Can't Wrap my Mind Around this "Bluewater" Thing!

[Southern Star]

Dave (goboatingnow), I suspect the principle reasons that many more people today are making significant ocean passages/circumnavigations than in the 60's have more to do with the improvements in technology, rather than the inherent seaworthiness of the yachts themselves. Here's my top ten list (in no particular order) for technological advancements that have made voyaging MUCH easier and SAFER than in the 60's:

1. GPS/Chartplotters versus Sextant: Much less skill is required in order to get much more accurate fixes.

2. Solar panels/wind generators: Allow sufficient electricity offshore to not only improve diet and comfort (refrigeration, fans etc.), but also safey (radar, chart plotters, electric autopilots etc.).

3. Efficient/reliable roller reefing: Dramatically eases sail trim for varying conditions; reduces risk of going on the foredeck to change sails.

4. ST winches: Again, eases sail trim.

5. EPIRBS/Satphones: Dramatically increases chances of rescue if the worst occurs.

6. Watermakers: No need for strict rationing for consumption, nor to avoid fresh water showers.

7. Better weather forecasting: And better equipment for obtaining GRIB files etc. while offshore.

8. Electric anchor windlasses : And the electrical reserves to use them permit sailors to use larger and more efficent anchors.

9. Better and more readily available safety equipment: life rafts, life slings, series drogues, production sea anchors, harnesses with inflatable life vests, etc., etc.

10. Crusing rallies: safety in numbers.

One could also speak about the number of available yachts at reasonable prices. Fiberglass hulls and decks last much longer and cost much less (and require less skill) to maintain than wooden ones. This means that there is a HUGE used market of boats that are large enough to cruise in comfort and that, due to the increased supply, are cheap in relative terms.

Can we also say that the design of most modern yachts are also inherently safer? In most cases, no. The report on the Fastnet disaster reviewed stability and noted that beamier yachts that were only then becoming popular, tended to be much less likely to (or at least, much slower to) return upright in the case of a capsize. The diagrams in the report (as I recall) showed the ideal as a relatively narrow hull with relatively slack bilges, significant rocker and a full keel.

Alfredj has already referred to the MAIB (Marine Accident Investigation Branch) report into the loss of life on a Beneteau Oceanis 390. This boat, due to increased beam carried well aft, relatively flat underbody and relatively shallow draft with a wing keel, mirrors the design of most 'modern' production sailboats - albeit many of the latest boats have exaggerated those traits. Remember, this was a yacht promoted by Beneteau as part of their 'offshore' series. The report concluded that:

"The stability characteristics of yachts of Ocean Madam's typce mean that once inverted they are likely to remain so until another sea forces the upright again."

Brad

[robert sailor]

Brad I would go one step further and say GPS period. Prior to that we had very little company crossing oceans but once GPS came out it was a different game! All your other points are good ones but without GPS I can't see the numbers we have today.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Hey Dave,
Where are you getting your numbers from??? Thousands of Benni's or the like circumnavigating...I don't think so...hundreds maybe over time. I counted the Benni's in 2013 ARC and there were around 18 I think, a little short of hundreds. I know you are trying to make a point but come on!!

I didn't say 1000s are circumnavigating. I meant that 1000s are out there do deep sea passages either across the pond , Atlantic Europe etc.

[robert sailor]

Post 275 you said thousands were circumnavigating....in reality if you take out the Med/Caribbean and Mexico you are left with real deep water sailing and the numbers get pretty skinny after that, even hundreds is probably a gross exaggeration.

[Terra Nova]

Originally Posted by Polux

Do you know any 39ft sailboat designed to cross oceans in bad weather?

Freya 39 comes immediately to mind.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Post 275 you said thousands were circumnavigating....in reality if you take out the Med/Caribbean and Mexico you are left with real deep water sailing and the numbers get pretty skinny after that, even hundreds is probably a gross exaggeration.

I actually said "1000s" of "production boats" , I wasn't referring specially to Bennys


dave

[robert sailor]

God you are a tough nut to crack my friend...OK thousands of production boats is a gross exaggeration as at best circumnavigaters are a small number. I think the last time I checked more people had climbed mount Everest than had sailed around the world. Be that is it may the numbers would not exceed the very low hundreds if that. So when we lose a couple or three of one brand in offshore sailing it represents a much higher % that you are leading people to believe. There are lots of want to be offshore sailors on this site and there is little good in suggesting these boats are the perfect choice.
I fly as well and you can buy production aircraft and aerobatic aircraft. This does not stop you from doing aerobatics in production aircraft but you better limit your choice and be damn good at what your doing if you fly aerobatics in a standard aircraft.
Aerobatic aircraft are built to standards much higher and are terribly forgiving of screw ups when it comes to overall build quality and strength compared to a standard aircraft.
Thats the way I view modern built down to a price production sailboats. Great boats, great value, produced to satisfy 99% of the market place that likes to sail in the Med/Mexico or Caribbean but to those 1%ers taking them offshore be easy on them and don't take them into conditions they were never designed for in the beginning.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Floating here aboard...ducking "work" by reading this thread, the question comes up....

What's more Crazy:
Trying to "wrap your mind around this Bluewater thing?
Or
Debating it in this thread?

At least reading it gave me a break from entering my CC charges into QuickBooks, but that's about all the value I can find....a diversion from reality.

[Blue Crab]

Yep and not our first rodeo.

[Terra Nova]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

...more people had climbed mount Everest than had sailed around the world...
There are lots of want to be offshore sailors...and there is little good in suggesting these boats are the perfect choice...

This is the bottom line--being realistic and honest in judging a boat's "bluewater" suitability. And it is about understanding the risks when your choice of boat places your family's and friends' lives in peril.

That there really is a bluewater category of boat is a given. When I last changed boats, I was specifically looking for a bluewater boat, one so seaworthy that any experienced sailor could tell, at a glance, that it was built to cross oceans, a full-keel double-ender. My search ended with the beginning of my Freya project.

[robert sailor]

Your Freya looks great, pretty boat for sure but I also want to be clear that I personally don't believe that an offshore boat needs a full keel as I prefer a fin keel myself but one that is more moderate in design and build than your typical racer cruiser.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

.

What's more Crazy:
Trying to "wrap your mind around this Bluewater thing?
Or
Debating it in this thread?

depends on how badly one needs to pat themselves on the back doesn't it?

+2 for the list

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

God you are a tough nut to crack my friend...OK thousands of production boats is a gross exaggeration as at best circumnavigaters are a small number. I think the last time I checked more people had climbed mount Everest than had sailed around the world. Be that is it may the numbers would not exceed the very low hundreds if that. So when we lose a couple or three of one brand in offshore sailing it represents a much higher % that you are leading people to believe. There are lots of want to be offshore sailors on this site and there is little good in suggesting these boats are the perfect choice.
I fly as well and you can buy production aircraft and aerobatic aircraft. This does not stop you from doing aerobatics in production aircraft but you better limit your choice and be damn good at what your doing if you fly aerobatics in a standard aircraft.
Aerobatic aircraft are built to standards much higher and are terribly forgiving of screw ups when it comes to overall build quality and strength compared to a standard aircraft.
Thats the way I view modern built down to a price production sailboats. Great boats, great value, produced to satisfy 99% of the market place that likes to sail in the Med/Mexico or Caribbean but to those 1%ers taking them offshore be easy on them and don't take them into conditions they were never designed for in the beginning.

What I was trying to get across , is there are lots of boats doing difficult passages, Hell Northern Europe and the western approaches is at 50 N the North Sea is-56 N. These are tough tough waters and these " types" of boats are to be found all that area

The fact is you'll not find a make that hasn't been lost at sea one way or the other

No one is comparing or saying a light weight racer cruiser is an optimum heavy weather boat. But these boats can cross oceans and typically are much tougher then the typical skipper.

We agree, they have to be sailed appropriately. But the fact is they are and will suffice

Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[robert sailor]

The last word is yours Dave!

[downunder]

Catamarans are often derided as not being Bluewater but many have sailed the southern ocean. Here is a link to delivery of a leopard 44, 56 days SA to Sydney via southern Ocean.

Delivery Skipper's Report: Indian Ocean Crossing on a Leopard 44 | Leopard Catamarans US

Q: How did the boat handle?

A: The boat took the seas really well. With each approaching depression, we would get strong Northwesterlies: we would fall off with the wind and take the seas and winds on the quarter and go further South, until the wind would back round to the Southwest, and we would head back to North on the other tack, still keeping the weather on the quarter. This would allow the boat to run with only the genoa, which meant that the sail was easy and safe to reef, but allowed for good progress, none the less. The auto-pilot steered the boat with ease, and the helm was balanced. Even when the boat took occasional big beam seas, it felt stable.

Q: Did you have to make any repairs underway?

A: No repairs were needed underway. I climbed up the mast once while we were becalmed, to check
the rig – forestay and cap-shrouds – and found everything to be as it should. We tightened up slightly on the cap shrouds. In very strong winds, we would tag down tightly the genoa with the lazy sheet on the weather amidships cleat, and tightened up on the topping lift and then main sheet (even without the main being hoisted) to give the rig additional “backstay” support, and we experienced NO breakage.

Q: What were the highest wind speeds and wave heights that you saw? What was the prevailing wind direction?

A: We had true wind speeds gusting into the lower 70s, but between 50-60 was frequent, from NW’lies to SW’lies, hence we would keep the weather on the quarter, and keep apparent wind speeds down. But usually the depressions would not last for more than 24 hours, so the seas would only pick up to 5-7 m, mostly a more or less comfortable, long period swell, which would push the boat along nicely, giving us some surf speeds up to 18 knots on the odd occasion. After the passing of a depression we would sometimes be becalmed slightly for a day or two, giving the sea a good chance to subside again.

Q: What kind of air temperatures did you experience?

A: About 12-17°C, high humidity and lots of rain.