Long distance sailing in small yachts

[JoeRobertJr]

Great thought-provoking thread. For my wife and I, I have been researching mostly ketches in the 36-40 ft range, with the Pearson 424 at the upper length limit. I just added this 36' Mariner ketch to my list, but given the narrow beam, and that some of that LOA is bowsprit, I kinda discounted it as probably too small.

http://www.boats.com/sailing-boats/1...dard%20listing

You all have me reconsidering. If I were actually ready to buy, I would probably ask to see her in person.

[Tricolor]

Very nice, sailing history.

[Jim Cate]

The advantage of a small boat is that it will sail everywhere even on light winds

IMO there is no inherent light air capability endowed by being small. On the contrary, the considerably taller masts on larger boats will at times reach up to w here there is useful wind, whilst near the sea it is calm.

Light air performance is largely governed by SA to D ratio and SA to wetted area ratio, neither of which is enhanced by "smallness" per se.

Jim

[CptCrunchie]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

....the considerably taller masts on larger boats will at times reach up to w here there is useful wind, whilst near the sea it is calm.

I believe that's called Wind Shear; that the wind slows near the water.

Then there's the true wind twist; that depending on what point of sail you are on, apparent wind due to wind shear can hinder or assist the upper parts of a taller sail, particularly with the slight wind speed increase above the spreaders. Smaller boats don't get that benefit.

Then add hull design by its length, as in, the hole it creates as the boat travels through the water, better known as 'hull speed'. Most think this is a mathematical formula. While that calculation can get you close, your boat will show you much quicker and far more precisely.

Displacement boats moving through the water create a trough that the boat sits in. Surprisingly, the bow is actually all drag, where the stern is actually where a boats 'hull speed' is created.

The longer the waterline, the deeper the hole it creates. The deeper the hole, the more the stern wants to slide down the wave. So, if you have a bow that likes to slice the waves, your hull speed will be slightly more than a shape of a bow that has more drag.

Bringing this to boat size, the longer the boat, the bigger the trough it creates, so the faster the stern will slide down into the hole. Smaller boats make smaller troughs.

Adding these two factors, bigger boat utilize those benefits. While there are a few shorter boats 'by design' will counter the 'waterline rules' principle, overall, bigger is definitely better in my world.

[Paul L]

How about a nice Moore 24 for a circumnavigation. Webb Chiles boat Ganett sailed when he was over 70. Of course he's done many circumnavigations as well as gone through many wives. Fast, small and romantic

[robert sailor]

If your on a tight budget, small boats make lots of sense. The cost to buy and maintain a boat go up exponentially with length so if your trying to stretch a buck go small. It’s a wonderful option for younger people because as you get older you start wanting more creature comforts and you pay dearly for them.

[Tricolor]

Independent of a budget it make sense to limit how much i want to spend on a so cost intensive project as to circumnavigate. By counting also the cents and not only the dollars/euros it becomes in reach of a lot more people, young and old.

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Tricolor

Independent of a budget it make sense to limit how much i want to spend on a so cost intensive project as to circumnavigate. By counting also the cents and not only the dollars/euros it becomes in reach of a lot more people, young and old.

Oh, are you planning a circumnavigation in a small boat?

[Tricolor]

No me not. Small yachts can bring a circumnavigation within reach of maybe more people. I only will watch them from the sideline.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

If your on a tight budget, small boats make lots of sense. The cost to buy and maintain a boat go up exponentially with length so if your trying to stretch a buck go small. It’s a wonderful option for younger people because as you get older you start wanting more creature comforts and you pay dearly for them.

My approach has always been to get the smallest boat I can live with. I suggest figureing out what one actually needs (not wants), then get the boat that suits these needs.

Too often people approach the question of “which boat?” from the perspective of “how much can I afford?” This approach tends to maximize size and complexity. This leads to the expense curve Robert mentions. Viewing the question from the needs perspective lets you focus in on what’s actually important to you and your crew.

This approach also means it is possible to go too small. As with most things in life, the best answer often lies somewhere in the middle of two extremes. Too big means high costs and complexity. Too small means insufficient size for storage, tankage, seaworthiness, and basic living and sailing comfort.

[laika]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Too small means insufficient size for storage, tankage, seaworthiness, and basic living and sailing comfort.

That can be true, but we'd first have to agree on what "small" is

Beyond smaller boats making slower passages and thus being more exposed to wx, they are not inherently less safe or seaworthy. Additionally, in some situations, such as upwind into a heavy chop, it may be more of a struggle to make way with a shorter, lighter waterline.

The living and comfort thing, for sure. Everyone's threshold is different. For us (2) on a 27' and on the youngish end of the age curve, our threshold is about 3-4 months of active cruising before we start wistfully thinking about land and stability. Conversely, when living aboard solo w/ dog for 5 years full time and it never felt too small.

Storage and tankage is a crapshoot. Our 27' was built for passagemaking so storage abounds. We manage to have most of the small luxuries the bigger boats do and still have empty lockers.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

My approach has always been to get the smallest boat I can live with. I suggest figureing out what one actually needs (not wants), then get the boat that suits these needs.

......

There's some real issues with this approach. Most potential cruisers facing the question don't have the experience to really know. They are going by their own, often romantic, notion of what cruising is. When you look at experienced cruisers buying a new boat to cruise it is usually a larger one.

Then there's the scale we use for 'I can live with'. It reminds me of those 1 to 10 scales in the doctors office to measure your pain. One man's 4 is another man's 8. Since most cruising is done in couples, if you want both parties to be content 5+ years out it is usually pretty important to move from camping on the boat to a boat that is a home.

[nortonscove]

My determining factor would first be cost and then be what can be handled by two of us. Given those limitations I think we all pick which works for us. I can't say for sure that I wouldn't own the biggest Rassy or Oyster I could handle without a crew. As it is I'm happy enough with my 40 footer.

[Cpt Mark]

For me, my requirements are fairly simple. Standing headroom throughout the boat, great engine access, and small enough to be easily singlehanded. Even with 2 people on board, s**t happens and it may be that one person is left to do everything. That has happened to me before.

My last boat was a Landfall 39 (leaky leaky make) and was heavy and wonderful for living and sailing on. She was built like a tank so while not fast, could put up with anything including the 2 typhoons she'd already been through.

Current boat is a 35' catamaran which has flat decks, easily sailed solo and meets all the other needs. Being I'm disabled at this point a flat, relatively stable surface is key for me.



I once sailed a Deerfoot 68. What a piece of S**T that boat was. Looked gorgeous but construction was sub par. Anyway, this boat was created to be the "ideal" cruising boat for a retired couple. Hmm, huge main, hank on jib need I say more?

[dcstrng]

Originally Posted by Cpt Mark

For me, my requirements are fairly simple. Standing headroom throughout the boat, great engine access, and small enough to be easily singlehanded. ... it may be that one person is left to do everything. That has happened to me before...

Yep -- As I recall Don Street used to say you needed 5000# displacement per person (may not be right, but something like that). I don’t know if he was right or not, and that always seemed excessive to me, but I know going too large has probably stifled as many dreams as “too much” anything else. If A/C, hot and cold running maids and the ability to power into a near typhoon are important to the skipper, there is a vessel out there that will do it – but I’m belatedly of the school that says that anything not on the boat, can’t break, bend or be misplaced. I directly blame my infatuation with a corpulent ketch (over 12,000# per person) for suppressing the dream to leave and go – comfortable, but there always something more to refurbish, fix, rewire or overhaul… but it may just have been the skipper.

I think my all-time perfect boat was the B24 I recently had – but I’m a now wide-body and for grandma and me together it was a bit cramped, but sweet to sail and uncommonly sturdy, and that’s where my heart was; but not everyone truly enjoys life that primitive (my idea of motorcycle camping used to be sleeping on the bike) so I do understand there are different priorities for different folks. I just wonder if I’d have been cruising these past 30-35 years (instead of just sailing in circles) if my priorities at the time had been closer to Robin Graham or Peter Tangvald than aspiring to emulate the Dashews.

Could-a-would-a-should-a…