Cruising on $500 per Month . . .

[w1651]

Right Zhag ! I wouldn't get caught doing anything in U.S. waters these days. But then again if I did get caught, three meals and a workout everyday is low cost and the medical is free...:-)

[ImaginaryNumber]

Originally Posted by Mark Johnson

Next, is "go as small as will serve your needs". Averaged out over decades, boats cost more exponentially with size. It is the dockage, haulouts, fees, sails/rigging, and every gadget on the boat. The bigger the boat, the more crap you will put on it. Mine were a 23 cat, a 28 tri, and after getting married @ 35... a 34' tri. This has been "just right" for two.

Go shallow draft...

Mark

Mark,
Given your tight budget and cruising/liveaboard lifestyle, I wonder why you chose to build multihulls over a monohull? For instance, a sharpie-style hull, like some developed by Bolger, would have given you the shallow draft, but would also have been less expensive to build and had more payload capacity for a given length. Of course, they don't sail as fast a multi, and may not be as esthetically pleasing -- always a big consideration.

[ImaginaryNumber]

Originally Posted by tgzzzz

...I still don't know what I want to be when I grow up but at 69, in great shape (or so the gals tell me) I'm still thinking of building a 31' Tiki. Wish I knew how much time I have left.

This comment about making plans when you are getting older got me to wondering what the concerns, plans and solutions are for those cruisers who are older but want to live a frugal on-board life?

I think of the great story The £200 Millionaire, by Weston Martyr (1932) - Inquisitive Sailor In it a retired doctor renovates a small boat and lives the life of Riley gunkholing around the shores and canals of Britain and Western Europe. I think the £200/year spent in 1932 may even be more than the $6000/year that Indy suggests is doable in 2011. But what I'm really curious about (and I realize this story may be just a story) is how long the doctor was able to stay afloat before infirmity drove him ashore?

I suppose the answer varies from individual to individual, and may be driven by medical issues more than anything else. So I wonder if wondering vagabond livaboards find they can get medical care most anywhere (in the US) when they need it? Does anyone intentionally sail to other countries to take advantage of less expensive medical care or old-age care -- maybe some Central American countries? How can small sailboats be adapted to the needs of the aged?

[pullord]

yes, infirmities of the aged are a concern with the fatigue so often accompanied with old-age,,your concerns remind me of how many tenants choose accomadations close to hospitals in my home town and how even the hospital is burdened with monthly tenants who :check-in" because they fear a stroke is immenent,,perhaps the best move is to park your boat in a marina close to a hospital and tell tall tales to company aboard and that way you will be safe ,,death is always lurking even on the finest hospital floors so have fun while you can,,cheers

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by pullord

yes, infirmities of the aged are a concern with the fatigue so often accompanied with old-age,,your concerns remind me of how many tenants choose accomadations close to hospitals in my home town and how even the hospital is burdened with monthly tenants who :check-in" because they fear a stroke is immenent,,perhaps the best move is to park your boat in a marina close to a hospital and tell tall tales to company aboard and that way you will be safe ,,death is always lurking even on the finest hospital floors so have fun while you can,,cheers

Old age / ill health can rob one of the desire to do things that used to bring pleasure - even when physically still able. If you stop enjoying something / it becomes too much like hard work for the benefit - then it is the sensible option to stop. Whether Boats or Bicycling.

Enjoy "it" whilst you can.

[osirissail]

Originally Posted by ImaginaryNumber

This comment about making plans when you are getting older got me to wondering what the concerns, plans and solutions are for those cruisers who are older but want to live a frugal on-board life?
. . . But what I'm really curious about (and I realize this story may be just a story) is how long the doctor was able to stay afloat before infirmity drove him ashore?
I suppose the answer varies from individual to individual, and may be driven by medical issues more than anything else. So I wonder if wondering vagabond livaboards find they can get medical care most anywhere (in the US) when they need it? Does anyone intentionally sail to other countries to take advantage of less expensive medical care or old-age care -- maybe some Central American countries? How can small sailboats be adapted to the needs of the aged?

- - I can take these questions head-on as I sit in my hospital bed in Orlando, FL after being rudely but voluntarily separated from my "home" of the last two decades - one of which was the eastern Caribbean.
- - Being "driven ashore by infirmities" is indeed highly variable. Living ashore is normally quite expensive compared to a small pocket cruiser or smaller sail/power boat. Personal mobility probably being the controlling aspect. Normally a small boat has everything arranged for efficient access with minimal needs to cross a lot of "dead space" that is often found in land homes. We had for a long time in Luperon, D.R. a rather infirm old man who had to be winched ashore and back each day from boat to dock. While on his boat he had good access to all the requirements of his daily life at his finger tips.
- - And the costs of being in the marina in a 3rd World country was miniscule compared to North American marina costs. The difference, IMHO, being the North American costs of over-regulated, over-required this and that which was deemed "necessary" by some bureaucrat sitting in an office with too much time on his hands. They all have good intentions of protecting you from yourself and everybody else around you.
- - As to access to different levels of medical care, this is a big one. Life anywhere is keyed to the basic needs of the local population and providing advanced medical support centers for a population that does not need it is patently silly. So for the vast majority of "old age" related conditions living outside the borders of advanced medical services is both doable and economical. Living "outside" such borders also means living with honestly "natural" foods as the locals cannot afford gene-engineered this and that or hormone treated this or that or even the barrage of chemical pesticides, etc. that is needed to grow "bumper" crops. Free range chickens take care of in-ground pests and sheep and goats keep everything neat and trimmed. And you get to literally eat your lawn-mower when it is having trouble starting.
- - What is definitely rarely available "outside" is access to advanced and specialized and highly practiced doctors and institutions for the "weird" or not-normally seen old-age conditions. Which is the why and wherefore of my personal current condition and location. I would rather be treated and have access to doctors/hospitals who have done thousands of what I need versus being in a 3rd World place who has rarely ever seen or treated such advanced things. The appreciation of life and health is never ever fully realized until you come face to cowl with the guy holding the scythe of Life.
- - So, as to the quoted questions - access to treatment for the "normal" and some advanced old-age health conditions is as good in most "outside" countries and most definitely cost only a fraction of the costs involved with "inside" access. So I have observed first hand a lot of "old folks" on boats living a good life economically available when you remain "outside." And life while inside your boat is quite easily configurable to a more efficient and comfortable existence as you conclude your time.
- - Access to assistance for getting out of and into your boat from necessary or desired land excursions is easy and unbelievably economical when compared to the same thing if you are living "inside" the cocoon of 1st World requirements. And best of all, you are providing employment and joy to local families who are providing you with honest and loving care.

[Mark Johnson]

Originally Posted by ImaginaryNumber

Mark,
Given your tight budget and cruising/liveaboard lifestyle, I wonder why you chose to build multihulls over a monohull? For instance, a sharpie-style hull, like some developed by Bolger, would have given you the shallow draft, but would also have been less expensive to build and had more payload capacity for a given length. Of course, they don't sail as fast a multi, and may not be as esthetically pleasing -- always a big consideration.

Valid point. It is absolutely true that building & owning a monohull can be vastly less time consuming AND less expensive than multihulls, but there were other considerations for my trimaran preference.
One, is that I envisioned "seasteading", where one is more "living a self sufficient life on the sea", than just going on a three year cruise. Because of the extra space in the amas of our tri for the necessary equipment, level platform, and room on deck to stroll around, it seemed more suited to "seasteading". Ultimately, much safer too!

In the amas, out of the way from down below spaces, where you can't see or smell them: We have our empty jugs for transporting fluids, dinghy oars & accessory kit, long aluminum poles for the HUGE awning, OB motor, SCUBA tank, spear guns, spare parts kit, viewing bucket, washing bucket, 4 fenders, spare life jackets, fishing poles, spinnaker in a sock, broken down Fortress hurricane anchor, etc... ALL this, while keeping the weight per ama under 200 pounds.

In the three vented & self draining deck lockers, we have all three working anchors and/or their rodes, as well as hull cleaning gear, wetsuits, and dive gear for two. None of the wet smelly stuff goes down below, NOR is it piled on top of itself in a small cockpit lazerette to get moldy. ALL OF THIS ON A 34' BOAT!

Before I get pedantic... I will just "cut n paste" a rationale summery from the book I am working on: My 40 Year Love Affair With Multihulls.


.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....
When I decided on multihulls it was partly because I was not interested in the things that monohulls shine at: cruising the far southern ocean, living aboard in a cold climate, or just hopping from marina to marina. What I wanted was “seasteading”… a tropical, self sufficient, anchored out lifestyle, in clear water, where the diving’s good.
I have had to live with the fact that when I need a boat yard or dockage I have fewer options, although this is slowly changing. When I have lived tied to a dock, especially in cold weather, it’s been marginal at best. Our boat is neither insulated nor sound proof. There is also the fact that with all of that surface area, multihulls are a bit more expensive to own and maintain. This is especially true when you figure in dockage and hauling fees.
I just have to weigh the advantages… For the temperate climate cruising lifestyle, my boats have been vastly more forgiving to the perils of the sea. If I look back on my many encounters with the vicissitudes of life on a boat, I would’ve had a much worse outcome on a monohull.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
Our shallow draft and being able to sit on the bottom, has saved me from many a disaster. All of the things that I just missed, I might have hit with deeper draft. The tide going out from under the boat could’ve resulted in major damage or even sinking if I had been in a monohull. Most, of those comfortable protected shallow anchorages would have been off limits in a deeper draft boat, as would be most of those protected hurricane hidey holes.
Looking at all of multihulls’ advantages, shallow draft is number one!
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
Multihulls are generally unsinkable. Ours is, and if it is holed by a container or a tree, I can hopefully patch it and be on my way. At the very least, if the water is warm it’s survivable.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
Multihulls are faster, which is a safety issue. I have a better ability to out run bad weather, and if I can cut down on the number of days spent way out to sea during hurricane season, all the better. “Faster is also more fun”!
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
At sea, a multihull is a more consistently horizontal surface to live and work on. We can keep a better watch, and are more likely to stay with the boat when making sail changes. We’re less likely to get disoriented or sea sick, and we’re less likely to have accidents, (like burns from cooking). There is also a much better shot of making repairs while under way.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
Because of our being a multihull of reasonable windage, and using a bridle to the anchor rode, we don’t saw around at anchor. We are therefore way less likely to drag. I also feel that docked, anchored, or in a boatyard, Delphys has a much better shot at surviving hurricanes.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
At anchor, multihulls can make a much better platform from which to work, go fishing, or go diving. They are easier to board from the water, and have a larger more stable deck on which to wash your dive gear, or rebuild your outboard motor.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
Living anchored out, facing the wind with hatches open and an awning up, Multihulls can be delightfully more comfortable in a tropical climate. Also, we love that feeling of being out there in our surroundings, rather than down in a cave.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
Finally, as an environmentalist, I really like that many multihulls lend themselves to treading lightly on the planet. They are vastly more efficient boats. Good multihulls of a given length can both sail faster and motor more efficiently, on far less fuel. This is while using a much smaller engine, taking up less space and payload. They also have plenty of room on which to install solar panels, and if equipped to do so, they can be mostly self sufficient when anchored out without running the engine!
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………….
All boats are a compromise… Our Searunner “Delphys” has been the compromise that works best for us, and we hope she will continue to for many years to come. Another adventure lies just over the horizon!

Mark

[goprisko]

Originally Posted by ImaginaryNumber

Mark,
Given your tight budget and cruising/liveaboard lifestyle, I wonder why you chose to build multihulls over a monohull? For instance, a sharpie-style hull, like some developed by Bolger, would have given you the shallow draft, but would also have been less expensive to build and had more payload capacity for a given length. Of course, they don't sail as fast a multi, and may not be as esthetically pleasing -- always a big consideration.

Sharpie hulls are now the norm....

Virtually all the beneteaus are presto sharpie hulls, as is Lapwing.

The major difference between modern hulls and those of the classic period
is modern hulls have sections scribed with a compass, ie an arc, whereas
classic hulls have radiused chines. The harder section gives stiffness, and
classic hulls sail upright. Sailing upright is a desirable characteristic.

Regarding multihulls and larger boats. Please go elsewhere to discuss them. It is not possible to micro budget cruise on them. Even the wharrams of 30-34 ft cost more than a similar sized monohull to operate.


INDy

[goprisko]

Mark's diatribe is a self serving tome.

Monohulls have proven themselves suitable for a variety of climates,
have sufficient carrying capacity and storage lockers, provided
the interior is properly laid out.

They are self righting, from knock downs, which multi hulls are not.

They are cheaper to operate. Handier in tight places. and coast from
one puff to another due to higher inertia.

Regardless, they are not suitable for micro-budget cruising which is the focus of this thread. Please take the discussion elsewhere.

INDY

[goprisko]

Originally Posted by osirissail

- - I can take these questions head-on as I sit in my hospital bed in Orlando, FL after being rudely but voluntarily separated from my "home" of the last two decades - one of which was the eastern Caribbean.
- - Being "driven ashore by infirmities" is never fun. And life while inside your boat is quite easily configurable to a more efficient and comfortable existence as you conclude your time.
- - Access to assistance for getting out of and into your boat from necessary or desired land excursions is easy and unbelievably economical when compared to the same thing if you are living "inside" the cocoon of 1st World requirements. And best of all, you are providing employment and joy to local families who are providing you with honest and loving care.

Never mentioned, but of vital importance is the health account. It is a fact of male life that virtually all of us will have infirmities by the age of 60. Half us males over 40 cannot get it up. By 50 a very large proportion of males have diabetes. Half the male pop over 60 have high blood pressure.

An important consideration for micro-budget cruising is to enable cruising during the age of health, while financing same via odd jobs.

INDY

[goprisko]

Originally Posted by sctpc

Hi Indy I see you mention in Outfitting antifowling haulout 1k but in your yearly cost its not mentioned at all, any reason? to me its so important as you may get away one year but the cost magnifies is you dont look after you boat.

It is in the maintenance and repair budget item $ 970/yr.

INDY

[goprisko]

Originally Posted by w1651

How hard is it to pull up to a island, let the tide go out, then scrape and paint one side of your boat at a time?
I was reading James Baldwins blog and site recently. He says when he first set out to circumnavigate he went to a small island in Biscane bay first and tied his boat off. He then scraped and painted the hull at low tide in three or four days.
Couldn't get away with that now but there should be somewhere in this world you could still do it. Africa maybe?

Where tides are suitable, it is done frequently. During their US east coast
cruise in Wanderer III, the Hiscocks dried out in the berry Is of the Bahamas for that purpose, regardless of the 1 meter tide there.

Your only consideration is using the right paint.

INDY

[boatman61]

Goprisko... sorry mate no can do.... mainly coz I disagree... 'Cookie' aka "Cooking Fat"......... Tiki 21ft Wharram circumnavigated... also came second in the last Atlantic Jester.
Quite a few Tiki 26ftrs have cruised down from the UK to the Med... a couple have even crossed the Pond.
How do you make out a Wharram costs more than an equivilant mono... having owned both in the past I disagree...
Fancy telling us how you reach that conclusion...

[Mark Johnson]

Originally Posted by goprisko

Mark's diatribe is a self serving tome.

Monohulls have proven themselves suitable for a variety of climates,
have sufficient carrying capacity and storage lockers, provided
the interior is properly laid out.

They are self righting, from knock downs, which multi hulls are not.

They are cheaper to operate. Handier in tight places. and coast from
one puff to another due to higher inertia.

Regardless, they are not suitable for micro-budget cruising which is the focus of this thread. Please take the discussion elsewhere.

INDY

WOW... talk about irrational! Your comments are of coarse, utterly ridiculous.

CHILL... I have cruised on three multihulls in the way that I prefer, and other than the acquiring of the boat, I did so as the least funded 1% of cruisers... and it is not up to you to tell me where my comments belong.

My explanation of "MY" boat choices over a lifetime of building boats and sailing away on them, was in response to a request to "explain my rationale". That is the only reason I did so! It was in no way self serving, as I have no ax to grind here. I don't care what other folks choose as the number of hulls that they choose to cruise on! (I COULDN'T CARE LESS in fact!) I have participated in CF for the sole purpose of helping others, not to push my choices on them.

You obviously know nothing about the thousands of Wharram & Searunner sailors who have cruised hundreds of thousands of safe sea miles, over decades... MOST of which, did so at a small fraction of the expense of a similar sized monohull, with a safety record that is certainly in the top 5 designs, of either type.

I want all cruisers to assess the type of cruising that they want to do... the type of climate, desire to use marinas, availability of wide travel lifts, need to be used as a diving platform, preference for taking the ICW, and anchoring in shallow water into account, and then choose the configuration that works best for them. This is what I did.

Monohulls have a number of advantages, I mentioned them... most of which don't apply to my life. This is why I chose Trimarans, because THEIR advantages DO apply to my life.

My points are all true, and I have no desire to argue. I certainly didn't mean to step on the toes of monohullers, who make up the majority of my cruising friends. I was just explaining my choices, as I was asked to do.

Mark

[frank_f]

Originally Posted by goprisko

Mark's diatribe is a self serving tome.

Monohulls have proven themselves suitable for a variety of climates,
have sufficient carrying capacity and storage lockers, provided
the interior is properly laid out.

They are self righting, from knock downs, which multi hulls are not.

They are cheaper to operate. Handier in tight places. and coast from
one puff to another due to higher inertia.

Regardless, they are not suitable for micro-budget cruising which is the focus of this thread. Please take the discussion elsewhere.

INDY

A trimaran is basically a mono hull with stabilizers that are, on a lot of models, retractable. That should handle the self-righting issue. Also remember that a slacked main sail (or broken and snagged main halyard) at the time of capsize can prevent a mono hull from righting as well.

I believe the object of this thread is "Cruising on $500/month". If Mark can do it, his opinion is just as valid as anyone's.

Indy, you don't get to say who's ideas are right and who's ideas don't fit this thread. You gave up that right the first time you asked for opinions and hit the send button. If you only want to see your opinions, write a book.