Boat length NOT increasing over the decades

[Olddan1943]

Originally Posted by toddster8

The bad news is, as you might have noticed, jet skis are taking over the world. From the brief summary, it sounds as if once the vermin are accounted for, larger boats are gradually winning out. I didn't look at any raw data though.

I wonder of other Sea Grant colleges compile similar statistics?

What's nice about jet skis is, you can string them together and tow a bunch back to shore.

[Clivevon]

Sorry, cant agree. Boats absolutely have got bigger over recent decades. For example - during the seventies, my Westerly 36 foot Conway design was the flagship of their fleet - the biggest boat they built. Nowadays, 42 footers and above are commonplace.

Not sure why that should be the case. Are we all relatively richer - or have boats become relatively cheaper? Better mass production techniques? Or is it all down to roller reefing and in-mast furling?

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Clivevon

Sorry, cant agree. Boats absolutely have got bigger over recent decades. For example - during the seventies, my Westerly 36 foot Conway design was the flagship of their fleet - the biggest boat they built. Nowadays, 42 footers and above are commonplace.

Not sure why that should be the case. Are we all relatively richer - or have boats become relatively cheaper? Better mass production techniques? Or is it all down to roller reefing and in-mast furling?

I tend to agree, which is why I was surprised at the near-static LOA from this specific dataset (American, west coast circumnavigators). Even though it is quite specific, I’d expect the overall increasing LOA to show up here as well. It doesn’t. But maybe their is something odd about this group.

The much more limited ARC data that I retrieved shows a significantly higher average LOA in general (upper 40s vs 42). But if there’s a trend for increasing size over those 10 years, it’s very slight.

[toddster8]

OK, I couldn't resist free data. Even though I am NOT spending the day in the office. REALLY.

Of course there is some bias here, in that the smallest classes don't really have to register, unless motorized.

One thing that really jumps out, when quickly glancing through the data, is that the sailboats are much older than all other types of boats.

[Nanamuk]

As one of those west coast circumnavigaters (in a 35 ft Endurance) my thoughts are that owners of smaller boats are out cruising longer than those with the bigger boats because of the increased cost and work involved in maintaining a larger boat. When we spent 3 years going around the Pacific (Canada,Mexico,New Zealand and home via Japan) 1982 - 85, Nanamuk was one of the larger boats in the fleet with Vancouver 27's, West Sail 32's, 26 ft Folk boats and the like were more the norm. On the circumnavigation, '94 to '01, we were among the smallest boats, especially considering there were now 2 kids along. Very few of the 48 ft or larger boats we met on or travels completed circumnavigations, with most staying in the Pacific and either selling the boats or having them delivered home by ship or paid crew.
If you look at the round the world rallies on the other hand all the boats are huge - to keep up the pace they need to be!! I don't consider them long term cruisers, committed to the live style so would not include them in a consideration of is the size of an average cruising boat.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Nanamuk

As one of those west coast circumnavigaters (in a 35 ft Endurance) my thoughts are that owners of smaller boats are out cruising longer than those with the bigger boats because of the increased cost and work involved in maintaining a larger boat. When we spent 3 years going around the Pacific (Canada,Mexico,New Zealand and home via Japan) 1982 - 85, Nanamuk was one of the larger boats in the fleet with Vancouver 27's, West Sail 32's, 26 ft Folk boats and the like were more the norm. On the circumnavigation, '94 to '01, we were among the smallest boats, especially considering there were now 2 kids along. Very few of the 48 ft or larger boats we met on or travels completed circumnavigations, with most staying in the Pacific and either selling the boats or having them delivered home by ship or paid crew.
If you look at the round the world rallies on the other hand all the boats are huge - to keep up the pace they need to be!! I don't consider them long term cruisers, committed to the live style so would not include them in a consideration of is the size of an average cruising boat.

Thanks Nanamuk, that would be another fascinating piece of information; charting cruising duration and LOA. The common perspective I pick up on forums like these is that bigger boats allow for easier cruising. If this is true I’d think it would lead to the opposite; that bigger boats would lend themselves to longer terms.

My own biased () view is that there is an optimal size that is neither too big, nor too small. The Goldilocks of LOA for long-term cruisers, if you will. I think that’s what the circumnavigation data is suggesting … but I could always be wrong .

[estarzinger]

Mike O,

This is in fact generally consistent with what Beth found - she three times in her boat writing career analyzed decent sample sizes of then current cruising boats. The circumnavigators were pretty steady in the low 40's, while the 'serious but less than circumnavigation' rose in size (from like 35 to 45). The ARC has typically been larger on average than the general fleet.

I personally agree with the Goldilocks theory - somewhere under 35' is 'too small for most for the long term' and somewhere over 52' is 'too big (and expensive) for most couples to run for the long term'. There are ofc exceptional couples at both ends of the spectrum, but I think for the middle of the normal curve of long term cruising couples there is a (relatively large) sweet spot.

That is generally considering boats after roller furling jibs came into acceptance. I would expect average sizes (and the sweet spot) before that to be smaller, but that was before our time. And . . . thinking . . . . perhaps not, because the distribution of rigs was different back then (more two mast rigs) which made the manual sail handling easier.

As to fewer circumnavigations - there is no mystery at all - the predominate effect is that the Indian Ocean has essentially been blocked for most tropical cruisers. The pirates created a no-go zone up the Red Sea and many tropical folks don't want to attempt a great cape/Africa post Mandela. You can ship the boat past this blockage point, however many people consider that not a 'circumnavigation', and is also considered expensive for many.

[Heath68]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

"circumnavigators don't represent the full cruising community very well in person or in boat choice, "They" are a different lot for sure...."

Jim

Is there a "circumnavigators forum"? As I'm a bit of a wannabe 😊

[Heath68]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Beneteau start at 20ft, 25ft, 31.5 etc etc... if they weren't selling they'd not be building.. but then its a different scene in the EU.
Imagine other EU builders are the same.

http://www.beneteau.com/en/first/first-25

Mike is the data giving any indication of country of origin? Boatman's comment gives me the thought that if early manufacturers were EU based and small than say manufacturers designing for the USA market. Early US buyers would have small boats before then changing them for larger ones making it seem like the world's changed when only it's the US? It also might show that the US market has a disproportionate amount of cruisers to circumnavigators and ROW buyers are still in smaller boats and travelling more?
As a newbie into the market, my initial impression was that bigger boats (cats to me) lived in the US.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Heath68

Mike is the data giving any indication of country of origin? Boatman's comment gives me the thought that if early manufacturers were EU based and small than say manufacturers designing for the USA market. Early US buyers would have small boats before then changing them for larger ones making it seem like the world's changed when only it's the US? It also might show that the US market has a disproportionate amount of cruisers to circumnavigators and ROW buyers are still in smaller boats and travelling more?
As a newbie into the market, my initial impression was that bigger boats (cats to me) lived in the US.

The Latitude dataset doesn’t specifically contain nationality info, although I think it’s reasonable to assume that most are Americans since it is specifically charting circumnavigators who have departed from the US west coast.

The ARC data does include nationality. I haven’t tried to analyze it from that standpoint though. Perhaps I’ll play with that. Although as estarzinger points out, ARC boats tend to be larger than the average.

[buzzstar]

Does data on circumnavigating vessels really define whether or not boats have gotten longer over decades? This is actually a question, not an answer, although I do have doubts about the conclusion to be drawn from the data used for the analysis.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Mike O,

This is in fact generally consistent with what Beth found - she three times in her boat writing career analyzed decent sample sizes of then current cruising boats. The circumnavigators were pretty steady in the low 40's, while the 'serious but less than circumnavigation' rose in size (from like 35 to 45). The ARC has typically been larger on average than the general fleet.

I personally agree with the Goldilocks theory - somewhere under 35' is 'too small for most for the long term' and somewhere over 52' is 'too big (and expensive) for most couples to run for the long term'. There are ofc exceptional couples at both ends of the spectrum, but I think for the middle of the normal curve of long term cruising couples there is a (relatively large) sweet spot.

That is generally considering boats after roller furling jibs came into acceptance. I would expect average sizes (and the sweet spot) before that to be smaller, but that was before our time. And . . . thinking . . . . perhaps not, because the distribution of rigs was different back then (more two mast rigs) which made the manual sail handling easier.

As to fewer circumnavigations - there is no mystery at all - the predominate effect is that the Indian Ocean has essentially been blocked for most tropical cruisers. The pirates created a no-go zone up the Red Sea and many tropical folks don't want to attempt a great cape/Africa post Mandela. You can ship the boat past this blockage point, however many people consider that not a 'circumnavigation', and is also considered expensive for many.

Thanks for this estarzinger. It’s good to know previous analysis of similar datasets found similar results. I have no where near the experience of you or Beth or many others here, but I’ve come to appreciate that the right boat is neither too big nor too small. All too often the discussion on these forums pushes the Bigger is Better narrative. Or alternatively, the focus is on Go Small, Go Now. I think the best answer is to be found somewhere in the middle.

Too big becomes too much of a physical and financial burden. Too small means the vessel is also difficult physically, but in different ways. Too small means it is also harder to be self-sufficient for long periods.

Your comments about the Indian Ocean barrier certainly echo Cornell’s. He also cites the increasingly erratic weather patterns due to climate change. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on the latter. It’s something I’ve wondered about.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by buzzstar

Does data on circumnavigating vessels really define whether or not boats have gotten longer over decades? This is actually a question, not an answer, although I do have doubts about the conclusion to be drawn from the data used for the analysis.

I’ve been very explicit in saying all this analysis shows is that LOA has not changed over time using this one specific dataset. It is specific to NA west coast circumnavigators. It does go back into the 1970s (and earlier), right up to the present, so it is a good picture of this group.

It does not necessarily extrapolate, but it may … I just don’t know b/c I lack similar datasets from other regions.

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I’ve been very explicit in saying all this analysis shows is that LOA has not changed over time using this one specific dataset. It is specific to NA west coast circumnavigators. It does go back into the 1970s (and earlier), right up to the present, so it is a good picture of this group.

It does not necessarily extrapolate, but it may … I just don’t know b/c I lack similar datasets from other regions.

Good reply. I think I was overreacting to the thread title and providing too little to credit your actual original post. Was there data on the ages of the boats, the ages of the captains, or the duration (days) of the voyages? Thanks.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

He also cites the increasingly erratic weather patterns due to climate change. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on the latter.

I never had that conversation with anyone - eg them saying they were not completing or not starting a circumnavigation because of climate change issues. It has just never ever come up in that context, so I personally dont see it as any sort of factor in number of circumnavigations.

I have had the conversation with people frustrated with lack of steady trade winds in the Pacific and 'blaming' it on climate change. However, my personal impression is that the Pacific has always been less steady than the classic books made it out to be. You read the books and think you are going to have an absolutely steady wind, not touch the sheets for 3 weeks, but in the real world that is just not how it is - there are always (and have always been) squall lines and convergence zones and north/south shifts. There is ofc more sail handling in the southern ocean than in the tropics, but the books paint a misleading impression of the tropics.

The above is not to say that climate change has not had any effect on the wind fields - I'v see some data which suggests it has - but really nothing which should significantly change people's circumnavigation experiences.