|
|
12-12-2017, 07:02
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Berlin - Germany
Boat: Dufour 35
Posts: 199
|
Pacific crossing decisions
We have our boat currently stored on the hard in the Caribbean and are planning to go through the Panama canal in early April and then want to continue our journey to the Marquesas.
After doing a lot of research we decided to leave out the Galapagos. Even if it looks like these are extremely beautiful and interesting islands, for us personally their fees feel like a rip-off. We'll just save the money as there are more than enough other places in the world that are not as expensive and complicated.
But leaving out the Galapagos lengthens the distance from Panama to Marquesas to about 3800nm. Our boat is not the slowest one and the longest distance we sailed so far was 2300nm (Atlantic crossing), so i'm pretty sure we could manage to do 3800nm as well if there is no other option.
But we would prefer to break this into two smaller cruises, and while looking at the charts again i came up with the idea to sail up to Cabo san Lucas in Mexico first (probably in a single or maybe two legs), then take some days for reprovisioning and resting and then head down to the Marquesas. This shortens the longest leg from 3800nm to 2600nm which feels very significant to me, but also means that the whole distance all in all is about 1000nm more. Which is also significant, because we're quite late in the season.
Also, looking at the pilot charts this means sailing through the Intertropical Convergence Zone and because of that i'm not sure if this is a good idea at all in the end. Unfortunately i can't access our cruising guides right now as they are stored on the boat so i would like to know if anyone had the same idea as we did and how it worked out in the end?
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 07:28
|
#2
|
cat herder, extreme blacksheep
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: furycame alley , tropics, mexico for now
Boat: 1976 FORMOSA yankee clipper 41
Posts: 18,967
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
why cabo?? it is the most expensive place in western world to provision. why not banderas bay, puerto vallarta. much more affordable, and more interesting environment.
folks leave for puddle jumping from all over west coastal mexico.
pacific puddle jump is a good rally. might consider it.
ictz has been crossed by many. also called doldrums and monsoonal trough.
can be sporty or dull.
ssb info and licensing for ham is available in puerto vallarta area. so is everything needed for the loosely organized pacific puddle jumping rally.
have fun and smooth sailing
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 07:34
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Fiji Airways/ Lake Ontario
Boat: Legend 37.5, 1968 Alcort Sunfish, Avon 310
Posts: 2,749
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Nobody I know ever said they wished they skipped Galapagos.
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 07:50
|
#4
|
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Solent, England
Boat: Moody 31
Posts: 18,398
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetepare
Nobody I know ever said they wished they skipped Galapagos.
|
Perhaps, but I was watching a YT video of a young couple explaining that the fees plus antifoul job was going to cost them 2000 USD hence the decision to skip and sail past.
Seems a great shame but understandable if you are young and on a limited budget.
Pete
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 09:18
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Santa Cruz
Boat: SAnta Cruz 27
Posts: 6,683
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
The leg from Panama to Galapagos is usually light and variable headwinds, and you will burn through most if not all of your fuel getting there. If you don't want to stop, it may take you an extra week. Usually you will pick up the trades soon out of the Galapagos and not need much fuel from there to the Marquesas. While its a long passage, the sailing is pretty easy and relaxed.
OTOH, the leg from Panama to Mexico is light and shifty to Costa Rica, then mostly headwinds, with the probability of strong offshore winds near the coast in places. You will probably need fuel by the time you get to southern Costa Rica. Once you make it to Mexico, you will have to go through the ITCZ to get to the Marquesas--more light winds with squalls.
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 11:01
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Miami
Boat: Boatless
Posts: 1,578
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
While I think that the Galapagos are over priced Don's advice about the need to refuel is valid. We had almost no wind for 5 days off the Galapagos and needed to refuel. We took the 'one-island 28 day check in' option that was much cheaper. We just went to Isabella and the cost was $1,700 for the boat five crew.
Bureaucracy is rampant and it took 8 days to get permission to buy fuel. The locals will try and get you to buy fuel without official permission but one cruiser who did buy without permission was ordered to sea at 12 hours notice during a 10 day period when there was no wind.
They are quite rightly paranoid about the cleanliness of the boat, inside and the bottom so it is essential to make sure you have cleaned the bottom carefully and have the required mosquito certificate.
Going via Mexico looks much harder than going straight to the Marquesas or stopping to refuel in Isabella. By the time you have motored to Mexico and checked in there you will not have saved much money.
The whole problem with the trip is getting across the ITCZ which takes patience or fuel.
__________________
Phil
"Remember, experience only means that you screw-up less often."
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 12:25
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumping around the Caribbean
Boat: Valiant 40
Posts: 4,625
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
The Galapagos are absolutely amazing and unlike anything else, anywhere else, that you'll ever experience. They are magical.
Look at it this way, you couldn't hop on a jet and travel and stay there for that $2,000, so the cost is not completely ridiculous. They work extremely hard to keep the environment as unpolluted and undamaged as possible, and it's pretty amazing when you get there to find 97% of the land area uninhabited and virtually untouched.
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 16:54
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: W Carib
Boat: Wildcat 35, Hobie 33
Posts: 13,479
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetepare
Nobody I know ever said they wished they skipped Galapagos.
|
Friends of mine made the decision to skip the Glapagos while sailing anyway due to the cost and beauracracy. They took a tour out of Ecuador instead. [emoji16]
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 16:59
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Trunk (boot) of my car
Boat: Tinker Traveller...a dozen feet of bluewater awesomeness!
Posts: 1,230
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
I was curious enough to look at google earth to see what alternatives there are to a stop in the Galápagos. Not a whole lot, but I found this article interesting and maybe it will be of some help:
https://www.sailmagazine.com/cruisin...peruvian-coast
On second thought, the Ecuadorian coast seems to make more sense, as there isn't a whole lot going on in the far north of Peru on the coast:
http://yachtpals.com/cruising/ecuador
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 17:27
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bellingham
Boat: Outbound 44
Posts: 9,319
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
I can't see adding a tough passage up to Mex to get to the Marquesas. If you leave the Las Perlas on a strong northerly you'll get at least a few days worth of good mileage. Then take your time making your way down and past the Galapagos, conserving fuel when you can. We only had about 24 hrs of motoring to get to the Galapagos and would probably have spent another 24+ to get past them. After that it's a good sail west most years.
The Galapagos are very cool and I'm glad we stopped on our way west. That said, the pricing, hassles and restrictions are over the top. If you really wanted to get a good tour of the Galapagos you are better off doing it via a small cruise ship.
__________________
Paul
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 18:06
|
#11
|
Marine Service Provider
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 911
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Quote:
Perhaps, but I was watching a YT video of a young couple explaining that the fees plus antifoul job was going to cost them 2000 USD hence the decision to skip and sail past.
Seems a great shame but understandable if you are young and on a limited budget.
|
I watched that Youtube video too, yesterday, and I was surprised at the prices quoted. This lead me to Google further and found a wealth of information on noonsite where the costs seemed to be a fair bit less than the $2k quoted, however it also talks of cleaning, antifoul, placquards and fumigation so I guess with all that and depending on the number of crew, you could indeed be up for $2k.
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 19:05
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,075
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tetepare
Nobody I know ever said they wished they skipped Galapagos.
|
The SV Zatara family wished they skipped it.
"dirty water"
"over priced"
"rip off"
(I still want to see a blue-footed booby dance in person)
...
Skip to about 6:50 in this video:
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 19:38
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Santa Cruz
Boat: SAnta Cruz 27
Posts: 6,683
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Just another example of why you should go cruising now instead of waiting. In 1973 it cost nothing to check in and there were no restrictions on where you could go. In 1992 a week in the Galapagos cost $150 in fees. The Port Captain wanted us to buy diesel from him for $1/gal instead of $0.25/gal at the gas station.
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 19:59
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bellingham
Boat: Outbound 44
Posts: 9,319
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyan
The SV Zatara family wished they skipped it.
"dirty water"
"over priced"
"rip off"
(I still want to see a blue-footed booby dance in person)
...
|
Calling the Galapagos a bad place because of dirty water is just disingenuous.
__________________
Paul
|
|
|
12-12-2017, 21:09
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,075
|
Re: Pacific crossing decisions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul L
Calling the Galapagos a bad place because of dirty water is just disingenuous.
|
"dirty" was probably just their unfortunate term for "full of plankton"
It is seasonal.
The plankton shows up in the colder months.
|
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Advertise Here
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vendor Spotlight |
|
|
|