Reaching Hull Speed . . .

[zeehag]

i love gaining speeds in excess of hull speed, but then i ride a brick out in the deep blue ocean.
but in the carib is waayy too pretty to speed thru it....5 kts is just about right..

[hard-a-ground]

I'm on the Baba 40 track in my heart. The intangibles win me over i guess. There is plenty of evidence this boat would be a great friend to have.

Maureen wants me to show her a pilot house boat - I am thinking the 40 foot Brewer Pilothouse might be worth a look. The Baba pilothouse boats are out of my price range unfortunately.

[Randyonr3]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

Bigger boats are going to slow you down in other ways. There's a lot more to take care of, and a lot more that can break and screw your sailing up. You'll have to have a larger crew, and if the water gets rough enough that could just mean that more people are so seasick they're worse than useless -- on deck they're a safety hazard to themselves and others. You have a jammed sail, you're going to slow down or stop no matter what the size of the boat is.

I dont quite understand the "more crew" or "more work" issues that people talk about in larger boats.. its actually easier to handle a 40 foot boat over a 22 foot. the 40 foot boat will stay where you put it..
I single hand my 42, and race with people who single hand their 50s and 60 foot boats without a problem.. Did I say Race, Yes, in full compitition and when something goes wrong, hit the auto button and strap a harness on and fix the issue..

[hard-a-ground]

I work with the 500 sq. ft. per sail rule offered by Eric Hiscock as a criteria. Not so much the boat, but the sail management gets tough with large sails according to Eric. Two years ago I chartered a boat out of Puerto Rico... tropical storm hit us out in the open ocean. Yep, entire crew were down below leaving me and one other inexperienced person there. Hit auto and work the sails, that was my experience. By the way, is it always true the person responsible for the boat escapes sea sickness, or am I just lucky?

[Play Actor]

Hard-a-Ground, check out the Baba Owner's group at baba-l : Baba-Panda-Tashiba Sailboat Users Group. Some of the folks with Baba 40's can give you real answers to your questions about hull speed.

Based on the performance of our Baba 35 over the last 20 odd years, I think you are greatly underestimating the speed of the Baba 40. We have no trouble hitting our hull speed of close to 7 knots in anything over about 12 knots of wind. I'm sure the 40 is faster. The formulas don't tell you much about how the boats behave under real world conditions. Under typical Caribbean conditions with 15 to 20 knots of wind, we outsail most of the lighter, longer, higher SA/D boats of "modern" design, which doubtless have much higher theoretical hull speeds. We can carry more sail in the relatively heavy seas, and we have momentum on our side when plowing into head seas. With the full keel, we make less leeway and end up out pointing them, too, even though we are sailing farther off the apparent wind. I'm not trying to start thread drift into light versus heavy or full versus fin; just illustrating the point that design statistics don't tell you the whole story.

If you're in love with the Baba/Tashiba/Panda 40, buy one. You won't be disappointed, and I think you have good taste in boats.

[zeehag]

is not necessarily true that larger boats need more crew.
i find my 41 ketch a lot easier to handle than the 37 ft sloop i sailed in gulf of mexico 2009-2010. easier to handle means possibility of longer watches without exhaustion-even in BIG winds, as we found out. longer watches yields more rest for off watch, and more enjoyment of the sail.
my ketch would be no problem to solo, but i prefer one or 2 others along to save attitude and for the fun and experiences/adventures.
i use no one else's criteria for sail or any other thing...i heartily adhere to reef early --especially where big winds are known to be regular -- eg--north of cabo san lucas, where we met 60 kts wind and were sailing 8 + kts boat speed. was fun. doesnt often happen to attain hull speed with a formosa with old cruising sails...but it does prevent a knockdown when these come up so quickly, and with no warning.
i9f something goes wrong--as we had something fail -- you do what you have to do and with what there is, right there to work with, and make it continue. dont have to slow down--if problem is serious enough, just DO it.
and yes, most larger boats with cruising capabilities and good set up will not need human hands on wheel for long periods of time. that allows time for repairs, trimming sails, dropping sails, adding sails....whatever you want to play with on deck. and someone else can cook for you . and ye can catch fish without slowing or placing boat into irons, as i had to do from the sloop to boat a fish. i could boat my catch in my boat while underway as we were, without changing anything. was a gas. is sooo easy --i hadnt a clue, as my other sails were in sloop--is a lot more work, and a cutter--the ketch is a lot easier than either and both.

[ddsailor25]

Reaching hull speed is always nice, but we've had some of our best days out on the water making 2kts just relaxing.

[carstenb]

It's always a thrill to go hull speed - even better exceed it.

Regarding different size of crews, I single hand our 40 footer on occasion, though usually we are two on board. My neighbor singlehands her 53 footer.

Amount of crew is a function of the skill of the sailor, rig of the boat, and how many you invite along.

Trying to draw a linear speed "curve" from hull speed/wind backwards is an exercise in futility. There are just too many variables.

[Whaubner]

I would 2nd buy the boat you love, and she will love you back.

Also we have owned a 30,40,50 footer over the years. For sure the 50 footer takes a little more time to clean and maintain but she is by far the easiest boat to handle in light winds or heavy seas. All three we have a crew of 2 people. She is a balanced sail under full canvas or reefed.

If I am at sea the 50 footer is the one I want to be in.

-w

[denverd0n]

Originally Posted by ddsailor25

Reaching hull speed is always nice, but we've had some of our best days out on the water making 2kts just relaxing.

There you go.

I understand the challenges of racing. Enjoy it, in fact. But when it comes to cruising, I have never been able to figure out why some people want their sailboats to go as fast as possible, and if the wind won't cooperate then fire up the iron genny. If you're in that big of a hurry, why are you even in a sailboat to begin with? Relax and enjoy the journey.

[zeehag]

only advantage of a fast hull speed, other than racing, is when marlin fishing. you will need hull speed for that one.

[mrohr]

Well ,there are plenty of reasons that faster passages are desirable ; think: impending weather, exhausted crew, sick or injured passengers, shortened stores,arriving in daylight hours,grumpy spouse,etc. etc.. However i agree with others that the boat and the experience itself should trump most of those listed in this post. Otherwise just fly,nothing goes to weather like a 747.
Speaking of going to weather,the OP is proposing a passage directly into the teeth of the strong easterly trades over open water in which case a weatherly design should be an big advantage to those in a hurry to get in.
Thinking about this further,a grumpy wife trumps all others. I would rather face pirates.

[denverd0n]

Originally Posted by mrohr

Otherwise just fly,nothing goes to weather like a 747.

Well put.

Yes, there are times when going as fast as possible is necessary. No doubt about that. But if that's one of your primary criteria for choosing a cruising sailboat, then I think you're kind of missing the whole point.

(My two cents worth, anyway, and it didn't even cost you that much!)

[zeehag]

"Well ,there are plenty of reasons that faster passages are desirable ; think: impending weather, exhausted crew, sick or injured passengers, shortened stores,arriving in daylight hours,grumpy spouse,etc. etc."

these are personal choice faults.
is easy to plan these out properly.
with sick crew--i have had that--one goes into port. let crew find alternative transportation--granted is difficult to do in open ocean---
exhaustion is fault of capt not dealing with watches in a realistic manner.
weather-get real--is easy to look at potential weather for up to a week in advance. bad weather is something that is mostly preventable, at least as far as named stuff is concerned--and learn the local characteristics of weather before going to a new area...might have some surprises you dont want to meet--here there are heavy winds in spring and fall--katabatics in spring--can be interesting if not prepared--and even if you are, can be a bitch. off baj are chubascos in spring and fall, inside golfo de california, commonly called sea of cortes, has northers--strong winds from north to cool off the gulf in fall, as well as to warm it in spring...florida has tboomers....
provisioning--store up for a 2 week adventure if it is a short passage--too much beats too little as far as food and water are concerned. i plan for almost a month when i go 300 miles or more in one leg. (but, then , i have room for that option)
arriving in daylight hours is easiy done by preplanning the passages and leaving in a timely manner so as to arrive not in total darkness.....
many things do able by CHOICE of the skipper/owner/planner.

if you wish to sail faster than hull speed, go to airlines for ticketing--monohulls dont do passages faster than average -- hull speed is more or less 7 kts. good luck in your fast escapes... try air. i found i actually reached hull sped on pasages inmy own boat mebbe 4 times in 1500 miles from sd to here--onc with 60+ kt winds, and once while riding prefrontal winds north of ensenada......and some other times under engine power....LOL
in gom, opb, we reached hull speed whenever we sailed thru tboomers and storms of frontal origin....
remember, hull speed on most monos works out to around 7 kts per hour.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by hard-a-ground

So what are pro/con of reaching hull speed at reasonable wind speeds? I am thinking Valiant 47 versus Baba 40 for example... Hull speeds are 8.5 kts and 7.87 kts respectively... If I assume the V47 can reach hull speed at ~16 knots(close reach) wind speed while the Baba reaches hull speed at ~19.2 knots wind speed... True? don't know...estimating based on SA/Disp. It would follow that if I want to sail from Culebra to St. Croix... ~51 miles. And if the wind were 12 kts i would estimate the V47 would make 6.4 kts (12/16*8.5) while the Baba would make 4.9 kts(12/19.2*7.87). Over eight hours, the V47 would make St. Croix while the Baba would require 10.4 hrs. This seems to be an important aspect of a cruising boat - reaching hull speed at reasonable wind velocity since it would yield better port-to-port distances. What I am concluding is that the V47 should travel 30% faster over the bulk of the "common" wind range... until hull speed is reached and that controls the problem. Is this on track, or am I missing something?

The two ways I am comfortable with for comparing relative speeds are the PHRF ratings and the Leonard/Starzinger formula.

L/S formula is Daily Average Mileage =24*(2.62 + 0.066*SA/D+ 0.051*LWL ) obtained from their website and based on reviewing the logs of a bunch of boats they met while cruising and running the data thru a mathematical regression to determine what the important variables are.

BABA - PHRF-186, L/S-128nm/d, HS-7.9kt w/ 2.0nm/gal, 4.5nm/gal@5kt
Valiant - PHRF-96, L/S-140nm/d, HS-8.5kt w/ 2.1nm/gal, 4.9nm/gal@5kt

Using PHRF as a predictor the Valiant should beat the Baba by about 75min on a 51nm passage. Using the L/S formula about 1/2hr. My guess is that if you push the boat hard it will be closer to the PHRF number, and if you cruise along it will be closer to the L/S number.

Related issues to consider are that the Baba is built a lot heavier than the Valiant when you adjust for length, beam and ballast ratios. This should translate into better strength and motion comfort but no guarantees.

That tradeoff can be seen in the relative fuel economy of these boats. The fuel economy numbers were obtained using Gerr formula. Though I think the real world numbers would be better, the relative fuel economy of the two is probably about right.