to virtually ANY boat. After all, he sailed this baby over 60K miles through some wild conditions and used these same techniques:










And I don't think anyone would call this a blue water stalwart.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Have no experience with true centerboard boats in a storm. My experience is limited to a storm on a B40 keel/centerboard. It was quite wet and unpleasant. Have yet to experience a real storm in my current boat so the JSD has not been out in anger. But have had breaking waves from repetitive line squalls and a gale. Find we are able to keep calm and sail on. Even use the head, sleep and eat. Can't really hove to. The boat fore reaches and ride really just as good just reefing down and falling off a bit so hoving to so far is for lunches when we want to keep the cockpit clean. 
Really curious about how these boats behave. Is it more fatiguing? Did have a Bermuda on a racing tri. Saw no real weather but it was so hard to do anything on the boat that just wanted to sleep for week when I got off her and let the black and blues go away. Wonder if the Egret derivatives are more like that experience?


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Smack- At no additional expense had builder put suitable blacking plates under stern cleats. Cleats sit on stainless running all the way back to edge. That portion of boat solid glass. Forces distributed over wide expanse. No issue for JSD and simple to do at time of manufacture. More difficult afterward. This should be incorporated in all new Cat A boats IMHO.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

hannah2 said:


> ... the use of the Jordan Series Drogue and breaking waves as apposed to heaving-to is a good conversation. I believe that Heaving-to is the proper thing to do if you decide go wait out a passing low pressure system.


I agree. There are other scenarios where heaving to makes sense: arriving at a Bahamas inlet (almost any of them) in the middle of the night (I have a talent for making landfall at 3a - *sigh* I'm really good at it) and waiting for light or approaching port in dense fog without radar. I'd sail a race track before breaking out a drogue or sea anchor but heaving to is more attractive.



outbound said:


> Can't really hove to. The boat fore reaches and ride really just as good just reefing down and falling off a bit so hoving to so far is for lunches when we want to keep the cockpit clean.


In my experience you can heave to in just about any boat. It may not be as simple as spinning the wheel and and then pointing up. On lighter fin-keeled boats you have to fuss with things a bit. A lot depends on where the center of effort is in the sail plan so you may have to reef. Often efficient rudders in clear flow mean less rudder angle to attain a stable condition. Outbound's observation that often some forereaching vice strictly heaving to does happen but if you keep fiddling with things you should be able to get speed down to 1/2 a knot or so, not so different from the leeway of an older design boat. Fin keeled boats do seem to be more sensitive to wind speed when hove to so in hannah2's scenario you can expect to have to adjust rudder angle, main sheet position, and possibly reefing as the system passes. You're going to want to maintain a watch anyway so that isn't the end of the world.


----------



## jjackson18b (Sep 24, 2015)

I am new to this sailing blog and find it some what of jocks vs. nerds on this topic.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

outbound said:


> CC- you had a decade with a wonderful boat. Never had the joy of sailing a sistership but have been on similar whale body craft. Was struck that it behaved much like a conventional keel boat. The ride was quite pleasant in Buzzard Bay chop. Think this was a reflection that ballast was quite low and hull slack at turn of the bilge. Ends quite tapered with beam not brought aft. Pleasant ride upwind and down.
> Would think this is a very different paradigm then a modern centerboard such as currently offered by several European builders. Would appear even these are not pure centerboard boats with in effect a keel box presenting lateral resistance ( hence boat in the water) but also allowing ballast at some distance down from the surface of the water.
> Wonder H and S does your ride deteriorate pounding upwind and cork screwing off the wind? Especially curious comparing the Mason to the Boreal. Are soufflés off the menu? Would seem fine enough and have enough mass to ride fairly well.


Yea, me too, I'd love to hear more about how these Euro shallow draft boats perform in all conditions. They look like they are built to take it, that's for sure! On the surface, it would seem to me anyway that the only way to get more foot pounds of righting moment, is more "foots" or more "pounds." Ted used to say, use more "pounds." That's of course different than the "sideslipping can be good" argument when heaved-to which I never gave much thought to before reading it here!


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Dave -different folks...
Yes I can come near to hoving to in light to moderate winds with a bit of fiddling around but in high winds seems more trouble than it's worth as explained above. its easy to reef way down and ride is nice so not yet motivated. I guess given where I am it seems weather always comes from where I want to go so getting even marginal VMG while going through the system faster is appealing. 
Debating about going off to the rages -)) next year or seeing more of eastern and western carribean so rages have yet to be a concern.
But you're right I should play with it more often. Still, not like just flipping the wheel like it was on the PSC or T37.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

hannah2 said:


> Yes it is nice to have some good conversations, sorry Don but you have to agree we were pretty much done with the OP. That is unless someone would post a new thread on the subject we are talking about now.


Post number 1 has 12 Likes even though page 1 was just people arguing how it was a BS topic etc. But feel free to go down any arguer path you want and change the topic to anything you want (that of course only the select few that wanted to argue this topic will even see)


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> Yes, but as always it's a bit more nuanced than simplistic critique of a cleat. For example, to assume a cleat on ANY boat is strong enough to handle storm forces with a JSD is not necessarily a good assumption. That's why you see people adding stuff like this...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Here are the cleats on the Boreal fully welded and not only to the deck but under the deck also with bracing. second pic is of the sampson post looking at it underneath. Cleats look a lot like that also underneath. Cleats are 1.5 inches so you can get a large line on them. The pilots on the Panama Canal really like being on boats like the Boreal with their big cleats. Most production boats can't handle the 1 inch lines used to go through the canal.

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61873&stc=1&d=1450414309
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61881&stc=1&d=1450414309


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Even like how they pulled the puddle on the welds. Really like your boat over Jimmy's. 

Again will shadow Jons sentiments. There is no reason a new cat A production boat should not be delivered prepared for heavy weather.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Hannah - how would you describe the Boreal? I've seen people refer to them as "voyaging boats" - meaning that they aren't just "blue water boats" - they can go really anywhere. That sounds pretty accurate to me - and by the look of those cleats - I believe it.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

smackdaddy said:


> Hannah - how would you describe the Boreal? I've seen people refer to them as "voyaging boats" - meaning that they aren't just "blue water boats" - they can go really anywhere. That sounds pretty accurate to me - and by the look of those cleats - I believe it.


Ya know it's a production boat and an affordable one at that. I think the price might now be about what you would pay for a 50 foot Benny Toy and I think you get a lot more boat in the Boreal 44. The Europeans call it an expedition boat anyway when it won the 2015 European boat of the year award. But honestly it's really a true bluewater boat of as modern design that can go almost anywhere.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

outbound said:


> CC- you had a decade with a wonderful boat. Never had the joy of sailing a sistership but have been on similar whale body craft. Was struck that it behaved much like a conventional keel boat. The ride was quite pleasant in Buzzard Bay chop. Think this was a reflection that ballast was quite low and hull slack at turn of the bilge. Ends quite tapered with beam not brought aft. Pleasant ride upwind and down.
> Would think this is a very different paradigm then a modern centerboard such as currently offered by several European builders. Would appear even these are not pure centerboard boats with in effect a keel box presenting lateral resistance ( hence boat in the water) but also allowing ballast at some distance down from the surface of the water.
> Wonder H and S does your ride deteriorate pounding upwind and cork screwing off the wind? Especially curious comparing the Mason to the Boreal. Are soufflés off the menu? Would seem fine enough and have enough mass to ride fairly well.


Yes the keel box makes the Boreal different from the Ovni and the Garcia. The Boreal has a higher stability number and I'll try and find that number, saw it the other day. Also think about the dog house can do for you if you ever got roller??? With the water tight door shut that dog house is going to really help you roll upright much faster than any boat with just a dodger.

We sail RC LOUISE on beam reaches with the centerboard up and the lee dagger board down often. Even with winds up and around 25kts because we have that one foot deep keel. The keel has 10,000 pounds of encapsellated lead in it. The anchor locker is in the center of the boat just in front of the mast so chain weight is not in the bow. 
Some pics of the Keel and where we drop the dagger board down. Also what do you think of the stern Lazzerette? We store the inflatable in there and many many other items in there. Nothing is ever on deck on passage. the bow locker is just about as big also as the chain locker is in front of the mast.
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61905&stc=1&d=1450417071
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61913&stc=1&d=1450417071


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

H- you're in the unusual position to directly compare the traditional blue water paradigm ( Mason 44) to the new ( Boreal 44). Could you please share your impressions?

Days work
Ride
Ease of activities of daily living.
VMG on various points of sail.

Find there is a significant discrepancy between the numbers such as a sailing polar and actual performance in use. If the boat pounds you will throttle back or fall off. If you're so much on your ear you have to sit to leeward to put on your socks you will reef and so on. In our short time with our boat we have less then a week full of days over 200m. Polars say should be nearly all the time. Use says all are happy campers with boat in 7.6-8 range with no spilt coffee. Maybe us as we're "built for comfort not for speed" but interested in your impressions.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Hanna, when you are drying it are you using a leg of some sort on the port side? What am I missing? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Bleemus said:


> Hanna, when you are drying it are you using a leg of some sort on the port side? What am I missing?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


No poles. The keel is about 3 feet wide at the widest part of the beam. So the boat sits on the beach right under the center board box. I only know of one Boreal that ended up on a big enough rock
that it tiped the boat on its side. If that happens the boat can only go to 17 degrees on its side. On that boat the tide came in and the boat righted its self.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Thanks Hanna. Sure doesn't look three feet wide. Nice feature! 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

outbound said:


> H- you're in the unusual position to directly compare the traditional blue water paradigm ( Mason 44) to the new ( Boreal 44). Could you please share your impressions?
> 
> Days work
> Ride
> ...


It is interesting being in this position of having owned a traditional CCA boat in the Mason 44. A really fine blue water boat, bit slow but very seaworthy. And now we own a modern day fast tank. Sort of like a Humvee on steroids. 
Difference is that the Boreal is so much more sea kindly. When we are broad reaching we don't get that stern waddle that a traditional keel cutter rig has. On the Mason I would watch that waddle for hours while on passage thinking about miles lost in 24 hours. It may be two reasons why the Boreal does not waddle, one the mast is just 12 inches back from where it would be on a sloop rig, on the Mason it was 18 inches to stern so the use of a main sail was less and head sails were used more. The other reason I think is the lee dagger board down. What a difference in sailing. When we are using the Wind Pilot I have a lot more room for error of having the sails not balanced. Even if I have too much sail up for the self steering the boat tracks well, sails on the Mason had to have just the right balance for self steering to work. With that dagger board down the Boreal stays very strait, no thought of rounding up a bit when surfing down a wave and the ass end does not move sideways. When we have the NKE auto pilot on I can go below and watch the amp meter and it hardly ever moves because the NKE has hardly anything to correct. Some days when the wind is steady I do not use the wind Pilot or the NKE I just let the boat steer itself. I really like sitting by the helm and watching the boat sail itself.

As for windward sailing Colin Speedie and I took her out for a sail to the windward side off Antigua one day. Winds were 25 and gusting 35, seas solid 6ft to 8 ft. We were able to keep speed up all the way to 55 degrees apparent. Steeper than that we lost speed and started to stall. On flat surfaces like in bays we can get 27 degrees apparent easily, we wore a hole in our jenoa sun shield rubbing against the bow pulpit one lovely day sailing really pinched on the English Channel. The boat with the lee dagger board down does not round up when sails get over powered in a gust. You start to think she is going to but it never happens she just keeps knifing with power through the lousy seas. I don't know where this will end as far as seas go before one must bear off some. Boat is a dry ride also going to weather, rarely have spray come over the dog house, lots of green water at bow.

The ease of daily living is pretty good. Huge storage, 600 liters water and 600 fuel. On passage we keep batteries always full. 100 % on 19 day Atlantic crossing. The prop shaft generator at 8 kt makes 20 or so amp hours along with solar and wind we sometimes make 40 plus amps so batteries stay full.

The 3 inches of insulation make the boat cool and quiet. Sometimes I think too quiet. I like hearing what goes on while in my berth. On the Mason which had good insulation I could hear the wind generator noise increase when wind speed picked up so I started thinking about coming on deck to reef. Its harder on the Boreal. But I like it when those nasty waves break on the stern/ beam they don't wake me up with all that noise we got on the Mason. We were the first Boreal to have dorades installed. The french and most modern designs don't use them anymore. I think Boreal uses them on all their new boats now.

The Galley is European, you just can't have a U shaped galley in a salon raised cabin, no room. It is the least favorite thing about the boat we don't like. But we have learned to cook as the Euros do and it works for us just fine. If we head to the S. Pacific we will be on a port tack all the way making cooking much easier as the galley is on the right side.

Up keep is about the same as the Mason as long as you do not count the varnishing. We are now un varnished. We are having some deck paint bubble up but so far nothing major. Just sand the spot mix up the two part epoxy paint for the deck and apply. One thing we will never have to do is replace all the screws and bolts through the deck like on a fiberglass boat every 5 to 6 years or less. No leaking through deck as there are no deck thru fittings.

Another thing we like is all the thru hulls are on aluminum stand pipes and above water line. The engine room, yes an engine room on a 44 foot boat is amazing to work with. I have complete entrance on both sides of engine and electrical boxes are as easy to get to as engine.

I think the biggest difference is the dog house, that is the one everyone asks about. It is very nice to sit in the dog house even in the tropics at night. Sometimes it can get cool or a squall comes by, nice to control the boat from the doghouse. The dog house has great 360 vision though we always go out in the cockpit to check for ships at night even with AIS we do that.

As far as polar I have no idea, never been into that stuff, sorry. There is a famous Frenchman who has sailed around the world 14 times who now is having a Boreal built I understand he is really into that stuff so some day we will know.

Any other questions I will be glad to answer. I know a lot of sailors ask about how we would sail the boat in a major low pressure system. I could answer that if anyone is interested.

Cheers
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61929&stc=1&d=1450469310


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Jeff is doing a single handed non stop circumnavigation on his Baba 40 ketch. He's the real deal. He will not be posting here so I am posting his log entries from time to time.



> Around Alone Days-46-47-48.
> Day-46.
> 24hr.Run=120NM. Pos.54*25;S 81*14'W. Weather= Bar=1000mb. Wind=10-15kts.ESE. Seas=2-4ft. Cabin Temp=44*-47*.
> Day-47.
> ...


----------



## capttb (Dec 13, 2003)

Been a long time since I spent all afternoon looking forward to sardines on crackers and a beer to wash them down, my eyes are watering.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Bob, where did he start from? He must be getting close to the end I suspect. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

Bleemus said:


> Bob, where did he start from? He must be getting close to the end I suspect.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Here is his blogsite: http://sailorsrun.com. He posts every 3 days.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

hannah2 said:


> It is interesting being in this position of having owned a traditional CCA boat in the Mason 44. A really fine blue water boat, bit slow but very seaworthy. And now we own a modern day fast tank. Sort of like a Humvee on steroids.
> Difference is that the Boreal is so much more sea kindly. When we are broad reaching we don't get that stern waddle that a traditional keel cutter rig has. On the Mason I would watch that waddle for hours while on passage thinking about miles lost in 24 hours. It may be two reasons why the Boreal does not waddle, one the mast is just 12 inches back from where it would be on a sloop rig, on the Mason it was 18 inches to stern so the use of a main sail was less and head sails were used more. The other reason I think is the lee dagger board down. What a difference in sailing. When we are using the Wind Pilot I have a lot more room for error of having the sails not balanced. Even if I have too much sail up for the self steering the boat tracks well, sails on the Mason had to have just the right balance for self steering to work. With that dagger board down the Boreal stays very strait, no thought of rounding up a bit when surfing down a wave and the ass end does not move sideways. When we have the NKE auto pilot on I can go below and watch the amp meter and it hardly ever moves because the NKE has hardly anything to correct. Some days when the wind is steady I do not use the wind Pilot or the NKE I just let the boat steer itself. I really like sitting by the helm and watching the boat sail itself.
> 
> As for windward sailing Colin Speedie and I took her out for a sail to the windward side off Antigua one day. Winds were 25 and gusting 35, seas solid 6ft to 8 ft. We were able to keep speed up all the way to 55 degrees apparent. Steeper than that we lost speed and started to stall. On flat surfaces like in bays we can get 27 degrees apparent easily, we wore a hole in our jenoa sun shield rubbing against the bow pulpit one lovely day sailing really pinched on the English Channel. The boat with the lee dagger board down does not round up when sails get over powered in a gust. You start to think she is going to but it never happens she just keeps knifing with power through the lousy seas. I don't know where this will end as far as seas go before one must bear off some. Boat is a dry ride also going to weather, rarely have spray come over the dog house, lots of green water at bow.
> ...


Fantastic write-up, hannah. Nice pic too. It almost sounds like many of the typical trade-offs that are always factors to consider b'twn different types of boats have been resolved on the Boreal. Among other things, the above-waterline thru-hulls using standpipes are most interesting! I assume you use some sort of isolation transformer to protect the aluminum hull & decks? Is galvanic corrosion a concern?


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Exile1 said:


> Fantastic write-up, hannah. Nice pic too. It almost sounds like many of the typical trade-offs that are always factors to consider b'twn different types of boats have been resolved on the Boreal. Among other things, the above-waterline thru-hulls using standpipes are most interesting! I assume you use some sort of isolation transformer to protect the aluminum hull & decks? Is galvanic corrosion a concern?


Boreal did not invent any of the ideas they use on their boats but they utilized many great ideas like standpipes, anchor locker in center of boat and the dagger board.

Corrosion is a normal concern on any aluminum boat. Though they are lot tougher than most think. We have a system that we check daily to tell if we have a short or a ground fault.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

D-mn. You're making me hate having swallowed the anchor for the next few months. But good on you and merry Xmas.


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

hannah2 said:


> Boreal did not invent any of the ideas they use on their boats but they utilized many great ideas like standpipes, anchor locker in center of boat and the dagger board.
> 
> Corrosion is a normal concern on any aluminum boat. Though they are lot tougher than most think. We have a system that we check daily to tell if we have a short or a ground fault.


Speed & seakindliness don't always go together, so that was interesting to read. You mentioned its good upwind performance but what about comfort? Does the Boreal slam or slap as opposed to your old Mason? Comfortable at anchor?


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Interesting in learning more about the Boreal daggerboards. I have only seen pictures of the deck cam cleats. Love to learn more.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Speed and sea kindliness don't always go together. That is for sure. But I'm not talking about 14 kts to windward. Boreal is not a fast boat compared to a lot of the modern day boats coming out of Europe. Still faster than the conventional blue water boats we think of here in N. America. I would say we average about 180 nautical miles in 24. Matt Chauvel has done 244 in 24. Not bad for us seeing we always slow way down at night. Our Boreal does not slam and does not slap going to weather and is very dry in the cockpit. Lots of green water coming over the bow and I'm glad we had wave brakes put around the forward hatches. But she stays powered and just seems to knife through the seas. But like I mentioned earlier that if you go just a couple degrees north of 55 apparent you loose it and she starts to bounce and flounder in 6 to 8 foot seas.

At anchor she is a dream, very comfortable, no rolling. You have to do a good job with your snubber's or else the sound of the anchor chain dragging over rocks or coral goes up the chain and through the chain pipe all the way to the anchor locker, hell of a racket. But easy to deal with.

We love the 44 over the 47. The 44 has the drop down swim step and the 47 has the sugar scoop. The 44 has more storage space in stern Lazerette and more space on step than sugar scoop has especially with a wind vane on stern. We have our wind vane on a giant hinge that unpins and swings open when you want to use the swim step. with the sugar scoop the vane is always in the way.
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61969&stc=1&d=1450492993
Hi Bleemus, I wish I could tell you more about how and why the dagger boards work. I'm really lazy that way I should have spent hours talking with Jean- Francois Delviye, the designer about such matters but had so much other things to discuss while we were at the factory. All I know is when the lee dagger board is down seems like we are sailing on a rail.

Cheers


----------



## Exile1 (Sep 21, 2010)

hannah2 said:


> Speed and sea kindliness don't always go together. That is for sure. But I'm not talking about 14 kts to windward. Boreal is not a fast boat compared to a lot of the modern day boats coming out of Europe. Still faster than the conventional blue water boats we think of here in N. America. I would say we average about 180 nautical miles in 24. Matt Chauvel has done 244 in 24. Not bad for us seeing we always slow way down at night. Our Boreal does not slam and does not slap going to weather and is very dry in the cockpit. Lots of green water coming over the bow and I'm glad we wave brakes put around the forward hatches. But she stays powered and just seems to knife through the seas. But like I mentioned earlier that if you go just a couple degrees north of 55 apparent you loose it and she starts to bounce and flounder in 6 to 8 foot seas.
> 
> At anchor she is a dream, very comfortable, no rolling. You have to do a good job with your snubber's or else the anchor chain dragging over rocks or coral goes up the chain and through the chain pipe all the way to the anchor locker, hell of a racket. But easy to deal with.
> 
> ...


Thanks so much hannah. Really fun & interesting to hear about your new boat, and all the best with it in the future. I definitely think I'll be doing some more reading up about it.


----------



## Shockwave (Feb 4, 2014)

Cool boat Hannah, sounds as if you are really enjoying her.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Understood. I am guessing the boards are closer to the stern locking the boat into tracking well. From the location of the control lines the stern also makes sense. When I hear daggerboard I tend to think something more midships. If they are more aft then they probably take a lot of load off the autopilot which is always a good thing! Sweet looking boat. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Bleemus said:


> Understood. I am guessing the boards are closer to the stern locking the boat into tracking well. From the location of the control lines the stern also makes sense. When I hear daggerboard I tend to think something more midships. If they are more aft then they probably take a lot of load off the autopilot which is always a good thing! Sweet looking boat.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Your right about dagger boards being effective because they are in the stern of the boat. One thing I have not mentioned is the Boreal can go dead down wind with ease. I know with the Mason we could not do that very well, really hard to get wind vane to work right. But with the Boreal we just go wing on wing and most importantly drop both dagger boards. Anywhere from 170 to 170 degrees apparent with that slight wind change and she follows perfectly. On our Atlantic crossing 6 days out the gale we were in finally dissipated and trades filled in. We pointed RC LOUISE for the Caribbean island of Antigua which was a dead down wind course. We never touched the wind vane for the next 13 days with steady trades blowing 15 to 20. Not the fastest way to sail but we did nothing but take watch and still made about 160 nautical miles a day. It felt really strange not playing with the wind vane all the time, seems like we always had to tweak it on the Mason. Next time we get to sail dead down wind I will try and not use vane just let boat go on its own and see if it will. Dagger boards are COOL!

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=62017&stc=1&d=1450540239


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

OK so now we know a little bit about the Boreal, if people are interested in more I'll gladly say more about them. But what about your boat, what do you like about it or don't like about it. I am interested in coastal cruisers and blue water boats as I enjoy sailing both areas. 

Outbound what about your boat. I think it is interesting that we picked the Boreal with our second choice being the Outbound and you picked the Outbound with the Boreal your second choice. 

But it would be fun and interesting to hear the good the bad and the ugly about your boats all of you. 

Pictures also. Smack what do you like about your Hunter and don't like about your Hunter?

Cheers


----------



## XSrcing (Aug 22, 2015)

Now I want Hannah's boat.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

It's definitely a tough-ass cruising tractor - that's for sure.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

I just looked at the Boreal website, and that ain't no tractor. More like a Range Rover: luxurious utility.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

mstern said:


> I just looked at the Boreal website, and that ain't no tractor. More like a Range Rover: luxurious utility.


Have you not seen the Lamborghini tractor?

Home Lamborghini Trattori - Tractors


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> Have you not seen the Lamborghini tractor?
> 
> Home Lamborghini Trattori - Tractors


OK I already see a problem with this tractor. No cup holder. Where do you put your coffee cup?:laugh


----------



## XSrcing (Aug 22, 2015)

That's how Lamborghini was started: building tractors.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Friend is a cranberry grower. Good tractor can be way more the most folks annual salary. Heat, air and good stereo. Fibreoptics, pto, hydraulics to wipe your nose, positioning systems to give nice rows in a field. More bells and whistles than most cars. 
Guess if your livelyhood depends on it and you're going to sit in it for hours on end its worth it.
Had fun mowing with it. Mower is on a hydraulic arm and doesn't touch the ground. Set a height and it floats over variations in the bank we were mowing. Crazy sophisticated device.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Sheesh... not only does this thread need a new title, it's gonna have to go to OT unless we create a farming forum...


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Faster said:


> Sheesh... not only does this thread need a new title, it's gonna have to go to OT unless we create a farming forum...


The thread doesn't need a new title, it needs less drifting!!!!!!!!!!!!

But that hope ended pages ago.


----------



## XSrcing (Aug 22, 2015)

#AllSailorsMatter


----------



## newhaul (Feb 19, 2010)

Faster said:


> Sheesh... not only does this thread need a new title, it's gonna have to go to OT unless we create a farming forum...


No need for new forum we just need to do the sea farming for fish bit to keep it nautical.:laugh


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Hey Don, What boat do you own and do you like it. Any pictures?

I'm thinking your a real cruiser and not an Internet Arguer.

Outbound lets hear about your boat. She is a beauty!

Cheers


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Absolutely love my boat. We're not as experienced as you and love the way she takes care of us. Have done about 15k coastal and about 4k offshore on her. Find she tracts so fine with just a Raymarine long arm that have yet to feel the need to put a wind vane on her but that's the next thing on the list before doing the canal for the South Pacific.

Little discussed is living on a boat. All the little things like having a work shop, having space for the stuff that improves the aesethetics and makes the bride feel she owns the boat. The bride has experienced seemingly endless days of gales,cold, and rain but is still with me to go voyaging. That's the big thing. We think of ourselves as intrepid sailors. But if the wife bails the dream is over. Not having to be on her about burning electrons or using water is a big thing. 
As you know we worked down to the decision for the last boat to,be a Boreal,v. a Outbound. I really liked the Boreal. Wife didn't. Her matrix may make no sense to a sailor but made great sense to her. The complexities of the daggerboards and centerboard and the interior layout put her off. I loved it. Still think you have a great boat.

However, the Outbound is just so comfortable and confidence inspiring be it coastal, offshore or stationary. She saw 35-50 for three days running with just her and me running the boat.,she needed to fly back for work and I headed off for the eastern carribean. She cried to leave the boat. I may tell her I've done so many Bermudas or so many deliveries or so many storms but she still thinks I'm a idiot. But she has never questioned the boat. That's a huge thing.

Another thing for me have been the community of Outbound owners. We had 5 sailing together on the SDR. Also how everything is just perfect. Be it wiring, construction details or ergonomics. We added a genset and now a watermaker. The through hulls were there already as well as the wiring and relays on the board. Phil has lived with this design for over a decade. He has been smart enough to listen to his owners. He anticipates what we owners might want and has the boat set up from the get go to accept it. Each boat has been an incremental improvement over the last. Each boat fits its owner. None of the boats have sat still. They ask to be used.but given it being stick built a 2 year old boat looks little different than a 14 year old full time cruiser. 

Went to a OCC meeting. Bill on a sistership is doing Chile,,Patagonia and the cape next year. Wife met these people. Stories like that inspire her to go cruising. No one she's met on a Outbound as given her one negative word. She knows Carl designed this boat for ocean cruising. The boat actually does that with little fuss or bother. That gets her going. As long as she feels safe and confident we keep sailing.

Know you love your dog house. I love my hard dodger. Best place on passage is standing behind the dodger. Both hands on the grab rail. Full vision of the sails. Screens a glance away but dry and warm out of the wind. Even in the November washing machine of the Gulf Stream. 

We expect ~180/d like you. We turn on the engine if doing less than 5.5k so have enjoyed the 190g of diesel. Been pleased with the light air performance so the engine is off with anything like 10k apparent even when needing to make miles. Potential advantage is pointing. We do keep up until ~39 apparent. Then it's pinching speed falls ride go south. 
Only ***** is coastal. Need to roll in the genny then roll it out when tacking. Generic issue with a Solent rig. No way around it. We're lazy so if upwind coastal even in light air genny stays rolled up.lose a knot flying Solent and main in light air. Glad we did conventional,slab reefing and set boat up to be singled. Confidence has meant we go sailing. Still do not have a secure go to list for passage crew and wife not yet fully confident go just us two. Hopefully that will come.

Much to be said for old school features such as internal ballast and no keel bolts or solid non cored glass. One less thing to worry about. Sistership ran into our stern while docking next to us in prep for sail from Nanny Key to Newport. Crosswind in twenties. He had been up for a whole day. No sleep for 36h so attention lagged. Small chip in gel coat no other damage to his or mine.

Boats I can compare to are various CDs, a OSTAR one off, aT37 and a PCS 34. Compare to those this is a massive step up in all regards. Comfort, beauty, performance, ease of maintenance and live ability.


----------



## seabeau (Oct 5, 2014)

hannah2 said:


> Your right about dagger boards being effective because they are in the stern of the boat. One thing I have not mentioned is the Boreal can go dead down wind with ease. I know with the Mason we could not do that very well, really hard to get wind vane to work right. But with the Boreal we just go wing on wing and most importantly drop both dagger boards. Anywhere from 170 to 170 degrees apparent with that slight wind change and she follows perfectly. On our Atlantic crossing 6 days out the gale we were in finally dissipated and trades filled in. We pointed RC LOUISE for the Caribbean island of Antigua which was a dead down wind course. We never touched the wind vane for the next 13 days with steady trades blowing 15 to 20. Not the fastest way to sail but we did nothing but take watch and still made about 160 nautical miles a day. It felt really strange not playing with the wind vane all the time, seems like we always had to tweak it on the Mason. Next time we get to sail dead down wind I will try and not use vane just let boat go on its own and see if it will. Dagger boards are COOL!
> 
> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=62017&stc=1&d=1450540239


 I believe that many of the comments concerning your dagger boards are simply indictive of all of the basic sailing knowledge we as a society of sailors have lost, since the years our ancestors made a living from the sea. Running downwind, with your center of effort far forward and your center of lateral resistance so far aft, it is easy to understand that your vessel will "run on rails". The father the two efforts are apart, the greater the steering leverage thus, the smaller the steerage effort. The eastern seaboard of the US had in the past, literally hundreds of "coasting schooners" designed for shallow water, complete with centerboards and some with a second "trimming" board, placed either forward or aft of the main board. Many of the great "trekking" double canoes of Polynesia employed two great dagger boards to control their direction, without need of a "rudder". On some points of sail, with my helm lashed amidships, I use my "rudder in the air", my mizzen, in small doses, to either head up or fall off any intended course.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

IMHO these last few posts help to put a stark contrast on how true offshore voyagers think about their boats compared to those of us, like myself, that might do an occasional offshore leg, but are primarily coastal sailors.

Think about these tradeoffs:

1. Solent ...easy sail change (highly valued offshore) roll to tack vs a single jib or a detachable forestay cutter for easy quick tacking (highly valued coastal).
2. Tracking and steering...how well does your boat go straight down wind, how much attention to stay on course, how much work does the autopilot need to do on any heading, how well does it steer wind a wind vane. Not a priority for coastal, a super high priority for voyagers.
Appendages that help with this, highly valued offshore. A bit of overlap here with the appeal of retractable stuff inshore.
3. Piloting from the wheel or behind a fixed structure or dodger....us coastal guys tend to put our electronics on the pedestal, and steer out in the open mostly keeping a lookout for markers and obstructions, the offshore guys know they want to hide behind a structure, see their electronics, be out of the weather while self steering is engaged.
4. Value of Overbuilt....multiple days in storm or gale conditions, how noisy was it, how comfortable was the ride, how worried were we that something would break, ....

It is interesting, there are so many long diatribes on these issues, but this thread IMHO is doing the best job I've seen in a while of describing these tradeoffs from the view of real long distance, offshore, voyagers. With also some honesty about how these tradeoffs might not be optimal for coastal cruisers.

Thanks for the clear, fact based, and real world experience based posts.


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

Outbound. Yours is truly a great boat. I dug around on their site and see no mention of who designed them. You mention Carl. Was it Schumacher? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Sea beau- all is not lost. Nigel Irons designed several modern schooners in the 40-60' range. Two built at Covey Island and in Southeast Asia that I know of. Believe all three were very successful boats having circumnavigated. One lost to fire ( Maggie B). Believe derecktor built a 90 meter one recently but don't know the NA for that one. 

Understand schooners do poorly pointing. No way around it. But the smaller sails meant "a man and a boy" could sail it in the past. Now it means mom and pop can. Having the sail plan further aft means underwater lateral resistance is moved aft. So downwind or surfing in big seas requires less helm input. Could see a boat with CF sticks and square head sails be a beautiful effective cruiser. 

Bob says he only drew one. Sure wish he'd draw another.


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

capecodda said:


> IMHO these last few posts help to put a stark contrast on how true offshore voyagers think about their boats compared to those of us, like myself, that might do an occasional offshore leg, but are primarily coastal sailors.
> 
> It is interesting, there are so many long diatribes on these issues, but this thread IMHO is doing the best job I've seen in a while of describing these tradeoffs from the view of real long distance, offshore, voyagers. With also some honesty about how these tradeoffs might not be optimal for coastal cruisers.


True, Capecodda. In my early days of sailing, I spent more time in the survival at sea subjects in books and magazines. Cruising in particular dealt more often with subjects like preparing for 360's in your sailboat, than sailing it.

Inevitably with these survival at sea subjects, you begin to worry if you have a boat that's up for it. All good stuff to know, if,... that's what you're doing.

But as you allude to, if you spend time and effort making your boat an ocean crosser, you may lose a lot of what makes it a good coastal sailer.

It took lots of coastal miles and years to realize how _I_ liked to sail and what I wanted to do on the water in a sailboat. I nixed stuff and systems that weren't used.

These days my efforts(and$) are concentrated on better, easier sailing with the boat I own, so I can sail more.

I set my own -light- safety equipment requirements based on what I know I will be doing(along the coast with an occasional overnight). That's a very personal list that comes from your experience.

Our boat itself isn't set up for living aboard beyond a few weeks or a season. It's all sailboat with the comfort of a minimal seasonal cottage by the sea.

Lightness, is the entire theme that works for my coastal sailing. It works both for my boat - as the waterline rises - and my head to achieve what I want out of sailing.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

Tom, you and I are sailing on the same page. Not at all critical of those who choose a different path, but it's the path we choose.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

Yes I think it is really important to simplify your boat if it is coastal. The joy of a day sail or a weekend cruise is stepping into your boat backing out of the marina slip and going. It can take us an hour to get ready and another hour or more to put our blue water boat away.

While we were in the San Blass Islands last winter we went for day sails just about every day between Islands. Usually inviting someone from another boat at anchor out for the sail. Putting a line or two out and catching a fish for dinner. Most of all we loved the hand steering aspect, what a great feeling. But going back to the anchorage or docking at a marina after a day sail is a lot of work. I would not do it as much if RC LOUISE had a home port.

Outbound your boat is beautiful and your wife should be very proud of her confidence in it. We look forward of seeing you both in the S. Pacific one of these years. It sounds like you had the same experience as we did when you had your boat built. It is so much as important to have not only a good boat built for blue water cruising but the experience of having that boat built with a good designer and a good builder, it is half the fun. Boreal was also so amazing to work with. Not always perfect but always they put the effort in 100%. I have talked with a couple of sailors who had a new HR built and a new Ovni built and they did not have such a great experience as we had.

Nine months into the building of RC LOUISE Tracy and I went to France and to Boreal for a visit and inspection of our boat. We were welcome to spend as much time in the shop go on board any boat being built and ask any question to any of the work crew. On the left is Jean-Francois Eeman, owner of Boreal and on the far right is Jean-Francois Delvoye, owner and designer of Boreal.
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=62137&stc=1&d=1450633846


----------



## Bleemus (Oct 13, 2015)

hannah2 said:


> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=62137&stc=1&d=1450633846


Those aluminum boats are so light they build them on blocks of foam!

:laugh:laugh:laugh:wink


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

This thread has become so interesting that I had to scroll up to the top to see what the heck thread I was on!

Thanks to all who make it so good!

I'm merely a dilettante. I gave my curriculum vitae early on in my "cruisers verse". Learned boat design with a plastic duck in the bath tub. Learned the ocean by reading books..... 

But I enjoy "soaking up" all I can.


----------



## hannah2 (Nov 15, 2012)

skygazer said:


> This thread has become so interesting that I had to scroll up to the top to see what the heck thread I was on!
> 
> Thanks to all who make it so good!
> 
> ...


I agree the thread is getting better all the time.

If your interested, go to youtube and type in Matt Chauvel's name. He has a bunch on vids on his Boreal that he sails all over the world with his dog Oscar. Matt is only 31 years old had enough of making big money at a young age, Gifted beyond belief. Had a Boreal built and said time to go sailing. The guy loves the high lats like 50 and above. After going around the horn he went to S. Georgia Island and then decided he would like to go to S. Africa. He is now headed back to Cape Horn doing the fifties again. He will be the first to circle the globe in a Boreal.

I like the vid named, ( smooth sailing) as it gives a tour of the boat under sail and he is doing 10 kts. Also his adventure at Gough Island which is between Cape Horn and S. Africa. This guy has been in three major storms as far as I know, one that would have ended my sailing days and back to the farm. After one of those storms and having damage done to his Aires windvane, he stops in and gets lifted up the cliffs in a net to have repairs done on the vane. Only 7 people are stationed there and they stay a year doing research and weather forecasting for S. Africa. Enjoy, sorry I have no idea how to down load from Youtube.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

hannah2 said:


> II like the vid named, ( smooth sailing) as it gives a tour of the boat under sail and he is doing 10 kts...


Oh boy, cue JonE and "The Ian Van Tuyl Analysis":



> "Wind 25 knots..."







And whatever you do, don't get him started on those dangerous hull portlights and narrow decks.

I'm staying out of this one.


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

Gotta love those extreme, wide angle lenses - really makes this look big on a sailboat.

Gary


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Hannah you're right they are great guys. I never met them but they were kind enough to send CDs and a ton of info to me when we were choosing between the Boreal and Outbound. Very upfront even with the language barrier.
Had a very unpleasant experience with the HR dealer in Connecticut. Walked into the broker office explained we wanted to buy a new HR. Clean deal with no trade. Treated us like we were inconveniencing him. We walked out when bride whispered " I won't let you give that man any money".
Outbound dealer in R.I. and company owner exchanged over 130 emails with me before and during build. No cost overruns to me even when expense of lighting and dodger ran over initial budget. Phil ate those costs. Got pictures each step of the way. Listened to mods we wanted and now has incorporated many of them in subsequent boats. Things like no balsa just foam, granny bars, redo of companionway, fiddles on all shelves and way head door swings. 
Shipped me parts to meet me at destination when told of breakage via satphone of things that they installed from other vendors at their expense. Even after warranty was up acted as my agent with Winchard so Wichard replaced things they made at no expense to me. Winchard has been good as well. Phil Lambert is totally stand up as is Josh Hodgson. 
Think you lose something dealing with a big shop. With the small shop you talk directly with the principles and they have big skin in the game so really want you happy. You are their advertising budget.
Also think your builder and mine were long time ocean sailors before they became builders. They get it and with Phil/Josh knew more of what was right for us then we did at times.
Hear there was a time this was the norm for all builders. Breaks my heart whenever a family company becomes corporate.


----------



## skygazer (Sep 3, 2011)

hannah2 said:


> I agree the thread is getting better all the time....
> ...Enjoy, sorry I have no idea how to down load from Youtube.


Quick lesson, it's easy peasy. Just under the title on the "thumb up" line click on "share" next to an arrow and a new line will expand under it.

Click "embed" and a new line will expand already highlighted and ready to copy. Now copy it (in Windows right click, chose copy).

That's it, paste it in your post and it's done..


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

outbound said:


> Had a very unpleasant experience with the HR dealer in Connecticut. Walked into the broker office explained we wanted to buy a new HR. Clean deal with no trade. Treated us like we were inconveniencing him. We walked out when bride whispered " I won't let you give that man any money".


I'm sorry you had a bad experience with the Essex HR dealer. There really is no excuse for that sort of behavior.

My experience with HR from Free State Yachts near Annapolis to the factory was much like yours with Outbound. Bill Adams (then owner of Free State Yachts and now at United Yacht Sales), Roland Olsson (then Director of Customer Service at HR), Vicki Vance (then running the HR parts organization), and others are now counted as friends. Nine years after my build I still correspond sporadically with Magnus Rassy.

During construction I got regular updates and photographs as you describe. My visits to the factory (I lived in England at the time) were positive; everyone was very open and helpful.

In fairness I should say that even without having bought a boat from them I have similar relationships with Island Packet, so good customer service is not unique to small builders.

I have no relationship with Hallberg-Rassy other than as a happy customer and boat owner, and none with Island Packet other than friendship and respect.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Don0190 said:


> The thread doesn't need a new title, it needs less drifting!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> But that hope ended pages ago.


I think the original topic was talked out. There wasn't much more to say other than to re-state what was already said. Now it's kind of like a dinner conversation with multiple conversations going on.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Here is "real cruiser" Jeff on his production built Baba 40, 30% off the way through his solo circumnavigation"



> Around Alone Days-49-50-51.
> Day-49.
> 24hr.Run=165NM.Pos, Lat.55*38'S Long.63*12'W. Weather=Bar=994mb. Wind=20-30kts.NW. Seas=8-10ft.W. Cabin Temp=46*-51*.
> Day-50
> ...


----------



## Bill-Rangatira (Dec 17, 2006)

ok so this ties in to the production boats thread lol


----------



## oysterman23 (Jul 22, 2011)

Anyone know where i can find a self setting anchor with auto clean and guidance features?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

oysterman23 said:


> Anyone know where i can find a self setting anchor with auto clean and guidance features?
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk


at the Sailnet store


----------



## robert sailor (Jun 22, 2015)

Some really great posts! All cruisers love to visit each others boats and check them out. Socializing is a team sport amongst us all. I have never heard any sailor bad mouth or give a less than stellar critique on a fellow cruisers boat. As far as offshore or coastal sailing no one I know really gives a damn, some folks bought boats locally and have only sailed locally others have crossed oceans, hell some sailors never leave a particular island...who cares, we all dive,hike or drink together and like each other for who we are not what or where we sail. It's only on the Internet that you partake in silly behavior and that is unfortunate but such is life. Really enjoyed the boat reviews, find them very interesting.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

Don0190 said:


> Don't some ever get tired of the same bah bah bah "discussions" of the small fraction of "blue water" danger sailing? Doesn't it seem that any cruiser sailing around doing day hops or 1-2 passage cruises on a comfortable boat is made out on forums to be some type of lower life form?
> 
> I bet by far more cruisers fall into the category of day cruisers that in the distance cruiser world. These are the cruisers normally not sailing more than 50 miles a day between stops. They are out to travel and see things, not spend weeks out in the water. Yes they sometimes spend a couple of days out on a passage to get to a new area, but they are smart enough to wait for the right weather to do so.
> 
> Lets stop suggesting these cruisers and their comfortable boats are some lower life form and start giving them their due credit for being the majority of real cruisers verse internet arguers!


Long distance cruisers do their share of both, the former early on, and more of the latter, later. The offshore cruising gives one a better idea of what lasts the longest.


----------



## oldragbaggers (Dec 6, 2005)

Reading through this thread, and many other threads on this and other forums, it seems to me that more negative comments are directed at people who own "old, tired, all they can afford, outdated, tanks," than are directed at coastal sailors, modern production boat owners, or weekend warriors. Heck, I think even the condo commanders get more respect. So, being the owner of one of these old tanks maybe I should be the one dragging a poop-lip around and feeling put upon, Don.

And while I have never taken a swipe at anyone's modern production boat, I find that a lot of owners of same are not similarly restrained when it comes to making negative comments about the older designs. So....I'm going to go and cry now.:crying


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

oldragbaggers said:


> Reading through this thread, and many other threads on this and other forums, it seems to me that more negative comments are directed at people who own "old, tired, all they can afford, outdated, tanks," than are directed at coastal sailors, modern production boat owners, or weekend warriors. Heck, I think even the condo commanders get more respect. So, being the owner of one of these old tanks maybe I should be the one dragging a poop-lip around and feeling put upon, Don.
> 
> And while I have never taken a swipe at anyone's modern production boat, I find that a lot of owners of same are not similarly restrained when it comes to making negative comments about the older designs. So....I'm going to go and cry now.:crying


I've been on the front-end of this discussion for many years now. And I think you have to have a broad view of that negativity for it to make any sense.

There has DEFINITELY been (and continues to be) A LOT of negativity directed at modern production boats. No question. And because of that, you have to expect there will be blow-back by those owners...which typically turns into negativity toward the "tanks". And the cycle spins.

Personally, I love all boats. I really do. I prefer to _own_ modern production boats for many reasons, but I wouldn't slam old boats outright as being "inferior" or whatever. I think they can all pretty much do everything their skippers want them to do. And some of them can do certain things better, some can't, etc.

It's only when one side or the other categorically insists that the other boats are "condos" or "toys" or "pigs" or whatever - or that theirs are the "real true and worthy boat" for whatever - that it becomes a negative-fest.

So - love your boat. Sail it to fun places. And don't worry what people on forums say. Everyone else will probably do the same.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

oldragbaggers said:


> . So....I'm going to go and cry now.:crying


Everyone needs a good cry now and again. Glad I could help you out on that.

You owe me now :wink


----------



## oldragbaggers (Dec 6, 2005)

I get your point, Smackdaddy, and it's sad it came to that. I agree with you, I also love all boats. We have owned boats of both types over the years, our biggest "tank" being a Cabo Rico 38 (the first one ever built) and our raciest (not by modern standards, but for its day) being a Newport 30. And we have owned several Catalinas, a 22 and a couple of 27's, a Bristol, and 4 Cape Dories. I can see the beauty and the appeal to the modern production boats. We went to the Annapolis boat show this fall and my husband had to catch me a couple of times to keep me from slipping in my own drool and breaking my neck. 

Beyond cost and speed though there is a "love factor" I think that is involved with boats that is as unexplainable as why you fell in love with the person that you marry, or why you find them physically attractive when someone else might think they resemble the north end of a southbound jackass. It's that little tug on the heart that you feel when you spot one from across the boatyard, a totally esoteric thing that will only be understood by others similarly inclined. I will say though that I have always loved the way these old tanks stiffen up after a certain point of heel. Whether it's real or just my perception (formed over 35 years of sailing both kinds of boats) but they make me feel safe. But I also hate that they don't back up worth a damn. All boats are a compromise, right?

As far as the "all they can afford" comment that I see come up so often (including in this thread), that might hold true for someone who just plunks down a couple grand for one, throws their beer in the cooler and takes off out of the harbor. That's not the way we roll and anyone who has ever done a proper refit and restoration of one of these old girls knows that it's not by any stretch the "cheap" way to go.


----------



## oldragbaggers (Dec 6, 2005)

Don0190 said:


> Everyone needs a good cry now and again. Glad I could help you out on that.
> 
> You owe me now :wink


You're all heart, Don.:grin


----------



## lillia28 (Aug 12, 2011)

Thank for the kind words. We've had stemless wine glasses long enough to even prefer them at home.:wink
I am old enough to have quenched my thirst for adventure. I started sailing late in life, so I won't be around long enough to learn as much as some on these boards have.
Lou


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

capecodda said:


> IMHO, listening to people who have more experience than you is always helpful.


A note from someone caused me to go back and read the early posts on this thread.

It occurs to me that sometimes listening to people who have less experience can be helpful also. It makes us (well, some of us) think things through more carefully. There is no better teacher than the act of teaching. I've had my share of a-ha moments explaining something to someone else. I find similar benefits from explaining a problem. Communication with another person incentivizes organizing thoughts and information and sometimes is all it takes to overcome a challenge or fine-tune a concept.


----------



## paikea (Aug 3, 2014)

I probably have not been more confused on a thread as this one. Not that I actually read the whole bit. I don’t think I can handle so much confusion in one day. 

We all start somewhere with anything, some go far, some don’t, only because we have different journeys to be on. And its the same with sailing and cruising, coastal or oceans, or circumnavigation, or the pond back door. Why does it even matter so much? I am happy for anyone being able to get any beautiful meaningful experience, be that short term, long term, big boat, small boat, perfect boat, less than perfect boat. 

My biggest teacher will always be myself. No matter what I am told, no matter what I read, no matter the experiences I go through, it all comes down to being ready for that information/experience and mostly using my own IQ. If I am to listen to everything I managed to read so far on any sailing forum, I would probably turn my sailboat into Frankensailboat and sail her like a yo-yo. 

I am never more at peace than when I am on my boat, even just laying down in my cockpit late at night with a tea, not to mention sailing her. There is so much nonsense in the world, and in our own personal lives, for most of us, any sort of sailboat, any sort of sailing, any sort of cruising that we manage to do is that little dose of sense that we can get. 
Instead we spend so much time labelling. Early next week I am moving unto my "small and oldish" 28 foot sailboat as a liveaboard for the next 6 months. I still have a place 400 miles away. Does that still make me a liveaboard? Yet another label. What I care about is what experiences I am having so far with this boat and how it supports my own growth.


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

Paikea... nice post and may I say spot on! 

The many problems I'm reading into many of these posts is the opposite of the 'Keeping up with the Joneses'... In fact the ones with newer, new, BW capable, better built (whatever that is) boats seem to look at the smaller, less perfect, needing much refit, less capable sailor, newbie sailor, etc. with some form of disdain, bewilderment of sorts. If you have anything outside of the BW capable boats and anything less than '20XX' year boat you aren't in the same league and therefore are looked upon as '-'. 

Much of these brash insults are ill informed as no one knows the financial means or reasons why they aren't sailing a newer vessel, perhaps they can but put off for reasons they feel they aren't ready. Perhaps there are no dreams to visit the South Pacific Seas, or thread the waters in the Mediterranean. Perhaps older boats serve some form of nostalgic sentiments or reasons beyond what many may conceive on these boards. I do know in many posts there are words one can collect over the years of the rhetoric they used to insult another's vessel simply because it's not what they would buy, sail, the quality of construction, how it's outfitted, etc. doesn't matter what it is these seem to be the outlying reasons many get into combative arguments on these forums.

Many cruise coastal waters only and from that 80% of the sailboats in our neighborhood never go out... not even for a short 2 hour day sail... why is that? Many marinas across the country I've had the pleasure to visit have those same percentages of sailboats that never got out (powerboats also). So why would any of these sailors want to buy a new 20XX sailboat for $500k or more to go where (many are marina queens and just that)? 

I guess I see things one way... When cruisers are ready (no need to post here or anywhere perfect case of S/V Catching Rays) they buy the vessel they intend to sail, outfit her, provision her, and set for cruise... no need to be on the forum boards constantly ranting about their outfitting the vessel, too afraid to embark, and if so come back scurrying to land because it's not what they imagined it would be even if on a very capable vessels. This is OK too... no one knows what you're getting into until you're out there. It's a big ocean with many dangers and for some that isn't a dream for them, perhaps sailing several miles within sight of land has that same thrill and appeal with a non BW vessel and might I say much older well heeled vessel.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

One of the fun things about rallies is all this stuff recedes into the background at the end of the passage. You are at your destination. What boat you're on, how old it is, who drew it, who made it and such is totally irreverent. You made it there. At the social functions there is none of this nonsense. 
Similarly to date my experience among cruisers most want information and have opinions about boats purely based on function. They want to know what works and what doesn't. What has caused trouble, broke, wore out, is hard to live with or maintain. The judgements made are about boats and their features. They are not about the people who own them, the cost, or imaged mystique or absence there of. That is a separate issue.
So here it seems some people have trouble making that distinction. When someone speaks to this specifics some get offended. Be it - this feature makes for a safer cockpit, this for a kindlier motion, this for a faster boat, here's a clever way to do that, or whatever detail discussed it's viewed as a personal attack.
The sea doesn't make these distinctions. It doesn't care what brand of boat you're on, how old, how expensive. What matters is does your boat do its job, does your boat care of you or you it, will it endure.
If posters here could accept the cold reality the sea doesn't care who you are and what you've done in the past nor about your preconceptions threads here could focus on the real issues with less noise. 
I look at the CF cutters and drool. CF chainplates stronger than dirt, no maintenance, never needing to be replaced. An excellent feature. I'll never be able to afford them. Does that make Bob a Internet arguer? Hell no!!! He expanded my understanding, showed me a better way to skin that cat. Look at the cheribini chainplates another better way to deal with that than on my boat. But if one was to comment chainplates on this production boat are hidden. This is bad. Some view that as a personal attack. Foolish....just foolish.


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

Thanks Jeff... post corrected


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Bah bah bah is alive and doing well. :clobber


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

No think it's about us. We should be exchanging information that educates us. 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Personal Attack removed per Forum Rules- Jeff_H SailNet Moderator

I'm only interested learning what works and what doesn't. Seems you're being the Internet arguer. You make my point with your response. 

Independent of all other issues chainplates that don't have the risk of deck leaks, are strong and maintenance free are better. Who we are, our preconceptions, our egos are irrelevant. Pick that hair out. You will be more comfortable sitting down. Used an example decades old and one using new technology. Some how you think this is self referenced. 

Pointed out only thing that matters is whether you to get to cruise successfully. Where is there any ego?


No, understand you want to make this personal. Have no interest in that. Rather learn from you and your experiences. Let's share our experiences and knowledge. May learn something that way.


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

hu·bris

/ˈ(h)yo͞obrəs/

noun

noun: hubris

excessive pride or self-confidence.

synonyms: arrogance, conceit, haughtiness, hauteur, pride, self-importance, egotism, pomposity, superciliousness, superiority; 

Thanks Jeff for editing this... wouldn't have posted had it not been directed at me.

Chainplates? Really?


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Yes things that work are best. The thing is most things really in fact work. I like how some people can talk about a real item that could be a problem as something that needs major bah bah bah talk about, when in reality it is only a problem in less than 1% of boats to start with. It is like spending post after post talking about keel boats, when in reality keels very very very rarely go loose. Talking about chain plates is another example of something that gets a lot of talk by some, when it mostly is a problem in boats from the 70s and early 80s and is just part of any boat getting older.

There just is a percentage of boaters on forums that are so focused on fear items that one wonders how they could ever have any boating enjoyable.

And then there are the boaters who give all kinds of boat design details needed, when basically what they mean is "Like my boat".


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

NEW RULES moving forward: If you make a post that contains a personal attack, the entire post will get deleted. We moderators do not have time to cherry pick through threads for personal attacks. From here on out, make an ad-hominem argument and rather than trying to pick flypoop out of the pepper, the whole post disappears. 

Jeff_H 
Sailnet moderator

And putting on a different hat for a moment, and speaking not as a moderator but as someone who values these forums for the exchange of ideas that they allow, I readily acknowledge that while some of these posts clearly are aimed at justifying why one or the other of us bought the boat that we did, I think that dismissing the points being raised as somehow irrelevant fears or self-aggrandizement misses the real value of these kinds of exchanges. 

To me, discussions about details like methods of constructing chainplates are very useful to better understanding the options that are out there and the advantages and liability of any single option. In designing and constructing any boat, there are thousands of decisions to be made. Many are pretty inconsequential, but many require compromises for some particular set of objectives. When someone buys any boat, they end up with the result of those numerous compromises. You can chose to put your head in the sand and decide that understanding the compromises is not important to you. Or you may chose to understand the trade-offs so that you can make decisions about which compromises you are willing to live with and how you will mitigate against the limitations implicit in those compromises. 

So, while it appears that chainplates were inserted into this discussion as a throw-away, "e.g." side comment, none the less, from my personal point of view, the decisions that surround how chainplates are constructed represent an excellent case study on the thought process required to select almost for any specific element in the design cycle. The selection of a method to construct chainplates by necessity is a balancing act between conflicting factors including the initial cost and complexity to construct, structural requirements of the hull and rig, the ideal location for sail setting efficiency, the ability to move fore and aft along the decks, water tightness, reliability, and maintenance and a host of other potential less obvious factors such as access to particular material or quality fabricators. 

And to me, it is therefore helpful to first understand the nature of items like chainplates that involve a broad series of trade-offs and what those trade offs might be. So for example, it might be useful to understand that a chainplate can be designed to require a lot of easy to perform maintenance such as an escutcheon which requires caulking the opening in the deck on a regular basis vs. a more permanent solution which is less likely to be inspected as frequently and may be harder to seal once it does start to leak. Or another similar example might be external chainplates. External chainplates are harder to brace structurally, potentially compromise sailing ability, are more exposed to damage and leakage, and depending on the design, are more likely to work and fatigue. But on the flip side, they are inexpensive to fabricate, much easier to inspect and replace, and improve the ease of moving fore and aft along the deck. Another example of such a trade off is associated with the once popular 'Tee' chainplate that is literally glassed into the hull. This detail is inexpensive to construct and very strong, but it is wildly expensive to replace and potentially is much more prone to unexpected failure since it cannot be inspected and is likely to succumb to sudden failure due to crevice corrosion than a more exposed chainplate design. Chainplates that are exposed on the interior and bolted to a knee or bulkhead are easier to inspect or replace, but they are more likely to rot out that bulkhead and trade off a greater initial cost and the requirement for more precision in construction. And so on, just to name a few examples. 

The point of these examples is to emphasize that there are generally no one universally right, one-size-fits-all answer to these kinds of design decisions. But by discussing these types of things, as individuals we at least develop a better understanding of the trade offs, and can make an informed decision about the implications of the particular option we chose to accept.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

Jeff... 

Good points on the chain plate debate but why not open a thread dedicated to chain plates, their use, construction, and maintaining of it if you are some expert or believe you have some knowledge to share? 

Why talk about and discuss this on a thread about cruising vs those that argue about cruising without any real cruising under their belts?

What I see happening is bringing topics from other threads not relevant to the discussion at hand. There would be less arguments and disagreements if posters would adhere to the topic thread.

Surely I avoid discussions on this forum that I have nothing to do with or wish not to participate and just wished others would think before posting their replies as well. May I ask you on the 'Production Boats and the Limits' to edit the 'empty shell attack' made by Outbound?


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

guitarguy56 said:


> Jeff...
> 
> Good points on the chain plate debate but why not open a thread dedicated to chain plates, their use, construction, and maintaining of it if you are some expert or believe you have some knowledge to share?
> 
> ...


I understand that the mention of or discussion of chainplates may appear to be irrelevant, or may in fact be irrelevant to the title of the thread, but in informal discussions like these, peripherally related topics do get inserted as examples for points being discussed or simply as a reference to a prior discussion. They may be seen as disrupting the flow of the discourse, but they only become major distractions when they have sufficient interest to elicit enough of a give and take between members that they seemingly become a topic of their own. At that point, the fact that they attack that amount of discussion in theory makes them a valid topic even if seemingly misplaced.

Theoretically you are right that ideally these side comments should get taken to their own thread, but as a practical reality, sidebar discussions occur organically wherever they happen to occur and it it is not feasible or even desirable for the forums to have some kind of rule eliminating side discussions, or for that matter, for the moderators to wholesale move any post which appears to be out of the line with the title of the thread.

Please PM me a link to the comment that you think should be reviewed in the Production Boat thread and I will take a look at it.

Jeff


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

I find chainplates themselves offensive and insulting. I am all upset and put out. 

Could we please refer to them as 'rig attachment devices' moving forward? Or to be safe only talk about rowboats?

Thanks.


----------



## MarcStAug (Nov 2, 2014)

chall03 said:


> I find chainplates themselves offensive and insulting. I am all upset and put out.
> 
> Could we please refer to them as 'rig attachment devices' moving forward? Or to be safe only talk about rowboats?
> 
> Thanks.


HURRY! Off to the SAFE SPACE! :laugh:laugh:laugh


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

chall03 said:


> ... be safe only talk about rowboats?
> 
> Thanks.


That's a great idea and one for a thread... definitely a livelier discussion than the shhhh... chainplates!


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

I have an older fiberglass row boat. Whats the best way to strengthen the gunnel for you know, whatchmacallits,, rigging screw attachment? Thinking about deadeyes a lot lately.


----------



## newt (Mar 15, 2008)

My hubris has reached the level that I refused to acknowledge anybody but me exists, therefore I do not insult myself by insulting anybody else. Also my chain plates are made of a special alloy that is a trade secret, so I refuse to acknowledge that I have chain plates, so various low life's will not come around and try to get a scraping of metal, detecting my recipe. 
Finally, the internet cannot detect real cruisers, because only I know who I am and the rest of this is just an exercise in my mind. (since there is nobody but me- see sentence #1)
Now what were we arguing about?
Oh yeah- I going sailing this week! YEAH!


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

And I've been avoiding this thread because the title says it involves Real Cruisers writing poetry about Internet Arguers. 

Maybe the OP meant versus?


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

newt said:


> My hubris has reached the level that I refused to acknowledge anybody but me exists, therefore I do not insult myself by insulting anybody else. Also my chain plates are made of a special alloy that is a trade secret, so I refuse to acknowledge that I have chain plates, so various low life's will not come around and try to get a scraping of metal, detecting my recipe.
> Finally, the internet cannot detect real cruisers, because only I know who I am and the rest of this is just an exercise in my mind. (since there is nobody but me- see sentence #1)
> Now what were we arguing about?
> Oh yeah- I going sailing this week! YEAH!


Why not? Supposedly we are in nothing but a universe that's a hologram anyway... so theoretically your boat as well as mine is but an illusion! 

Controversial experiment sees no evidence that the universe is a hologram | Science | AAAS


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Sounds suspecishly like the rantings of a AI computer as it digitally manipulates it's USB port. Really!! Hubris is just in the mind.


----------



## Bill-Rangatira (Dec 17, 2006)

there one was a sailor from nantucket....

does this count as cruiser verse?


----------

